Paper Example on Defining Success: A Comparison of Western and Eastern Perspectives

Success has many definitions depending on people and cultures across the World. For some people, a mark of success is about intangible objects (finding love, happiness, and peace of mind). Most people see success as material needs or exceptional net worth, and most knowledgeable sources, whether online or written, define the success of a person by his or her net worth/monetary value. Western World considers material gain as the mark of success. In contrast, the Eastern places more value on intangible things, e.g., dying in old age (100+years) or having harmony and love among people. The paper aims to answer questions on Success in 21st Century America and the role the government plays to make Success for aspiring minds.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Is there a single, all-encompassing definition of American success, or do a variety of "successes" exist? Might different factions of the American population, such as those of different genders, races, ethnicities, and economic backgrounds, have different versions of success?

From the knowledge above, however, it is essential to understand that the World is a 'global village,' which means that; even citizens of one country may have varying ideologies on success. In America, success is often simple; having high-end vehicles (Lamborghini, Ferrari, Aston Martin, Bugatti), clothes (Zara, Balenciaga), accessories (gold or diamond), and even shoes (Louis Vuitton or Weinbrenner). Traveling to exotic locations, e.g., Maldives, Tahiti, Santorini (Greece), or the Canary Islands, also counts as a mark of success since it one must be rich (successful) to afford. This is the picture of how American success looks.

America is a capitalist economy, i.e., most of the wealth is held and controlled by a few high-profile individuals, especially in the government. In contrast, most of the population has to depend on them for a living through employment. It is sort of like a Bourgeois-Proletariat kind of relationship. It is no surprise that 76% of Americans live from pay-check to pay-check, while 64% of businesses break even or lose money (Gandhi et al. 12). Statistics that point to the fact that most Americans do not feel prosperous, i.e., because of perpetual financial struggles.

The 'American Dream' famed as early as the 80s. It pictured people from poor backgrounds going to major cities, e.g., Los Angeles or New York. They would start massively successful businesses that would bring money that would make them rich. It is possible, thus, to say that success in America is often about monetary gain. It is the reason why people rush to 'Get Rich Quick' schemes, especially the Millenials. They want quick and significant gain without significant resource investment.

America is not a homogenous group of people in regards to; gender, race, ethnicity, and economic backgrounds. When it comes to gender, most people would agree that it all depends on how a person is raised that determines their attitude towards success. For example, a girl or boy raised in frugality will, as an adult, see success as a matter of having more significant financial muscle. Some will fall into, 'Generational Poverty' meaning a person is conditioned to settle for a frugal life because their parents chose the same.

In the case of a rich or wealthy upbringing, some by inheritance may either squander the monetary wealth inherited or choose to do more, e.g., donating to Philanthropy or Charity. For example, Bill Gates donates part of his fortune through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Besides, Men and Women's brains are wired differently. Women have more emotional than physical needs, while for men, it is the other way around though this is a generalized view.

A man will often want to affirm his self-worth and success by increasing the amount of monetary value or assets they have. A woman might have the same predisposition on matters success but often to a lesser degree. It is due to this condition that it is mostly the men who dominate the 'Billionaires Club' online. Female Billionaires like; Suzan Walton or Elizabeth Dos Santos or Oprah Winfrey rarely get mentioned.

There are no precise statistics to back up this claim, but simply put, the Definition of success in America stands at 50/50 on the precipice, i.e., 50% of either gender see success as having material gain while the other half see success as living life to full potential. They live by the principle; 'Follow one's Passion and more than enough money will come, chase the money and it will run away faster.' If money does not come, they still feel successful and satisfied with a life well-lived, whether in wealth or poverty.

The ethnic background of any American affects their take on success. For example, if he or she is of African or Asian origin, chances are success to them is living a life that is in line with the requirements of a higher power or deity (God). This is because Asian, African, and Latin American societies tend to have religious dispositions as contrasted to Secular Europeans and North Americans. However, with the cross-cultural assimilation, ethnic backgrounds have had a lesser impact on what success means.

It is not hard to find religious Native Americans who see success as living a life that is pleasing to a higher deity (God). For example, they will not engage in activities that go against their beliefs, no matter how much fame or wealth they may amass from them. Similarly, it is possible to find Africans or Asians or Latinos (previously considered frugal and religious) who perceive success as having a material gain. Such, borrow these beliefs and assumptions from likes of Aliko Dangote or Mukesh Ambani or Carlos Slim, respectively.

When it comes to race and economic backgrounds, the attitude towards success depends on upbringing and location. Upbringing because in the past, people lived in homogenous groups and localities sharing similar values on life. As of today, the World is a 'Global Village.' Cultures have infiltrated foreign lands, and thus, people from individual races and economic backgrounds have shifted their mindsets and attitudes towards success because of a change in parenting styles, location of upbringing, or economic background.

For example, most inhabitants of a previously, predominantly rural America used to consider success as a matter of having a farm with crops and livestock and raising children to the point of independence to raise the next generation. Now, this was a success in the Olden Days. 21st Century America has brought with it formal education and cross-cultural exchange. Success today is; a good education, good health, a good career or job, and giving a high quality of life to one's family and living a long healthy life.

In regards to economic background, success depends on the resources available. Either actively sought after or occurring by default. For example, a person born into a farming community or family with land and farm equipment as the primary resources might see success as making a living from agri-business. In contrast, a person born into a community of entrepreneurs might see success as nothing less of starting up on a business idea and making a profit or serving others Pro bono (Non-profit ventures).

What level of responsibility should the government bear in helping Americans achieve their definitions of success? Should the government be heavily involved or more hands-off?

The US government, in this case, must bear in mind that success has a different meaning from one individual or group of Americans to the next. As such, they have to chip in their part. The primary role of the government is to provide resources for those who are not able to access, e.g., because they are too expensive. Resources can be intellectual property, health care, free education, scholarships, or even the factors of Production (Manpower, Machinery, Money, and Material), i.e., the 4 Ms of business. (Leong, 194).

Employees mostly work best when they are not micro-managed. They need space and time to concentrate and focus on sound work output. In the same way, the government should neither be too lightly nor heavily involved. The government ought to provide the resources necessary for the success of its people and only come in on crucial matters like; National Security concerns, Monitoring and Evaluation, Audit of resource usage and allocation, or Integrity checks and balances. Essentially, people should not feel smothered or abandoned.

What are some examples of how the American government can help its citizens become successful?

The resources have to match the meaning of the success of the target people. Some of the ways through which the government can help people to become successful are highlighted using practical illustrations. For example, since good health is a universal success factor, then resources provided to perpetuate the same must match. A good example is the passing of the Obama Care Health Bill (Manchikanti, 107). It created health insurance with multiple free benefits for over 20 million Americans. This happened in the tenure of the 44th US government under President Barrack Obama. The academics and the majority of modernized communities across the US see attaining the highest possible level of education as a sign of success. A formally educated person is more likely to achieve success and fulfillment in contrast to one who is not. As such, the provision of resources like; free scholarships will be a useful resource to them.

As for those who see success as establishing industries or companies, the provision of the factors of production by the government will propel them to achieve their goals. Most potent entrepreneurs have halted their viable business ideas due to a lack of resources to make their ideas materialize. Reality shows such as; Shark Tank, hosted by billionaires, e.g., Mark Cuban have highlighted, this is a common problem in Entrepreneurial success. They have often provided funds for many innovative minds to succeed at bringing their ideas and efforts to fruition.

Conversely, what are some examples of the types of government assistance that should be avoided?

Help from the government, like medicine, has to be given in dosage(s), or there would be an overdose. The government must not engage in projects or offer assistance for ventures that do not have a clear objective. Graft is whereby public funds or resources, meant for communal or national projects, are diverted into the use or possession of a few greedy individuals. Having a clear objective averts graft as the funds have a pre-determined destination, and diversion will alert concerned parties to counteract the trend.

Government help must also be cut off from projects that do not have a good record. For example, if funds meant to enhance the growth of entrepreneurship or educational centers are repeatedly not distributed to target parties but vanish amidst corporate shenanigans, then the government must take the experience as the best teacher and never assist in such ventures. No government is all-knowing, which means most lessons learned on how better to improve financial decisions are trial and error.

What are the downsides to a government that provides too much or too little help to its citizens?

A responsible parent does not limit or offer too much freedom to their child. They provide guidance but also give their children the chance to experience life and learn for themselves. In a similar pattern of thought, Government assistance is about striking a balance in order for citizens to taste the fruits of success. If it is too much, then the Citizens might become complacent or discouraged.

Complacent or discouraged, in that, as everything is provided for, they do not develop an innovative culture or problem-solving skills. If say, government imports or develops concepts or structures to meet all citizens' demands, then...