By Debra Rae, www.debraraebooks.com
Sunday, May 20, 2007
We've all heard of Generation "X." Now there's "Generation E," usually in reference to a new breed of Europhiles. Decidedly secular and characteristically pessimistic, these are vigorous members of the European youth culture (ages 18-44).
To Euro-youth, marriage is superfluous; sexual orientation irrelevant. These self-proclaimed "global citizens of the future" love to hate Americans as being selfish, insular, and materialistic.
Truth is they are not completely off track. There's yet another Generation "E," one manifestly prone to such unflattering defining characteristics. This Generation "E" is driven by a spirit of entitlement.
First printed in the Washington Times (26 April 1999), "Children of the Therapeutic Society" by B.K. Eakman exposed how social scientists, at first, wrongly suggested that direct involvement of parents with their children was synonymous with over-protectiveness. Eventually, hands-on parenting was likened to "child abuse." In time, to tolerate a teen tantrum (or that of a two-year-old) became viewed as "being flexible."
Parents of Generation "E" (for entitled) are very, very "flexible." It is of paramount importance to them that their kids like them, no matter the cost. What once was called "talking back" is now "having a voice." Even tag artists who deface public and private property are deemed "creative" for their "thinking outside of the box."
All too often our youth are nurtured on what Gene Edward Veith calls "mind-candy of pop culture." Void of deep-seated convictions to stir passion, they are prone to be cynical, nihilistic, and sometimes criminal.
Today's growing selfishness is likened to "knowing what you want and setting out to get it." The "hormonal teen culture" justifies being insular, and lust for materialism smacks of what is perceived as healthy ambition.
In a word, privilege today is more an expectation than a rarity.
As the story goes, a wealthy farmer sent his sons to the fields, where they worked long hours in the heat of the sun. Neighbors were appalled. After all, they reasoned, he had more than enough money to hire out such work. In disgust, one neighbor stormed the father's estate, accusing him of unthinkable stinginess.
"Sir," the good farmer responded, "I'm not raising wheat; I'm raising sons." More than saving a penny, that father wanted his sons to learn well the simple lessons of life--lessons he credited for his own success as a farmer, businessman, and most importantly as a father.
No doubt those lessons mirrored life rules expounded by author Charles Sykes--the first of which follows: Life is not fair; get used to it. On occasion, but not always, the ball of blessing lands undeservedly in your court. Because of the likelihood that unmerited fortune will, from time to time, advantage you, let that suffice.
Kids do well to keep in mind that the world won't care about self-actualization or self-esteem, but instead will expect accomplishment as prerequisite to commendation or financial reward. No amount of ego will land you a vice presidency right out of high school. You must first earn that title; and, in the process, you'll need to "find yourself" on your own time.
Incredulous as it sounds, before you were born, your parents weren't as boring as they are now. They got that way paying your bills, cleaning up your messes, and listening to your revelries in self-aggrandizement. If you think your teacher is tough, wait until you get a boss who has no apparent interest in polishing your ego or feathering your nest.
Progressive schools may have done away with "winners" and "losers," but their self-esteem enhancing paradigm doesn't bear the slightest resemblance to real life. Believe it. When you flub up, it's not the fault of parents, teachers, or colleagues.
Life isn't divided into semesters, with breaks following; and, by the way, television does not mirror real life. Some youth may be reluctant to accept that flipping burgers is not beneath their dignity; in fact, it's called "opportunity."
Finally, be nice to nerds. Chances are you'll end up working for one!
A recently published Seattle Times article lauds a local child-centered school characterized by "freedom" and "democracy" (1 April 2007). Just as children ambulate and speak with seeming spontaneity (no "formal" instruction needed), it stands to reason that they will learn to read, write, and compute similarly unencumbered by pesky teachers, assignments, tests, grades.
"Free" students study only what they want to; these "find their bliss" by playing cards and shoot-em-up cyberspace games. Should they have questions, students are owed answers by attending adults. Unless asked, however, "facilitators" remain seen, but not heard. For this, parents dish out yearly tuitions nearing $6,000.
But, then, "new" basics of consensus building and interdependence are not new at all. Founded in 1921 by A. S. Neill, Summerhill was presumed to be a haven for children to discover who they are and where their interests lie. Anticipated outcomes were "nurtured" in a self-governing, democratic community much akin to the model classroom at the University of Iowa laboratory school for which I student-taught in the late 1960s.
Insofar as rules were concerned, pupils and staff alike had equal vote; and, yes, lessons were optional. Young and inexperienced as I was, it didn't take long to realize that this was no way to run a school--unless, that is, you don't mind ducking water balloons or dodging skate boarders hording the hallways.
Certainly, I'm not calling for "the good old days" of the late 1800s when teachers were required to fill lamps, clean chimneys, tote daily supplies of water and coal, and whittle pens for their students--in addition, of course, to dispensing knowledge and honing basic skills. Even so, for most, education imparted in one-room schoolhouses was highly esteemed; and educators commanded due respect. Despite grueling requirements, teachers enjoyed the supreme satisfaction of equipping their students with academic skills and a firm sense of personal accountability and character.
No more. What B.K. Eakman terms "psychological calisthenics"--this, in lieu of yesteryear's far more challenging textbooks, rigorous assignments, and stricter teachers--paves the way for students to become inebriated with an exaggerated pre-occupation with self.
Despite the fact that American high-school students are falling behind even the Third World when it comes to math and science, our kids still rank near the top when tested on matters of self-esteem.
Something is terribly wrong with this picture.
More than ever before, feeling good about oneself trumps all. In psychology, narcissism is an exaggeration of normal self-respect and involvement, yet networks and magazine ads scream the message that kids are entitled. Life owes them, don't you know?
The best car, the latest technology, the designer label, the spring vacation, endless junk food--all are expected, even demanded. After all, advertisements proclaim that I'm "worth it." "I deserve a break today"; it's "my thing" to "do what I wanna' do." The so-called "Imperial Self" is "born to rule." While theirs is "the spirit--with attitude," kids today "regret nothing."
Thus armed with commercial jingles and slogans, Generation "E" (for "entitled") strive to turn the tide of favor their way by opportunistically flashing the "victimology" card. Unfortunately, in the real world, parents and teachers do youngsters no favor by appeasing the oft-cited whine, "That's not fair!"
Horace Mann believed in the perfectible nature of man and, in 1850, sold many Americans on the misguided idea that in one hundred years secular education would solve crime and poverty. To the contrary, a "mental hygiene" approach to education, coupled with permissive parenting, has erupted instead in grotesque violence (can you say "Littleton"?).
Cheri Pierson Yecke characterized the rising tide of mediocrity in America's schools as a veritable "war against excellence." And a war it is. Is it any wonder that the longer students attend American schools, the farther they fall behind age-mates in most industrialized nations of the world (Dr. James Dobson, Focus on the Family)?
That the focus on academics shifted dramatically in the 1960s to emotional health issues begs the question, "How is this working for you?" Apparently it's not working well. Whistle blower Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt uncovered the mother lode, armed herself with it, and then fled the US Department of Education for which she had served as senior official.
A recent "Cosmo Girl" survey reveals that nearly one in three would pocket a $5 bill if she saw a stranger drop it on the floor. Indeed, former secretary of education William Bennett rightly reasons that "value-neutral," standard-light schools more often than not fashion morally indifferent students. Society, he concludes, is no better for it.
Not long ago, I overheard a middle-aged woman reminiscing about her lifelong journey as a Christian. Never having had a husband, or children, this seemingly unfulfilled woman blurted out, "God owes me BIG TIME."
I've got to admit, this unexpected outburst took me aback. Yes, my friend had devoted her life to Christian service; but, then, a "living sacrifice" is what the Bible describes as "reasonable service." Somehow this good woman felt "owed."
That conversation reminded me of an earlier experience when I employed a worker to undertake a construction project in the backyard. In the business sector, effort minus output seldom reaps reward, certainly not monetarily; however, despite this job's remaining incomplete, my workman demanded five times the amount of his previously agreed-upon bid. His rationale, as I heard it, was that God's intent was to bless him at my expense. No matter the mess left behind, he nonetheless felt "owed."
These scenarios underscore the principle that life isn't fair; but then it is the Lord's prerogative whether to give or take away. Wisdom dictates that there is no inherent virtue in material gain or loss. Neither ensures salvation, sanctification or discipleship; either can ambush and ensnare; both, when embraced, contribute to character maturation and "abundant living" in Christ.
To feel "owed" is a far cry from acknowledging and, then, appropriating more than thirty thousand biblical promises ripe for the picking. We who died to sin and self upon accepting Christ as Lord dare not indulge a covetous spirit of entitlement. God is in debt to no one, but we are forever in debt to Him. In fact, the Bible calls us His willing "love-slaves."
As was the case with the apostle Paul, most Christians experience abounding and abasing, being full and being hungry; but God's love and valuation of them never vacillates. No matter the quality of life enjoyed or tolerated, as the case may be, believers can trust that God remains their faithful provider.
Recently, I witnessed an attitude-propelled, manifestly disgruntled teenaged girl insisting that she was owed a replacement phone. Yes, she broke the one she had (when she threw it in anger); but after all, that phone was "cheap" and bound to break sooner or later.
No matter the sweet reasonableness with which she was implored, this youngster relentlessly insisted that she shouldn't have to wait, or be asked to contribute to, purchase of what she obviously has coming. Bottom line: parents owe her--and now.
Banking on the power of persistence, this young woman demonstrated intuitive knowledge that, given time, concentrated hammering on her parent was certain to get her what she wanted--if only to curtail the annoyance of an extended tirade.
Most likely, she was right. For any number of reasons, today's enlightened parent willingly takes to heart such scathing rebuke. Eager to sidestep escalating tensions, the exhausted adult rationalizes her teen's demand: Going without would surely wreck havoc with my child's self-esteem, wouldn't it? Friends have what they want. Shouldn't my child as well? Perhaps I really do owe her.
With that, the child is appeased, conflict ceases, and the relieved "problem-solver" applies the "smile gauge." Because the placated child appears happy, that parent basks in false comfort that her work here is done.
While throwing money at a problem often paves the path to least resistance, it seldom cures what's ailing. Take our public schools, for example. They have been, and remain, the best funded on earth, yet when competing with other industrialized nations, American students consistently score poorly in math and dead last in physics.
With this in view, former secretary of education and drug czar William Bennett poses the fitting question: What do we gain if our youngsters "smile their way into abysmal ignorance and educational oblivion"?
Insubordination won't cut the mustard in today's emerging global economy, nor does it serve to nurture healthy relationships of any sort. If Generation "E" consistently skirt self-gratification, whether delayed or denied, they are the real losers.
Left-wing mission groups like No More Deaths and Border Action Network persist in giving aid to illegal migrants braving the Sonora (World, 15 April 2006). Apparently, well-intentioned Americans, as these, view the US of A as a sort of "boarding house for the world's poor" (Phyllis Schlafly, July 2006). To them, proponents of legal and measured immigration are "nativists" and "racists."
The very term "illegal alien" stirs the ire of today's politically correct crowd. Lawbreaking immigrants are categorized instead as "undocumented workers"; nevertheless, whatever the nomenclature, the key word is illegal. It stands to reason that enabling lawlessness invites even more of it.
Indeed, increasing numbers of America's "undocumented workers" feel entitled to jobs and all the rights and privileges (minus responsibility) of American citizenship. According to Frosty Wooldridge, Arizona taxpayers foot over $1 billion annually in services for its half-million illegal aliens. Similarly, the average California household contributes at least $1,200 annually to subsidize the deficit between what illegal immigrants cost in services and what they pay in taxes (Victor Davis Hanson, Professor of Classics, California State University, Fresno).
Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum further contends that amnesty for tens of millions is but "a drop in the bucket" when compared to "temporary guest workers," for whom American citizens are expected to pay staggering entitlements as Medicaid, Social Security (with credit for FICA taxes paid under false numbers), Supplemental Security Income, Earned Income Tax Credit, the WIC program, food stamps, public and subsidized housing, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, and federally funded legal representation. Add to these costs of public schooling (replete with lunches)!
Steve Forbes rightly suggests that while we are the land of the free, we are not the land of free loaders. Nonetheless, statistics reveal that, after twenty years, even legal Mexican immigrants have double the welfare rates of naturalized citizens.
Over the last three decades, bilingual education, expanded welfare, the hyphenated identity and radical historical revisionism of SW American history, propelled by racist reconquista rhetoric, have proved to be detrimental to assimilation and economic improvement.
When the rate of immigration exceeds that of assimilation, riots and chaos are inevitable. Some surmise that under the titanic weight of diversity, multilingualism and entitlement for lawbreakers, America already has begun its downward plunge.
Politically correct black activist Randall Robinson wrote The Debt: What Americans Owe to Blacks. In it, he blames white folks for black poverty. To level the score, Robinson calls for taxpayers to underwrite black reparations to the tune of trillions of dollars. This applies even though not a single African-American alive today was ever a slave, nor was a single living white American a slave owner.
While the global community applauds reparations for bygone ills of American slavery, it takes little or no action to condemn ongoing atrocities by the Sudanese government, for one. Go figure.
Consider this as well: If you lost a family member in the 9-11 attack, you are entitled to reparation averaging almost $1.2 million (for some, millions more). This, however, does not apply if you are a surviving family member of an American soldier killed while defending America from further attack.
As a surviving spouse, the first check you get is a $6,000 direct death benefit (half of which is taxable). Next, you get burial costs ($1,750) and $833 monthly--that is, until you remarry--and each of your children is awarded a mere $211 monthly. Once each child turns eighteen, he is cut off completely.
Because it is not right to do wrongly that somehow good may come, blanket entitlement cannot possibly be a viable solution for bygone offenses. But, then, if one believes society owes him, this is not an easy pill to swallow.
Being "Norwegian-American," I am aghast at the hardship endured by Norwegian immigrants who once flooded our country. In support of their families, and to make ends meet, my rugged predecessors were forced to work under intolerable conditions and, then, for meager recompense. What about balancing the score on their behalf?
So, then, if society truly owes African-Americans and Norwegian-Americans, it surely owes Japanese-Americans, all victims of terrorism and natural disasters, unwilling hostages, war prisoners, families of those lost-in-action, the handicapped, those discriminated against, the sexually harassed, victims of crime--just about everyone.
So, pray tell, if everyone is owed, who pays?
The United Nation addresses the question, "If everyone is owed, who pays?" with two simple words--namely, sustainable development. Sustainability incorporates socialist principles into the emerging global governance structure. Simply put, those who "have" naturally owe those who "have not."
In the global economy, wealth redistribution (socialism) trumps allegedly greedy gain from free enterprise. "Acting together for a just world" has a noble ring, true, but then today's brand of egalitarianism is nepotism, plain and simple.
It may well be that the vices of ostentation and conspicuous consumption are so prevalent in 21st century American culture that they no longer are viewed as such (World, 15 April 2006). Americans shoulder trillions in debt; in fact, ours is the largest debtor nation in the world. Moreover, ABC news has reported that the average family in America wields ten credit cards and accrues, on average, twenty-six thousand dollars in debt. Experts warn that consumer installment debt is propelling our nation toward disaster. But, we reason, if the Joneses have it, so should we. It's owed us.
Disturbing as this is, I am equally alarmed by the growing mindset that "you owe me because you have it, and I don't." Although the US pays fully one-fourth of the UN budget, she is scolded nonetheless for being selfish and stingy. How dare she enjoy the fruit of her labors when others need and want what she has--not necessarily because it's earned, but because somehow it's "owed."
In Deuteronomy 16, Moses instructed the Israelites to appoint for each of their tribes those judges and officials who "hate dishonest gain." To the contrary, God pairs true equity with righteousness, viewing a just weight as "His delight" and a false balance as "abomination" (Prov. 2:9; 11:1).
Having traveled extensively through Third-world countries, I am haunted by earmarks of poverty--tired, old faces; torn, filthy garments; bellies distended from starvation. Each draws the heart of compassion; each reminds us of blessings that too many Americans take for granted.
Responsible social programs and faith-based outreaches give legs to the Golden Rule; and I affirm wholeheartedly that the affluent--Christians most particularly--have a moral mandate to reach out to the weak and poor of the world. Nevertheless, wisdom dictates that if we value entitlement over justice, we end up forfeiting both. For part 1 click below.
2007 Debra Rae - All Rights ReservedDaughter of an Army Colonel, Debra graduated with distinction from the University of Iowa. She then completed a Master of Education degree from the University of Washington. These were followed by Bachelor of Theology and Master of Ministries degrees-both from Pacific School of Theology.
Having authored the ABCs of Globalism and ABCs of Cultural -Isms, Debra speaks to Christian and secular groups alike. Her radio spots air globally. Presently, Debra co-hosts WOMANTalk radio with Sharon Hughes and Friends, and she contributes monthly commentaries to Changing Worldviews and NewsWithViews.com. Debra calls the Pacific Northwest home. Debra can be reached at: ABCs@debraraebooks.com
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement