Introduction
Winners and losers are always there in every field, organization and the society. From the moment people born, they face winning and losing despite their acceptance or not. In order to win for someone, there must be some losers. The American idea of winning and losing revolves around the concept that champions are those who put their mind to combating their rivals. The American society is mostly concerned with the winning as the result of extreme efforts and the hard work. For Americans, it very hard to enjoy their leisure time because of the competitions where they think that winning is more important than losing. The society is convinced that competition is more enjoyable than playing which provide learning to the people about the winning and losing.
Discussion
According to the famous football, couches winning is not everything, it is the only thing. The cultural domination of the Americans assumes that competition is the primary motive which plays the central role in defining the losers and the winners. The assumption also gives value to the preserved, hard work and all the pathways which lead to the winners. However, there is lack of infinite new ways which could prove the idea of winners. In the same way, the assumption of American society does not consider the way competition can turn into the complete loss of the courtesy. Defining and explaining the winners and the losers cause Americans to value the cooperation and inherent motivation (Lelkes, 530). The two writers and the authors of numerous social books on Americans culture Joshua Davis and Alfie Kohn question the assumption which constructs each and every aspect of American lives. These assumptions reflect the obsession of American lives with the concepts of losers and winners.
The American Revolution was one the greatest event for the Americans. The massive struggle and the hardcore campaign for independence have constituted the real concept of winners in their minds. The revolution resulted in the winners and losers. The patriots who represented the new liberties and freedom were the successful people who gained independence for their homeland. On the contrary, the loyalist or the Tories were defeated because the Crown was the loser against hardcore struggle. The American writers and the authors of many books have also represented their community through the literature that American are men of actions. They prefer to act immediately without much wait. Such types of slogans and the writing unfolded that American learned the lesson of winners and losers by striving for the actions which are mostly hardcore and struggle based.
The present American society is not divided by the racial, economic, religious, and the political division it is mostly by the division which is considered as winners and losers. For example, the president of America, Donald Trump is the divider in chief (Page, 535). He is one of the most protagonists of the society in explaining the phenomena of winners and losers. He was born on the third base and thinks that he hit a triple while sarcastic at those who mostly struggle and always out. However, the president does not invent the dichotomy of losers and winners. He was among those who exploited the phenomena. The culture of America provides the self-promoting mentality. The idea was bred from the European culture where every individual supposed that efforts could raise them as high as their struggle.
The development of the commercial culture intensifies the impulses of being the winner or the losers in the American society. Other than the Europe where social boundaries are higher and ordinary people have to move for the status than wealth, the Americans are mostly concerned with the artistic and intellectual success (Taylor, 470). Writings show that the concept of wonderful life is not because of the wealth but it is due to the spiritual and artistic successes. Many in the American community loses the money in order to find the wealth of love and independence. The concept of the winners and losers varies according to the norms and cultural behaviors of the respective society.
The Americans are increasingly unhappy with their lives not because of the need for material abundance but due to the divisions that is flowing in the society. The research concluded that the crisis in America is not economical but these are the social crises between the winners and losers. The repairing of the crumbling culture could refine it. Wealth cannot play role in renovating the society. People need to stop thinking in terms of winners and losers but focused their attention on the community-based factors. The trust and the great equality concepts can the real meaning of winners and the losers to the American community. The people of US have paid a steep cost for placing the frame of winners and losers.
Losers are not those which are being blamed by the Trump for their predicament. Similarly, losers are not those which are having deep hatred against those to whom they considered as undermining them (Lelkes, 530). It is that, losers with their brainwashing from the influence of their culture they learned to blame themselves. The national will and the power are saps by such concepts as winners and losers. In the same way, it affects the political power and processes. Winners and losers are everywhere in the world. With the loss of one other has to win. It is impossible to conceptualize the phenomena that both parties could win. In the animal, the same culture is operating.
People and the animal s they born in this mortal world has to win or lose. There is always another person and the animal which is better than the existing individuals. George Orwell in his animal farm revealed that pigs are winners because of their win at the time they born. The cause of the winning of pigs is because they born in the intelligence community, whereas other animals are the losers (Zhu, 911). Writing and the books also describe the phenomena of winning and losing. Some of them portray the example of soldiers where the top general in the high ranking position has not to fight the war. On the other hand, soldiers are the losers because they ace the war and also the deaths in spite of their survival. Being a winner of the loser one cannot choose anyone because the individual can be the winner for one but losers for the others.
Similarly like other culture and description of the winner losers concept the American community have also learned both perceptions from their social and individual life. From the American revolution of independence to the postmodern American society, there is a significant gap between the society over the winners and the losers. The influence of the political and social ideologies, along with the setting of cultural belief has led to the development of certain winners and losers thoughts in the minds of Americans (Taylor, 470). The society is deeply rooted in the obsession of winning without focusing on the losing.
Conclusion
Concluding the discussion, American culture is driven by the demand side than the supply side. There is infinite variety in the American culture of winners and losers. The struggle and the hard work along with competition in the society has the significant impact on the learned behaviors of Americans about being the winner or the loser. The quest for the excellence is the primary factor that has provided Americans to recognize themselves as the winners of the 21st century.
Works Cited
Lelkes, Yphtach. “Winners, losers, and the press: The relationship between political parallelism and the legitimacy gap.” Political Communication 33.4 (2016): 523-543.
Page, Lionel, and John Coates. “Winner and loser effects in human competitions. Evidence from equally matched tennis players.” Evolution and Human Behavior 38.4 (2017): 530-535.
Tayleur, Catherine M., et al. “Regional variation in climate change winners and losers highlights the rapid loss of cold‐dwelling species.” Diversity and Distributions 22.4 (2016): 468-480.
Zhu, Shanjiang, David Levinson, and Henry Liu. “Measuring winners and losers from the new I-35W Mississippi River Bridge.” Transportation 44.5 (2017): 905-918.
