Security has proved on many occasions to occupy the identity of a prosperous fruit for many people and is ultimately the quality that most every corporate honcho has a mutual dependency on. But can security define the essence of a successful man? How can somebody who has put forth no risk nor gained any reward begin to preach about success? Many would respond to such an accusation by declaring risk as subjective term, hence the amount of risk being proportional to the degree of success. Even abiding by such a trivial rebuttal- low risk yields low return and high risk yields a superior return, thus the further one strays from the boundaries of security the element of ambition will allow him or her achieve greater personal success as opposed to success measured by social norms.
The connotation of the secure person is derived from the definition of one that can provide financial, family, and other virtuous pillars of stability that satisfies a universal standard dating back to an age of naive euphoria. But can a term widely used to describe such positive attributes assert to be synonymous with words such as respect, happiness, or success? Maybe through the narrow scope of conformity but not through the wide vision of idealism.
As practitioners of Democratic ideals, the American government and the media have an elitist history of conveying contradictory messages to the public. For generations these entities have interpreted the notion that if one follows a systematic series of textbook instructions put forth by legislative officials the “American Dream” will be waiting on the other side of that white picket fence. And in an effort to combat public deviation from this mind numbing thought process, government and media tactics have radiated negative emphasis on liberally intuitive thinkers in fear that their recreational habits would shadow the progressive methods of thought they attempt to promote.
Unfortunately, this ideology trickles down to families and subsequently children who then become confined to a certain way of life. Even in present day society children are deprived from controlling the reigns of their own horse. This of course granted that at the elementary stages of life, kids haven’t the slightest idea of what they want however that does not justify a parent to make such a monumental decision for a seed that has yet to grow. In the event of such a selfish act, a parent may relinquish any opportunity a youngster may have to experience the thrills of everything life has to offer. The possibility of what that child could have conquered, achieved, risked, gained, discovered, etc. is erased at the expense of a single action. You may ask yourself why any rational adult would support the sacrifice of ambition for the stability of complacency- because it is SECURE.
Whoever coined the widely used phrase “pick your battles” was either strictly simplistic or on drugs because many highly acclaimed intellectuals are inherently too stubborn to abide by such a truthful statement. In that regard, I want to close by stating I am aware that social flaws are both inevitable and tend to reoccur throughout history thus they gradually intertwine with the daily events that shape the way we live. On the contrary, the privilege to demonstrate individualism is an American tradition that has been depreciated over time and is directly linked to the illusion that security is almighty. As a body of people we have been continuously ruled by the fear of certain consequences that may result if we neglect to follow the path of least resistance and it is high time to tear down that wall.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment