I'm writing this without access to preview.  Apologies in advance for links which don't work,  typos, grammar glitches, etc. etc.

Yesterday Bluebird asked a very interesting question in response to a post I created.  "When did choosing the lesser evil become the American Dream?"  I answered briefly and with a little more convolution than necessary.  After answering, I couldn't get the question out of my head.  So to exorcise it I'm posting this.

What is The American Dream?  I'd probably deny there is such a thing--in  the singular at least.  The American Dream as a concept is as tricky as love is as a concept.  I love my friends.  I love pizza.  Not the same thing at all.  So, what are  The American  Dreams?  Plural, please.  There are lots of them,  certainly.  Some of them are contradictory--which  isn't a problem in the dream world, but which can be very problematic in  the world awake.  Let's start with  two iconic dreamers,  Horatio Alger and Martin  Luther King.  I  place them in  that order for chronology's sake, and I use those two because the one of the dreamers I really like, John  Winthrop, is remembered by nearly no one except history types like myself. 

Algerite's beliefs can  be summed up in the words of the Horatio Alger Society.

The Horatio Alger Association of Distinguished Americans is dedicated to the simple but powerful belief that hard work, honesty and determination can conquer all obstacles. Today, through its Members, the Association continues to educate our nation's young people about the economic and personal opportunities afforded them by the promise of the American free enterprise system.

Founded by Kenneth Beebe and Norman Vincent Peale after World War II, the membership of those who "made it" is composed largely of corporate executives.  I see characterstics  of "Mr.  Hyde" in this version of the American  Dream--if I'm allowed to bring English Fiction into the discussion.   More about that later.  Where there's a Mr. Hyde there's also a Dr. Jekyl.  The good side of the American Dream--without the transformation into  the nightmare.

Here's Dr. King's Version, to which I aspire.

I say to you today, my friends, that in spite of the difficulties and frustrations of the moment, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a desert state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day the state of Alabama, whose governor's lips are presently dripping with the words of interposition and nullification, will be transformed into a situation where little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls and walk together as sisters and brothers.

If king were to deliver that speech today, he'd probably have to include more states and more races/ethnicities than he did nearly 50 years ago.  I'm not talking just Arizona here.  I'm talking  about most of the United States, largely because of what we've done as we've achieved Mr. Hyde's version.  Just a little from John Winthrop and I'm off to prove my case after what  I hope is a page break.

While still aboard the Arabella, Winthrop said



.  Now the only way to avoid this shipwreck, and to provide for our posterity, is to follow the counsel of Micah, to do justly, to love mercy, to walk humbly with our God. For this end, we must be knit together, in this work, as one man. We must entertain each other in brotherly affection. We must be willing to abridge ourselves of our superfluities, for the supply of others' necessities. We must uphold a familiar commerce together in all meekness, gentleness, patience and liberality. We must delight in each other; make others' conditions our own; rejoice together, mourn together, labor and suffer together, always having before our eyes our commission and community in the work, as members of the same body. So shall we keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace.

Sounds almost communist!  Call up the shade of Joe McCarthy.  Call  out the Club for Growth.  But please recognize this as communitarian thought--which infused the thinking of the early Puritans.


Fleeing each other.

If I've done  this right, we're on page two, or at least those who can take large doses of me are.

Here's what Mr. Hyde did:--he used Horatio Alger to get as far away from  the the  idea of community as possible--not just from the idea of community of  the unlike,  but from other Horatios as well.  He Sprawled.  He followed Frank Lloyd Wright into Broadacre City,  Not what Wright imagined, but a perversion of it worse than what Wright imagined.

Imagine this, coast to coast, all the same size, all  the same features,	Catch the next flying saucer to Cloneville

So far, Broadacre City (City??, not in my book) exists only as an  idea.  But we have adapted a considerable number of features from it.  I think they're Mr. Hyde-ish, though the developers and residents of parts may disagree.  I offer Stamford, CT as a test case,  though I  could  replicate the demonstrate in any state of the lower 48.

Stamford, toward the northern side of town and on the west.	Stamford, toward the southern side of town , and  on  the  west.

Count the number of houses in  each  illustration above.  IF the link works, take a walk  in each area.  Could the definition of neighbor possibly be the same in  both, I don't think so.  I love American Factfinder.  I can't wait until it is updated with 2010 census figures, but until then, 2000 figures will  have to do.  Things will not have changed  much, I predict.  So let's look at Stamford from  three different perspectives,  Density of  Housing,  Income, and Race.

Housing Units	The denser the housing the darker the data class
Household Income (2000)	The higher the income the darker the data class.  Not many in Stamford are "poor" but that's not entirely relevant to the argument I'm making.
Percentage of Respondents Identifying Themselves as Black	The darker the data class, the larger the percentage self-identifying as black The City median  is bout 15 %, but as one can see the distribution within  the city is very much skewed.

There are lots of conclusions to be drawn, but I'm curious what conclusions readers may draw.   I'm prepared to defend the thesis that the Mr.  Hyde in us has used the Horatio Alger version of the American Dream to flee diversity and settle in bland, blond neighborhoods--blond in terms of skin tones,  if not hair color.  We may recite Emma Lazarus's lines "Give me your tired, your poor", but we add NIMBY and define the BY far beyond our individual property lines.  Out of this comes more global  warming, larger carbon footprints, more dependence on fossil fuels, and more ecological  disasters.  This is enough for today.  I may come back to some of these topics if anyone is interested in more meandering aMike stuff.

I'm going to try to preview this and see if the formatting works.  If it doesn't delete and try again.