American+Culture

Ariel Siegel 10/25/2011 Sustainability Problems 2551

**Is American culture a sustainability problem?**

Picture this: A great white American eagle is ascending into the clouds of uncertainty and following instincts and soar out of the storm. This is the current diagnosis of our country, as well as most of the world. On an international level, many countries do have alternative methods of dealing with sustainability problems however they often result in deficits or economic crisis. Throughout the explanations of the sustainability problems that afflict this world, there are always several categories to which the target audience is political officials, public, and specific audiences such as intellects/academics, artists, hippies, etcetera. However in this sustainability problem, we can only measure with survey; as explained in the following perspectives whether American values and/or culture affect all of us as a problem with respect to sustainability.

Initially, recognition of the stakeholders and trajectory through history. This cultural perspective will show roots of ideologies based upon abundance. However some cultures and societies such that of American Indians wherein the inhabitant of Mother Nature. Mother Nature who is depicted all throughout tales of different origins. As expansion of Europe dominated the Americas as well as other centers for economic prosperity. Expansion driven by a variety of authorities including the capitalistic government and trade companies. Today we can still see governments and their dependence on profits or financial support via corporations. In fact business is run by these corporations which indulge our public. How is this done? It is natural, inherent in our capitalistic economy which supports our competitive nature as well as the constant “need to succeed.” Analyzing the effect of Manifest Destiny, as well as American values, are an important aspect in our society, in politics, as well as our economy. This type of thinking is stressed by leaders such as Ronald Reagan, and our materialistic approach on life. Materialism and American consumption is rather different, now with the media trying to connect the consumer with identification and a deeper meaning of the product. However this is just an advertising scheme of the “persuaders,” the individuals who have an obscene amount of push and pull within so many aspects of life, including society and politics. In assessing whether American culture and values are a sustainability problem, Naomi's speech “Addicted to Risk' addresses many key points in the affirmation of this issue. According to Naomi Klein in December 2010, who's major argument includes how American culture is dependent on taking risks and gambling. She makes a point to mention, “How much longer can we put it off.” She states the reasons why sustainability problems, like the BP oil spill. She initiates the main argument with a fact that 75% of phytoplankton in the Mexican Gulf are poisoned by the oil that now dominates and affects the ecosystem as a whole. In particular, marine life has a major importance in our photosynthetic production. Also, there are concepts to which we rule and reason through problems, which is a problem in itself. We cannot keep covering up what happens to our environment, with arguments that bacteria consume oil, as well as “solutions” which focus on the abundance of a resource. We cannot keep destroying our waters as well as other important ecosystems which drive Mother Nature. In advertisements such as MotorollaTM, depicts an advertisement for a phone which is depicted as indestructible. The ad plays off this conception of “slapping Mother Nature in the face.” This reasoning, is completely false. We cannot control Earth's environment or atmosphere like our own personal thermostat. These ideologies surround us, and would not only take redesign but extermination of these sources of persuasion. Another mentality that Naomi refers to is greed and the progression of greed into recklessness. Taking a deeper look into our greed, it is clear that Americans and therefore our actions must put us on the top. In reality there are other countries to which have a better ways of life. Our society including our families and children are convinced of fairytales of the world, that we have an abundance of every resource. There is no way of changing our way of life. Politicians do not want the public to suffer in their way of life. We have a tradition of sweeping dirt under the rug, this needs to stop. Is it reassuring knowing that no matter how much we mess up that there will be more; more ocean, more rainforests, coral reefs, etcetera. Naomi includes examples in her speech including geoengineering and other sciences that do attempt to cover up the effects. If we could possibly design or create something which will not solve the problem, but limit it and convince the public that there are other issues that take more precedence and impact our lives directly. Well what is definitely true is that this mentality needs to stop. But its not only the acceptance of “karma, physics (action and reaction), precaution, or the idea that life is too precious to risk anything,” we need to see a change in policy and within responsibility of the environment. This is not something that can be ignored or undervalued. Without the precious ecosystems in this world, what would happen to life? Naomi's argument has many strengths, and focuses on a recent problem and the inability to react properly due to this mentality of recklessness and taking risks. However, there are good mentalities that circulate through our society, based upon the American Dream of a white picket fence. When asking individuals within our society what their dream life would be, a suburban house with a white picket fence and a cute puppy that is playing on a perfect cookie cutter lawn. This American dream, in itself is a problem. For problems stem out from the perfection and tranquility. Naomi does not include any positive effects of the American culture, but does not focus on politicians or their role in leading the public. But maybe this grand scheme of doing things is too difficult in itself. In creating policies, government protocol and discussion and debate are supposed to enact change within reason. However, there is no way to react as quickly as possible, except in the occasion when corporations actually take responsibility of their actions. Naomi also does not address how politics and business tend to depend on one another. She does mention how the GDP is often a major driving force, but what needs to happen is quicker government action. However, her main argument is strong and does demonstrate the matrix elements in this issue of American culture. What is important is the necessity to act... NOW! However there are aspects to American culture and values which do circulate some positivity, as noted in Ronald Reagan's speech for presidency.

In November 1979, Ronald Reagan's speech for presidency like most politicians focus on positive diction and enacting change with addressing what they consider what the public wants. American citizens, due to our consumption and material necessities will not overly react well to trade-offs. But Reagan does admit that culture will have to change, but puts a patriotic spin to it. Patriotism is an interesting aspect of culture to analyze; only when major devastations or disasters occur, we often resort to unification. Reagan does not explicitly refer to this, but does mention his childhood growing up during the Great Depression. The allusion to this in his speech, gives the audience the message that he has been through rough historical times and is a way qualified in order to handle “anything that can pop up.” The diction that Reagan uses is rather interesting in signaling the American culture. In the beginning of his speech he states that he has “also seen the great strength of this nation as it pulled itself up from that ruin to become the dominant force in the world.” This after he refers to his childhood during the Great Depression; and in this brief statement the audience is presented with words of encouragement and enforcement of American culture: great, strength, ruin, dominant, force. There is only one negative noun, which makes reference to this history to which Americans overcome problems and situations, such as our fight for freedom. Freedom is also rather intriguing in investigating and analyzing. Reagan makes many references to freedom in his speech. For instance he mentions how our culture is “dominated with success, fairness and freedom.” Like most politicians, he separates himself initially with stating his career as an actor and an “average Joe” approach. Then he mentions how other leaders claim that problems are too difficult to handle, but that we have to learn for less especially with reference to our children. Another interesting aspect to which American culture demonstrates the importance of creating a better future for our children. This sense of progeny is evolutionary as well as maternal/paternal. It connects our instincts to provide safety for our children, but American culture has grouped safety with success and excellence. Which explains why the American Dream is often of a suburban environment, to ensure that all of the psychological needs are met as well. But we rob our children from experiencing other cultures and perspectives, depending on the environment. But sociological speaking, a speech like this is not just some bologna that they want the audience to gobble up, but serves as a perspective of what a general audience finds important. The American Dream is still within us in particular our mentalities. However there are some aspects to this source in debating whether American culture is a culprit of sustainability.

In particular, the Reagan speech is a mere speech but does have significance to what his political message is as well as the signals to American culture. In his speech, he uses the culture not as a culprit, but as the basis for change. It is rather interesting because during the presidency he did bring about change on the domestic interface but as well to the economy and expansion of the military. These actions served as support for his reinvigoration of American morale. However, in Reagan also demonstrated laissez-faire philosophies which drove his “Reaganomics” approach to the economy. This approach is not currently taken, where the government is charged with the corruptive role of regulation of corporations (at least in the publics eye). However Reagan did not approach the power of corporations in his term. He also identified the government as the source of the problem. But there is not much that can be done without destruction of the government. With a nation that prides itself on the freedom government allows, there is a negative perspective of socialism or anything resembling it. This mere consequence of our mentality and culture affects our international perspective and efforts not only with our national issues but international ones as well. In a third reference, to which states the dimensions and the particular components of American values, which is important in a complete unbiased approach to this possible sustainability issue.

ChangingMinds.org is an important resource in analyzing the entire issue because if one does not know of all of the components and dimensions of a cultural or sociological issue the entire argument is not complete. This can be seen in the other references, Naomi Klein and Ronald Reagan, wherein there were particular methods of maintaining the argument. However ChangingMinds.org is more likely to come up in an investigation of American culture or in this case, values. In particular to the American set of values, ChangingMinds.org states the components as:

Puritan and pioneer mentality, value of the individual, achievement of success, change and progress, ethical equality, effort and optimism, efficiency practical and pragmatism.

Now all of these mentalities and aspects of our national psyche are important on an individual level as well as with respect to unification. If we have these inherent in us, is that such a bad thing? Some of these can be used to our advantage of sustainability. But it is seen as a problem since the current association and classification of Americans as lazy. Now this may or may not be true, but what this information has provided us with... Hope. No this is not an Obama speech, but real inspirational hope which yields our better nature. These mentalities can be used to further our approaches with research, individuality, achievements on the field and in sustainability solutions. This is not the usual case which now infects society. We evolved into getting what we want, when we want it and that is what drives our desires and therefore our actions. This reference does provide a sliver of hope in change, but it lacks to address the key problem in our culture: the corruption by overconsumption and materialism. The reference as a whole is an asset to the argument that American culture is not a sustainability problem. However, this is not what is actually prevalent in our culture. We are characterized as lazy, domination-driven, greedy, recklessness, and many more. We need to acknowledge that these negative traits do occur in our national psyche. We are molded with the advertisement industry or rather the “persuasion industry” and are driven to our consumption driven lives. Material objects are not just objects, as an eagle is not a mere eagle but a symbol of something great. But when is enough enough? Will be do something as soon as an eagle turns around and says “Do something!”? This mentality needs to be embraced for what it was, and not how corporations view us as mere consumers. We all add to culture, unfortunately that includes our business system and ethics (or lack of).

In conclusion, the debate whether American culture is a sustainability problem is one not easy to address, It is rather difficult to address the nation stating, “We are the problem” or rather “our mentality and reasoning which governs our way of life is wrong.” This is clear cut when analyzing the affect of a disaster to the magnitude of the oil spill. There are some positive characteristics which could be used in order to create mass action for sustainability and shying away from who we used to be lazy greedy consumers. Our culture is characterized not by adjectives but by our actions and our desires. We pride ourselves on our entertainment industry, sport industry, music, and everything that classifies the matrix involved in culture. Like all sustainability, advances in culture cannot be made overnight, there are specific roles which involve regulation and policy. Can we depend on our government to make these changes? Maybe according to Ronald Reagan, but there should be more that we can do, since we do have all of this power. We should use this power, or maybe power is just an allusion. A hallucination of what we think we are. Acceptance is the first step to the progression of action. Change within our mentalities needs to occur for such a lost civilization as ours. Are we lost, or can we find our way into the future of sustainability?

References Klein, N. (2010, December). //Addicted to Risk.// Speech presented at Ted Talk <<[]>>. “Ronald Reagan- Candidacy Announcement.” 13 November 1979. <<[] [|>>.] “American Values”. Changing Minds. 2010-2011 <<[] [|>>.]