Is the American Dream a Myth?

I was first introduced to the concept of the "American Dream" in a discussion about F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, during my junior year of high school. The American Dream is the idea that in the United States, no matter your age, gender, race, or socioeconomic background (all contingent factors of birth), if you work hard, you can acquire wealth and social status. The modern American Dream began in the 1920s, or the Roaring Twenties, a time of sustained economic prosperity, extravagance, and possibility. Although in The Great Gatsby (which was set in 1922) Fitzgerald was criticizing the moral decay and greed associated with the American Dream, I have been questioning the existence of the American Dream itself.

The perfect American family. All that's missing is a puppy.
Image courtesy of: photostock/ www.freedigitalphotos.net

What exactly is the American Dream? It's the manifestation of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" as the United States' national ethos. In a more visual sense, the American Dream is a man, with his wife, two children (preferably one son and one daughter), who has worked hard all his life, and can now enjoy the amenities of a quaint house with a sizable lawn, social respect, and a perfect family. The American Dream is the attitude that through hard work, you can make it. However, I've been beginning to doubt the truthfulness of this; is the American Dream just a myth?


Edmund Burke, the 18th century and founder of classical conservatism, believed that myth was central to a functioning society. He believed that myth and illusions "...made power gentle, and obedience liberal, which harmonized the different shades of life...". Burke argued that the common people, or the "swinish multitude" as he calls them, needed to be entranced by myth and illusion in order to quell any revolutionary urges, and to create a functioning society. I believe such is the situation going on in the United States right now.

A  portrait of Edmund Burke by James Northcote. 
Image courtesy of Royal Albert Museum/Bridgeman Art Library

According to the winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics and Columbia University professor, Joseph Stiglitz, "America has the least equality of opportunity of any of the advanced industrial economies." We all know the rhetoric that Stiglitz is echoing and which is at the heart of movements such as Occupy Wall Street: the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer. No matter what your political stance is, the widening gap in income inequality is an irrefutable fact. This gap became much more clear after the 2008 recession, in which we saw massive lay-offs and unemployment, but an increase in the salaries of CEOs. One may argue that income inequality is simply the product of capitalism, and while I would agree with this, it's the fact that with income inequality comes "opportunity inequality" that irks me.

What do I mean by "opportunity inequality?" Imagine two newly-born babies, one born to a family at the top 40% and one born to a family at the bottom 40%. Both children would attend elementary school, middle school, and high school, although the child hailing from the bottom 40% could perhaps face more difficulties in his/her educational development (a topic I discuss one of my other posts). Now  they're applying to college; let's say that both of the kids are admitted to the University of Michigan. However for the sake of example, let's say that neither of them receive financial aid, for neither deviate too far from the median income level. At this point, the child at the top 40% can probably afford to attend the University of Michigan, while the child at the bottom 40% will probably have to relinquish his dream of attending UMich, or worse, go to MSU. This will affect the types of jobs they will get, their future incomes, their quality of lives, and even the lives of their own kids. Now I know that this is a highly black-and-white, assumptive,  and slightly unrealistic example, but I think it proves the point that income inequality creates opportunity inequality, which in my opinion, is unfair.

Occupy Wall Street protestors fighting for their American
Dreams. Also Burke's worst nightmare.
Image courtesy of Sacha Lecca for RollingStone.com

Despite this massive gap in income inequality, the only radical "revolution" to this has been the Occupy Wall Street movement. Why isn't there more public opposition to such an important issue? Burke's myth and illusion provides us with an answer. The vision of the American Dream has been so strongly drilled into us, that the idea of hard work  = good life has been seared onto our minds- and we don't want to challenge that, because we want it to be true. Since the dawn of time, the United States has been the land of opportunity, where anyone can come and make it big. This has become the dogma of the United States, which prevents the "swinish multitude" from starting a revolution. While I do believe that to a certain extent, the American Dream is meant to leash the common people, I would also like to believe in its truthfulness. The American Dream has certainly taken blow, with a recession and rising income/ opportunity inequality, however, I believe (or at least hope) that it can recover - and instead of simply being the American Dream, it can become the American reality.

What do you think about the American Dream - myth or not?


Citations:

1) Burke, Edmund. "Reflections on the Revolution in France." N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. <https://docs.google.com/a/umich.edu/viewer?                    a=v&pid=sites&srcid=dW1pY2guZWR1fHBvbHNjaTEwMWYyMDEyfGd4OjQyMDk4Mjk4YTUzM2FiMTY>.

2) http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/Family_g212-Family_Piling_Up_On_Dad_p34767.html

Fi