- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Topics
- Back Issues
- Weekly Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
Among the Intellectualoids
Unsuited for the American Dream?
How will an Obama Administration justify a comprehensive return to Big Government? For starters it may bring up the controversial new theory that man is evolutionarily incapable of looking after himself and needs bureaucrats to tie his metaphorical shoelaces.
The theory is the brainchild of Peter Whybrow, head of the Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Behavior at UCLA, and author of American Mania: When More Is Not Enough. Our behavioral infantilism goes back to a time when primitive man stalked the African savanna, Whybrow says, when the need for instant gratification was a survival mechanism hardwired into our brains. Prehistoric man, it seems, suffered from poor impulse control, and adapted to a scarcity of food by instantly gratifying his every need. "We were designed to run for our supper," he says, "and if you caught it you ate it.” We're still designed that way. In other words, you can take the man out of the savanna, but not the savanna out of the man.
Though he is neither anthropologist nor archaeologist, Whybrow believes his theory is key to understanding how we got into the current financial mess, and once we accept his idea that we are addicted to abundance, that we are on a “runaway train of self interest,” you can see how the subprime mortgage fiasco was all but inevitable.
Our inability to resist the impulse for instant gratification, coupled with too easy credit and the loss of social restraints (the old Protestant ethic), proved our undoing. True, credit allows many of us to purchase homes and automobiles and attend college and enjoy the good life. But too many of us lack individual responsibility and buy lots of junk and then cannot pay our bills (sometimes have no intention of paying our bills). Such people are denied the American Dream, therefore the system is rotten and needs a government fix. Basically, Whybrow wants government to take over the role the church and the family once fulfilled, that of imposing “social restraints," otherwise known as "regulations."
THERE SEEMS TO BE at least one major flaw in this theory. A little research into Pre-Columbian Indian cultures would have shown that -- far from never thinking about the morrow -- hunter-gatherers stored foods to see them through the lean, hard times. If anything, the tribes that practiced instant gratification would have become quickly extinct.
Contrary to Whybrow's thesis, the desire for instant gratification is a relatively new development. Today's profligate lifestyle -- building up massive debt and a reliance on charity -- is a result of the recent growth of the middle class and its abandonment of Protestant values, coupled with the expectation that government will always be there to bail us out when we behave imprudently. In my own lifetime, charity and massive debt were still frowned upon. Post-World War II generations, however, have been overly pampered and spoiled, and failed to learn the culture of thrift from their Depression-era parents. Their superficial guilt-feelings made charity acceptable, first for other people, then for all. Shame was okay if it was caused by the remote actions of distant ancestors or ancient regimes, but there was no need to feel ashamed of anything you yourself did no matter how reckless, stupid, or immoral. Government feeds (and grows) on such impulsive behavior. As Kenneth Minogue writes: "low morals amount to giving in to impulse, and impulsiveness soon lands one in the arms of the bureaucracy." We all pay in lost liberty for the reckless behavior of a few "impulsives."
Americans, Whybrow concludes, are genetically indisposed to responsible behavior and thus evolutionarily unsuited for The American Dream. He may be right if your definition of the American Dream is perfect equality or owning three television sets. But for the rest of us, The American Dream is about having the opportunity to succeed, with each generation doing better than the previous one, if it is willing to work for it. If anything, the past 200 years are proof that we are capable of deferring our own happiness for the sake of our children and our children's children.
There does seem to be a weird, old-fashioned morality at play not only in society but in the free market. When we get too far removed from the traditional, Calvinist ethos, when economic man chooses to live recklessly, impulsively, and without personal responsibility, some correction inevitably comes along to set us back on the straight and narrow. It's all part of the learning process. Centuries ago, Genevans decided they would no longer accept the social restraints imposed on them by Calvin's theocracy, and that enlightened men were capable of restraining themselves. I wonder if today's American will consider Obama's bureaucracy and have a similar reaction?
Comments
Leave a Comment
Are you in a mob?
The Democrats say Obamacare opponents are a mob. Are they right?
Participating in this survey will subscribe you to the American Spectator email newsletter. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Annie from Atlanta| 11.4.08 @ 6:46AM
I agree that instant gratification is a relatively recent trend. By recent, I mean about 60 years in the making.
There is a great difference between the older folks and the ones below the age of, say, 70.
I have noticed a trend that if you were raised during the depression, you probably raised your own children with thrift and hard work principles. I remember my own mother would constantly remind me that she only had one or two dresses as a girl, and that there was no money for all of her siblings to go to college. Thrift was instilled in me as a result of my upbringing.
But the children of the 1950s and afterwards were raised by those tired of having little and were indulged. Use or lose it. You only live once. You can't take it with you. Everyone else does it. Love the one you are with. Sound familiar?
As a bankruptcy attorney, I have observed the differences in people of all ages, races, sex, and cultural backgrounds who are in debt. There is no shame left for being in debt, with a few exceptions amongst older adults in more rural areas. (There was more shame evidenced 15 years ago.) Examination of debt set out in debtors' bankruptcy papers show generally reckless spending patterns...big car loans, high telecommunication costs, too expensive housing and lots of credit card debt. It doesn't help that most bankruptcy court judges coddle the debtor and offer reassurances that the system will give them all the help they need. Even if they are repeat filers with residential arrearages exceeding 1 year's worth of mortgage payments.
Some bankruptcy judges in Georgia bend over backwards to evade the law by postponing stay relief to lenders even when the law clearly provides that the lender is entitled to it. This fosters an entitlement to debtors which is not mandated by law but ruled via a judge's political bias. God help the lending industry if the progressive left ever gives those judges the poer to cram down primary residence mortgages. There will be a clamp down of mortgage loans which will boost the rental industry. ACORN will become obsolete and bankruptcy filings will increase so that more people can re-write their mortgage terms. God help us.
megapotamus| 11.4.08 @ 10:04AM
The indulgence of infantility this theory describes is the ultimate luxury good. In economic downturns we know that the luxury market is the last to contract and the first to rebound. If there is a silver lining here it is that if we do suffer an Obama regime there will be neither disguising or delaying the dreadful impact of a society stripped of discipline. Destroy the coal industry? Nullify NAFTA? (Re)-Ban drilling? Go solar/wind? These things are fantasies. If made reality by the Obots it will hit everyone's bottom line. No, there will be no floor to the destruction. We will be well and truly all in the same leaky boat. But that seems the only way the electorate can learn the timeless lesson that there is no such thing as a free lunch.
Caroline Miranda| 11.4.08 @ 2:01PM
A RETURN to bureaucracy and big government under Obama? When did it ever go away ? Under Bush, federal government control over schools and health and welfare skyrocketed, along with the national debt, because of Republican legislators who wanted instant gratification for their lobbyists, while shoving Americans into debt for generations. The sweeping out of their ilk in this electin is good news for Americans. It is unfortunate that none of these elected officials who caused the problems will suffer from them, having taken care of their own bank accounts and future lobbying jobs.
Rhonda Woodfine| 11.13.08 @ 5:21PM
I'm English, and I come from a Socialist country, England. No, believe it or not, SOCIALISM isn't a bad word, for it saves the people of that great nation all the stress that Americans live through on a daily basis. We call it "The Nanny State", the British Government taking care of all of our needs. This works so well it attracts immigrants from all over the world, both those with a right to be there and of course all the illegals. Why does it work so well? The Government has all the responsibility of ensuring the welfare of its people - from the Cradle to the Grave, we are ENTITLED to a roof over our head ( if we can't afford it, the government will pay for it ), food, warmth, education, health care, and to be looked after in our retirement or if we are unemployed, no matter how long that turns out to be. And if we have a low-paid job, the Government will "Top Up" our pay so we have a livable income. The people are free from the everyday worries about healthcare and unemployment that plague Americans. We pay for this through taxes, Income Tax and National Insurance contributions. Unlike the U.S. WE PAY LESS TAXES THEN YOU, yet we have a guaranteed lifestyle, one that says MEDICATIONS ARE FREE for most of the population ( the unemployed, people over 60, children as long as they are at school ), and are much reduced in cost for the rest of us ( a prescription is under $15.00, no matter what the drug ). The homeless in Britain CHOOSE TO BE HOMELESS - they are as entitled to be housed as anyone else in the country. In fact, many of our homeless are scam artists claiming unemployment while getting money from passers-by - a news story showed one "Homeless" man getting into his Mercedes at the end of his "Shift", and was followed home to his luxury penthouse overlooking the Houses of Parliament! Sure, we have the ones who abuse the system, but imagine the sense of relief our "Socialist" system provides everyone - even if you die penniless, the state will pay for your funeral. Our retired citizens even get free travel on public transport, as do our under fives and pets - yes, you can take your dog on a bus or a train for a day out! So, you may ask - what am I doing here? I've been asking myself that very question...... The Brits come to the U.S. thinking we are going to find the same system as ours but with one extra perk - lots of Sunshine!
Well, I found the Sun and a whole lot of Stressed-out American friends, who now all want to move to England!
Good Riddance Republicans - Welcome Obama!
Mr Shea| 11.14.08 @ 6:59AM
I work as a debt collector over the phone, and I find it extremely appalling the sense of entitlement that people of all ages and backgrounds have. Few anymore have guilt regarding debt, and many are aware of their "rights"
Ms. Know| 11.14.08 @ 11:24AM
The left-wing illuminati shouldn't be relying so much on big government, and that is that. We need to get away from that.