Page 19 - Šolsko polje, XXVIII, 2017, no. 3-4: Education and the American Dream, ed. Mitja Sardoč
P. 19
r. c. hauhart ■ american dream studies in the 21st century
that embedded notions of racial, class and gender superiority cannot be
whisked away (or wished away) by reference to the economic reality. Rath-
er, the American Dream, with its open ended, universalistic invitation to
prosper offers no respite from pecuniary and status competition once the
race is on. The classes, including the white American working class, will
never feel as though they have achieved their dream so long as they re-
main subordinated within a class hierarchy. In a hierarchical society, it is
merely a question of who deserves to be looked down on. In the United
States, and probably in all class societies, resentment is generally direct-
ed downward (even as inclusion and opportunity are withheld from the
lower classes from above) – toward non-white racial and ethnic groups,
women, the young, and any group that can be treated as ‘the other,’ that
is, outsiders. This history of exclusion has been ably documented by Jill-
son (2004) with specific reference to the American Dream and by Kara-
bel (2006) with regard to the illusory “meritocratic” nature of elite higher
education in the United States.
Pernicious Outcomes:
The Catalytic Effect of the American Dream
The American Dream may – or may not – have been correctly defined by
James Truslow Adams but its impact within the matrix of social and eco-
nomic forces alive today in the United States has generally become perni-
cious. The twin emphases of competitive capitalism and American indi-
vidualism that form the backbone of the American cultural ethos quietly
buttress the American Dram’s urgent exhortation to prosper in ways that
are antipathetic to individual success as a person and destructive to social
stability. Examples are many. One that we have already broached is crime.
Others may be equally insidious.
In recent years the United States has become aware of a looming stu-
dent debt crisis. Yet, the social and economic factors that have precipitat-
ed the crisis have been manifest for decades. Young people in the Unit-
ed States have long been told that to prosper economically they need to
obtain a college or university degree. Overwhelmingly in recent decades,
high school graduates have flocked to U.S. higher education in response.
Yet, since the time of the post-war G.I. Bill (The Serviceman’s Readjust-
ment Act of 1944) the cost of college tuition has risen dramatically, es-
pecially within the last few years. As William Celis (1994) of the New
York Times reported on the G.I. Bill’s 50th anniversary, a returning WW
II American serviceman, Mike Machado, attended St. Mary’s University,
a private college, in San Antonio, TX for $ 85 per semester tuition while
receiving a $ 250 monthly stipend for living expenses for his family of four
17
that embedded notions of racial, class and gender superiority cannot be
whisked away (or wished away) by reference to the economic reality. Rath-
er, the American Dream, with its open ended, universalistic invitation to
prosper offers no respite from pecuniary and status competition once the
race is on. The classes, including the white American working class, will
never feel as though they have achieved their dream so long as they re-
main subordinated within a class hierarchy. In a hierarchical society, it is
merely a question of who deserves to be looked down on. In the United
States, and probably in all class societies, resentment is generally direct-
ed downward (even as inclusion and opportunity are withheld from the
lower classes from above) – toward non-white racial and ethnic groups,
women, the young, and any group that can be treated as ‘the other,’ that
is, outsiders. This history of exclusion has been ably documented by Jill-
son (2004) with specific reference to the American Dream and by Kara-
bel (2006) with regard to the illusory “meritocratic” nature of elite higher
education in the United States.
Pernicious Outcomes:
The Catalytic Effect of the American Dream
The American Dream may – or may not – have been correctly defined by
James Truslow Adams but its impact within the matrix of social and eco-
nomic forces alive today in the United States has generally become perni-
cious. The twin emphases of competitive capitalism and American indi-
vidualism that form the backbone of the American cultural ethos quietly
buttress the American Dram’s urgent exhortation to prosper in ways that
are antipathetic to individual success as a person and destructive to social
stability. Examples are many. One that we have already broached is crime.
Others may be equally insidious.
In recent years the United States has become aware of a looming stu-
dent debt crisis. Yet, the social and economic factors that have precipitat-
ed the crisis have been manifest for decades. Young people in the Unit-
ed States have long been told that to prosper economically they need to
obtain a college or university degree. Overwhelmingly in recent decades,
high school graduates have flocked to U.S. higher education in response.
Yet, since the time of the post-war G.I. Bill (The Serviceman’s Readjust-
ment Act of 1944) the cost of college tuition has risen dramatically, es-
pecially within the last few years. As William Celis (1994) of the New
York Times reported on the G.I. Bill’s 50th anniversary, a returning WW
II American serviceman, Mike Machado, attended St. Mary’s University,
a private college, in San Antonio, TX for $ 85 per semester tuition while
receiving a $ 250 monthly stipend for living expenses for his family of four
17
