Chris Hedges' latest column knocks one out of the park. He spells out clearly what I first gained an inkling of from reading "A Boy and His Dog" thirty years ago. ["A Boy and His Dog" was written by Harlan Ellison in 1969. You can think of it as inspiration for Fallout 3.] Hedges' column also takes on Oprah, to the extent that last year she heavily promoted the "Secret" (ie. "Law of Attraction."), although he doesn't mention her by name. Here are the choice paragraphs from Hedge's column. I added the bold. Happiness Consultants Won’t Stop a Depression

Quote: ... The driving ideology of corporate culture is a blind faith in the power and virtue of the corporate collective. All quotas can be met. All things are possible. Profits can always be raised. It is only a question of the right attitude. The highest form of personal happiness, we are told, is when the corporation thrives. Corporate retreats are built around this idea of merging the self with the corporate collective. They often have the feel of a religious revival. They are designed to whip up emotions. Office managers and sales staffs are given inspirational talks by sports stars, retired military commanders, billionaires and self-help specialists like Tony Robbins who tell them, in essence, the impossible is always possible. And when this proves not to be true, it is we who are the problem. We simply have to try harder. The belief that by thinking about things, by visualizing them, by wanting them, we can make them happen is magical thinking. The purpose, structure and goals of the corporation can never be questioned. To question, to engage in criticism of the corporate collective, is to be obstructive and negative. We can always make more money, meet new quotas and advance our career if we have enough faith. This magical thinking is largely responsible for our economic collapse, since any Cassandra who saw it coming was dismissed as “negative.” This childish belief discredits legitimate concerns and anxieties. It exacerbates despair and passivity. It fosters a state of self-delusion. And it has perverted the way we think about the nation and ourselves. Corporate employees, like everyone else, are gripped by personal dilemmas, anxieties and troubles. They are not permitted, however, to ask whether the problem is the corporate structure and the corporate state. If they are not happy, there is, they are told, something wrong with them. Real debate, real clashes of opinion, are, in the happy world of corporatism, forbidden. They are considered rude. The corporations enforce a relentless optimism that curtails honest appraisal of reality and preserves hierarchical forms of organization under the guise of “participation.” Corporate culture provides, as Christopher Lasch pointed out, a society dominated by corporate elites with an anti-elitist ideology. ... Those who fail to exhibit positive attitudes, no matter the external reality, are seen as maladjusted and in need of assistance. Their attitudes need correction. Once we adopt an upbeat vision of reality, positive things will happen. This belief encourages us to flee from reality when reality does not elicit positive feelings. These specialists in “happiness” have formulated something they call the “Law of Attraction.” It argues that we attract those things in life, whether it is money, relationships or employment, which we focus on. Suddenly, abused and battered wives or children, the unemployed, the depressed and mentally ill, the illiterate, the lonely, those grieving for lost loved ones, those crushed by poverty, the terminally ill, those fighting with addictions, those suffering from trauma, those trapped in menial and poorly paid jobs, those whose homes are in foreclosure or who are filing for bankruptcy because they cannot pay their medical bills, are to blame for their negativity. The ideology justifies the cruelty of unfettered capitalism, shifting the blame from the power elite to those they oppress. And many of us have internalized this pernicious message, which in times of difficulty leads to personal despair, passivity and disillusionment. This flight into the collective self-delusion of corporate ideology, especially as we undergo financial collapse and the pillaging of the U.S. Treasury by corporations, is no more helpful in solving our problems than alchemy. But there are university departments and reams of pseudo-scientific scholarship to give an academic patina to the fantasy of happiness and success through positive thinking. The message that we can have everything we want if we dig deep enough inside ourselves, if we truly believe we are exceptional, is pumped out daily over the airwaves in advertisements, through the plot and story lines of television programs and films, and bolstered by the sickeningly cheerful and upbeat banter of well-groomed television hosts. This is the twisted ideological lens through which we view the world. ... This ideology condemns all social critics, iconoclasts, dissidents and individualists for failing to seek fulfillment in the collective chant of the corporate herd. It strangles creativity and moral autonomy. It is about being molded and shaped into a compliant and repressed collective. It is not, at its core, about happiness. It is about conformity, a conformity that all totalitarian and authoritarian structures seek to impose on the crowd. Its unrealistic promise of happiness, in fact, probably produces more internal anxiety and feelings of inadequacy than genuine happiness. The nagging undercurrents of alienation, the constant pressure to exhibit a false enthusiasm and buoyancy, the loneliness of a work life in which one must always be about upbeat presentation, the awful feeling that being positive may not in fact work if one is laid off, are buried and suppressed. There are no gross injustices, no abuses to question, no economic systems to challenge in the land of happy thoughts. In the land of happy thoughts, we are to blame if things go wrong. The corporate state, we are assured, is beneficent and good. It will make us happy and comfortable and prosperous even as it funnels billions of taxpayer dollars into its bank accounts. Mao and Stalin used the same language of harmony and strength through the collective, the same love of spectacles and slogans, the same coercive power of groups and state propaganda, to enslave and impoverish millions of their citizens. And, if we do not free ourselves from the grip of this ideology and the corporate vampires who disseminate it, this is what will happen to us.

What do you think about this? Have you encountered similar episodes of forced cheerfulness at work? If so, how did you respond? Were you tempted to paint clown smiles on your face in order to get along? (as in "A Boy and His Dog") What strategies of resistance, if any, did you come up with? What strategies of resistance might you employ? Is forced cheerfulness only used with employees in non-creative jobs? Does forced cheerfulness impede creativity? Does the flight from reality encourage drug abuse? What questions about this do you have?

This column is very interesting, because it essentially sums up a very central impression I got from America while I was studying there for one semester (I'm from Germany originally).

The notion that you have to pump people up emotionally pervades American culture. The entire indoctrination of college undergraduates revolves around it, for example. The surface topic of the column - inspiring happy thoughts in the workplace - is just another symptom of the underlying culture.

I can certainly understand where it's coming from, and I think it does work to an extent - it's a form of social engineering that I suspect can work quite well, especially on less thinking people. It did affect me as well and it was also a lot of fun sometimes, but it left a bitter aftertaste.

Never read the book.

It hasn't been enforced cheerfulness at work so much as everywhere else. So many people get determined to put you in a good mood or try to get you to talk about your trouble when you're down about something that is none of their buisiness. I usually just tell these people that it kills me a little bit more inside everytime I have to put on a happy face or pretend that I'm not in a bad mood. The result is usually that they end up feeling guilty and that actually makes me feel a bit better.

I don't know about impeding creativity but I find a good dose of negativity can sure shake out problems with designs or plans at work and at home. "Oh, that will never work because you haven't consider A, B, and C." Then they go consider those things and the plan goes much smoother. Also, pessimism is the foundation of disaster recovery.

Although... I can't help but think that a lot of this current economic downturn (or whatever you call it) is the result of too many people buying into all the doom and gloom forecasts and negative publicity.

Quote: Original post by kseh
Although... I can't help but think that a lot of this current economic downturn (or whatever you call it) is the result of too many people buying into all the doom and gloom forecasts and negative publicity.

I would say that the persistence of this economic downturn is people buying into all the doom and gloom after the collapse. Technically, the economy has stopped contracting, but we haven't truly started to recover. Unemployment is still growing, and that feeds into the sense that things are getting worse. Plus, our media adheres to the policy of "if it bleeds, it leads," so we're getting reinforced by bad news all the time.

Or, well, those who read and watch the news are. I don't. I manufacture my depressive funk on my own. [smile]

I agree with the thesis of the article. Corporate culture is predicated on a phoniness and insincerity that I still need to build myself back up to return to. Watching the founder and the senior VP of operations chew the same co-worker out on separate occasions in full view and hearing of everyone (excerpt: "Stop fucking lying to me, man!") and then talk about how the company is "like a family"? Yeah, whatever.

I really don't ever want to go back to a corporation as an employee. I'd rather be a contractor.

Quote: Original post by Prefect
The notion that you have to pump people up emotionally pervades American culture. The entire indoctrination of college undergraduates revolves around it, for example. The surface topic of the column - inspiring happy thoughts in the workplace - is just another symptom of the underlying culture.

American culture isn't monolithic, but since you've referenced undergraduate education, I suppose it's fair to ask if you're talking about American sports culture? Cheerleading isn't far removed from forced cheerfulness.

Quote: Original post by Prefect
I can certainly understand where it's coming from, and I think it does work to an extent - it's a form of social engineering that I suspect can work quite well, especially on less thinking people. It did affect me as well and it was also a lot of fun sometimes, but it left a bitter aftertaste.

Bitter aftertaste? How so? The disappointment when the school lost the big game?

Quote: Original post by kseh
Never read the book.

Assuming you mean "A Boy and HIs Dog", it's closer to a short story. It was made into a movie in the early 70's. Don Johnson (Miami Vice) played the boy. Jason Robards (too many movies to credit only one) played the leader of post-Apocalypse subterranean Topeka, Kansas, a place where everyone had smiles painted on their faces and non-conformity meant exile to the radioactive wastelands of the surface. Wikipedia has more.

I have to disagree somewhat with the idea that the economic recession is the result of too many people buying into all the doom and gloom forecasts and negative publicity. It seems to me more the case that the bubbles that lead to this recession - subprime etc. but also enron and the dotbomb - were the result of too many people buying into the hyperbole and phony cheerfulness. The doom and gloom forecasts were ignored when it mattered, when fixing things would have been less painful. That's one of the points Hedges makes: This magical thinking is largely responsible for our economic collapse, since any Cassandra who saw it coming was dismissed as “negative.” The lethargy of present levels of consumption, the primary factor behind the persistence of the recession, is more a reflection of sobriety, a coming to grips with the ugly reality of the damage done after years of binge drinking (so to speak).

I actually bought one of these self help courses(one of many) which I realised its whole premise was just act happy and you will be happy. I was too miserable to get past the first tape and never went back.

I hate this sort of two faced behaviour, especially in staff dealing with the public I dont like pretending myself and I dont like watching people do it.

For instance I saw this Hotel Lady dealing with a customer and she was the most polite you'd ever seen and smiled throughout, except for her eyes, they remained cold and dead throughout, and the second the customer turned and walked off. The managers face dropped and turned to stone perfectly matching her eyes. It was one of the most horrible things I've seen.

Quote: Original post by LessBread

Quote: Original post by Prefect
The notion that you have to pump people up emotionally pervades American culture. The entire indoctrination of college undergraduates revolves around it, for example. The surface topic of the column - inspiring happy thoughts in the workplace - is just another symptom of the underlying culture.

American culture isn't monolithic, but since you've referenced undergraduate education, I suppose it's fair to ask if you're talking about American sports culture? Cheerleading isn't far removed from forced cheerfulness.

Reminds me of this thing my HS did. It was the most ridiculous thing ever. They had these pep days and things like spirit week and such. Such a waste of time for a public school.

Hehe, I remember when I was 17 and working a job at McDonalds. The people at the front counter are supposed to give a great big happy smile to every customer and pretend that they really care about them as a person. It's emotionally exhausting and I eventually got tired of doing it. One day I was feeling sort of sick but had to work anyways. The store manager noticed that I wasn't smiling to anyone and it bothered her, so she took me aside and gave me a lecture about it. I went back to the front counter and still didn't smile... I just didn't care (shame on me!!!)... and the manager would be watching me and still telling me to smile for the customers, even in front of them. Man, that job sucked...

I'm ALL for acting genuine with everyone I meet. Some people completely bore me and I won't pretend otherwise. It's not my fault they're boring or uninteresting -- it's their problem. Other people actually have a sense for rapport. I wish more people would adopt my frankness. Then we wouldn't have to wonder so much about whether someone is being fake. To mandate the emotional states of employees is very...coercive. For the sake of those airline flight attendants, let's stop with the fake happy faces!

What's even more scary is that people seem to think that this goes in hand with being "professional" and they don't even have to be told to act fake. They coerce themselves! Is it a cost of staying in business and being competitive? Is the customer experience so important that we delude them with fake happiness?

We were runnin so fast til we came to the McDonalds where I used to workWe walked up to the drive thru and gave my boss a jerkSaid, "give us all your money and three Big Macs to goAnd suck on this you weasel, we're goin to Mexico" -- "Mexico", Beck

Quote: Original post by LessBread
I have to disagree somewhat with the idea that the economic recession is the result of too many people buying into all the doom and gloom forecasts and negative publicity. It seems to me more the case that the bubbles that lead to this recession - subprime etc. but also enron and the dotbomb - were the result of too many people buying into the hyperbole and phony cheerfulness. The doom and gloom forecasts were ignored when it mattered, when fixing things would have been less painful. That's one of the points Hedges makes: This magical thinking is largely responsible for our economic collapse, since any Cassandra who saw it coming was dismissed as "negative." The lethargy of present levels of consumption, the primary factor behind the persistence of the recession, is more a reflection of sobriety, a coming to grips with the ugly reality of the damage done after years of binge drinking (so to speak).

You make compelling arguments. I was thinking of the emphasis on "consumer confidence" as an index of predictable growth (since consumer spending accounts for some 70% of economic activity), but you're right that the doom and gloom was ignored prior to the fall. Is it possible that it is now being overvalued, that many commentators and the consumers who listen to them are perpetually on the hype train rather than the information train, and consequently constantly "behind the curve"?

Quote: Original post by slayemin
What's even more scary is that people seem to think that this goes in hand with being "professional" and they don't even have to be told to act fake. They coerce themselves! Is it a cost of staying in business and being competitive? Is the customer experience so important that we delude them with fake happiness?

The coercion is not exclusive to corporations, though, which is why so many people adopt it unbidden. How many of your casual acquaintances, when asking "How are you?" do you think really want to know how you are? Want to know about your foul mood, difficulties paying the bills, problems with your wife and how you hate your boss - or how ecstatic you are over an accepted proposal and a consequent promotion? People seem to just want the perfunctory answer "I'm fine, thanks for asking. You?" because they really don't care. It's just small talk.

And since people aren't interested in the states of others, they assume they shouldn't share theirs either.

I was once in a church where an elderly gentleman said "Hello" and I responded "Hi," quietly and without all the false enthusiasm. He complained, "There's no need to growl." I was taken aback, and a little bit offended (and considered it a racist affront at the time to assume that I, as a black man, would growl; I'm older now and just view it as an old man expecting the feigned joy that everyone shares at church and surprised to find otherwise). Maybe if we eliminated the ritual of inquiry, replacing it instead with a brief, cordial-but-not-necessarily-cheerful "Hello" or "Good morning," we'd get past this? Or maybe not.