Is the Drive for Success the Root of All Evil?

[sageb1]

IMHO it is because the ages-old imperitive to be successful is conflicting with more ancient tradition to "don't make waves or cause family shame".

When once, people were respected and treated equitably, in the rush to succeed, people forsake family and friends for something transient (power, wealth).

Nobody wants to be self sufficient because most of us live in an urban setting, where our needs can be met either through hard work or HUD supplementation (if poor).

Yet the rural areas get the short end of the stick due to a complex variety of reasons, mainly due to the myth of the "redneck" mentality. Plus if a bunch of Asians moved into the rural areas in droves, there is a myth about plummetting property values, none of which materialized especially if you look at the influx of Hmong people into Minnesota.

Much of the poverty facing youth among the Hmong and the Blacks was precipitated by unfounded fear by the whites that both racial groups are "others" unworthy of equal rights, due both to culture and language differences in the case of Hmong.

So laws were abused to protect the economic rights of white people in Minneapolis, and certain specific cultural behaviors of both blacks and Hmong were unfairly criminalized. The resulting oppression only accelerated inequity and poverty.

This rationalization can also be generalized for America proper.

You may make your assumptions from all this or call BS, but it appears to follow a global trend too.

Rampant striving for success may have unwanted side effects and repercussions, including risk of poverty (for "have-nots") and continued inequities of increasing proportions (mainly due to overpopulation).

Drug abuse and recreational drug use are only side effects of what can be generalized as "urbanization". Indeed, it may be part of the checks and balances inherent in complex socieities such as outs e.g. Amy Winehouse and Wong Fei.

At the same time, this drive for success tends to blind people to what self sufficiency actually means i.e. actually buying land, and working a farm rather than viewing it all as investment.

IMHO the drive for success is not a root of all evil, but our lust for money is.

Therefore we should not discount acquiring some hippie ethics like recycling, having a truck garden, and raising livestock, even if it is just guinea pigs.

[mr. x]

This is not your blog or your basement newsletter

[snailpoo]

No problem! Cure it with Ionex daily hair conditioner. Ionex daily hair conditioner, the solution for all modern evils. Now, new and improved with 63.8% extra Ionex.

Try some today!

[Sunflare]

^LOL. What is this? Spam?

[sageb1]

Originally Posted by snailpoo

No problem! Cure it with Ionex daily hair conditioner. Ionex daily hair conditioner, the solution for all modern evils. Now, new and improved with 63.8% extra Ionex.

Try some today!

finally, someone who gets the point of my OP.

[popculturepooka]

Originally Posted by sageb1

IMHO it is because the ages-old imperitive to be successful is conflicting with more ancient tradition to "don't make waves or cause family shame".

When once, people were respected and treated equitably, in the rush to succeed, people forsake family and friends for something transient (power, wealth).

Nobody wants to be self sufficient because most of us live in an urban setting, where our needs can be met either through hard work or HUD supplementation (if poor).

Yet the rural areas get the short end of the stick due to a complex variety of reasons, mainly due to the myth of the "redneck" mentality. Plus if a bunch of Asians moved into the rural areas in droves, there is a myth about plummetting property values, none of which materialized especially if you look at the influx of Hmong people into Minnesota.

Much of the poverty facing youth among the Hmong and the Blacks was precipitated by unfounded fear by the whites that both racial groups are "others" unworthy of equal rights, due both to culture and language differences in the case of Hmong.

So laws were abused to protect the economic rights of white people in Minneapolis, and certain specific cultural behaviors of both blacks and Hmong were unfairly criminalized. The resulting oppression only accelerated inequity and poverty.

This rationalization can also be generalized for America proper.

You may make your assumptions from all this or call BS, but it appears to follow a global trend too.

Rampant striving for success may have unwanted side effects and repercussions, including risk of poverty (for "have-nots") and continued inequities of increasing proportions (mainly due to overpopulation).

Drug abuse and recreational drug use are only side effects of what can be generalized as "urbanization". Indeed, it may be part of the checks and balances inherent in complex socieities such as outs e.g. Amy Winehouse and Wong Fei.

At the same time, this drive for success tends to blind people to what self sufficiency actually means i.e. actually buying land, and working a farm rather than viewing it all as investment.

IMHO the drive for success is not a root of all evil, but our lust for money is.

Therefore we should not discount acquiring some hippie ethics like recycling, having a truck garden, and raising livestock, even if it is just guinea pigs.

tl;dr

[Sunflare]

Originally Posted by sageb1

IMHO the drive for success is not a root of all evil, but our lust for money is.

Therefore we should not discount acquiring some hippie ethics like recycling, having a truck garden, and raising livestock, even if it is just guinea pigs.

I think urban yuppies fit that description better in terms of the ethics described. Dirtbags.