The measure of success

One of my closest friends was recently promoted to a senior position at his job. I can certainly attest to his stakhanovite work ethic and commitment that propelled him to his new post. Nevertheless, he recalled how not working in a white collar industry, which may have been deemed a natural progression following his undergraduate degree, wasn’t always perceived with universal favour by those around him. Nonetheless, working within his field he found himself in an industry where he was able to apply himself and help and motivate others around him. Furthermore, enjoying a job he’s also good at, he eventually realised he’d found his niche and he holds no regard for the views of those who felt his choice of employment didn’t conform to their ideal of a successful career. Not to mention, his career ascent has undoubtedly justified his decision and refuted that of others. It’s a testament to his conviction in his own pursuit of happiness that hasn’t been side-tracked by the views of others.

For most, that disregard of society’s validation of their success does not come easy. On the contrary, they spend their lives chasing it and it characterises their decisions and their life’s direction. Often, that has consequences of suppressed unhappiness and discontent for many as they seek acceptance and endorsement based on society’s principles rather than their own. However, given our perception of our achievements should be subjective, how and why have so many people been driven to gauge this against society’s measure rather than their own?

Similarly to many of my peers, I was the first within my family to attend university. We typically read traditionally academic subjects and our families were undoubtedly proud of us achieving a milestone that hadn’t been achieved in generations before us. That pride inadvertently soon became pressure. And as we neared graduation, we felt our next logical step was a job within a field that seemingly complemented our higher education and what our families and society anticipated. What we didn’t appreciate, and weren’t afforded the perspective of, was what would bring us fulfilment and job satisfaction. The consideration of going into a field where our work would be meaningful and enjoyable was ashamedly secondary to what might be a job that ticked superficial boxes of success. This view of success was typically manifested by the white collar, corporate image which years later I realised in no way guaranteed fulfilment and for some, actual misery.

Sadly, the impact of society’s measure of success upon us is even more prevalent in the most personal aspects of our lives. We feel the need to adhere to society’s modus operandi. And should we not conform to that, we’re left feeling a failure. In a previous post, I wrote about the Asian pursuit of marriage and the feeling of being compelled to find a partner particularly once one has hit a certain age. Of course, this isn’t exclusive to Asians and many cultures and individuals feel that marriage is an indicator of one’s personal success. But marriage isn’t a prerequisite for one to feel complete as an individual and it should be a personal choice. Yet society has managed to infiltrate that choice for many. Years ago at her younger brother’s wedding, my own partner was told by an older family friend that “it didn’t look good” and was “embarrassing” that her brother was now married but she was still unmarried. Clearly her family ‘friend’ is incredibly ignorant but he’s a vessel of society’s judgement that is placed upon us.

I’ve seen peers who have thrown themselves into so-called relationships with the first person that comes along because they’ve hit or are approaching 30 and they feel marriage is the making of a person. Furthermore, they remain in denial of their so-called relationship being contrived and prefiguring failure before it’s even started. Instead, it’s fast tracked to a speedy engagement because it’s what others around them seem to be doing and they feel compelled to follow suit in seeking a hollow notion of cultural achievement. Similarly, women are made to feel that a lack of maternal instinct portrays them as an incomplete woman (although I recently read a selection of brilliant and valid ripostes to that from a number of women in the public eye). It’s a sad and unfair reality that we’re able to be made to feel a failure or incomplete by an objective gauge that’s foisted upon us by society.

The impact of this on mental health is astounding though seemingly ignored. We are effectively determining how we feel about ourselves based on an indicator that isn’t even our own. And the extent to how damaging this is can have reach fatal consequences.

In an age where we are preoccupied with our perception by others, the barometer of success is perpetuated. Social media provides a looking glass through which we are judged not by our own criteria but that of ‘friends’ and ‘followers’ who too are subject to the ideals society has foisted upon them. Social media has provided another tool by which we project the aspirations and lives of others as a vehicle for our own alleged success that often isn’t attained. Internally, we may therefore feel empty and despondent at not fulfilling what we have been wired to accept as the standards we are expected to achieve.

South Korea has one of the highest rates of suicide in the world. It’s a society where personal and family honour is held high. Many suicides in South Korea are therefore often attributed to the respective individuals perceiving themselves as failures and bringing shame upon themselves or their families in the process. The aforementioned are common themes for suicide anywhere. Though as a society, we’ve become so driven by superficial measures of success that in some instances it can drive people to take their own lives.

To feel a failure according to notions set by others surely isn’t right. Alas, it’s become the status quo that has forced many people to struggle with in validating their own lives to themselves let alone society.

So many of us have become conditioned to compare our achievements and happiness by standards dictated by society rather than ourselves. It’s a culture built upon propagating a message that serves to endorse the choices and lives of others with diminishing regard for ourselves. Cultures and societies are built upon these principles but they are crippling the self-esteem and realisation of self-worth amongst so many. Indeed, it’s a sad truth that in many cases, our respective successes are built upon little more than perpetual and damaging lies to ourselves and those around us.

Happiness and success, and the path to which they are sought, should be subjective. But instead they are determined by the expectations of others that are merely projections of what society has deemed valid. It can take great conviction to pursue a course that goes against the status quo of society. Although as my friend can attest, when it is, it’s the measure of success that we should all aim to pursue.

How has the coalition government managed to last a full term?

With the UK general election on 7 May 2015, the coalition will have served a full term. However, subsequent to the last election and the coalition being formed, I, like many, doubted it would last. In fact, I was sure of it. Fast forward five years and I need to eat a slice of humble pie as the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats managed to make their relationship of convenience work when many said it'd never last. But how did they manage it?

Prior to and during this Parliament, the signs have been there for the wheels to fall off the coalition. Furthermore, the Liberal Democrats have certainly been the abused partner in a relationship that they've been determined to make work no matter how much they're derided by the Conservatives. Many would opine that to be a case of more fool them as the Liberal Democrat vote is likely to take a shellacking in this election. Yet they're arguably the glue that held the coalition together.

The referendum on AV (alternative vote) was a stipulation of the coalition put forward by the Liberal Democrats but was a compromise for the Liberal Democrats from their preference for proportional representation. Then, to rub salt in the wound, the referendum campaign saw the Conservatives mock their coalition partners for their pursuit of a more equitable distribution of seats before, during and after. During the campaign, Tory rhetoric became even more akin to a private school playground than it usually is. David Cameron further resembled the school yard bully, with his Bullingdon goons in the background mocking and jeering Nick Clegg, as if he was about to give him a wedgie while his good chum Gideon captured it on his phone and uploaded it to a social network. No wonder the coalition gave rise to the ‘Nick Clegg looking sad’ photos.

Similarly, the tuition fee hike saw another dark period for the Liberal Democrats during the coalition as they supported a move that went directly against one of their own manifesto promises. Angry protests from students, a sizeable bloc of the Liberal Democrat vote, should have told them it might not be the relationship for them. Though perhaps by then the damage was done and Nick Clegg sought to make the best of a bad situation by opting to stay put for the long haul until 2015.

Despite the hallmarks of a failed relationship, the persistence of the Liberal Democrats wasn't the only factor that preserved the coalition for a full parliament. And in retrospect, perhaps I and others were too hasty to sound the death knell for the coalition from the get-go.

Prior to the 2010 election, many commentators foresaw a hung parliament but that can be traced back to Tony Blair's resignation as Labour party leader and Prime Minister. Regardless of his transgressions over Iraq and his blinkered attempts to preserve the special relationship by supporting President Bush, it's difficult to argue that Blair didn't have the look and feel of a Prime Minister. Statesmen-like and gifted with a special quality, Blair never looked as if he was punching above his weight in office. That's putting aside any personal views of him. The same went for Margaret Thatcher, whose politics, ideology and policies certainly weren't in line with mine. She had the same prime ministerial aura about her. That meant the electorate saw her as such and duly voted for the Conservatives – just as in 1997 they voted for Labour in seeking Blair as their Prime Minister. He and the Labour Party were ready to govern and it was apparent to the electorate.

Though since Blair, no party leader from any party has had that special quality about them. To lead a party and to show potential to govern a country requires a special quality that isn't always tangible. But during the 2010 election, it was absent from all three party leaders.

Without being presented with a leader who has that special quality, the electorate has no credible alternative from the status quo and it’s little surprise that widespread public pressure against the coalition hasn’t been seen. If the coalition ran aground, what was the alternative? There wasn't one so the electorate settled for what they perceived to be the best of a mediocre situation.

A further argument for the coalition’s success has been voter apathy. As voter apathy has increased in recent years, it’s been compounded by a perception of all politicians and political parties being a homogeneous group. Consequently, the electorate hasn’t really had the motivation to push for a change in government let alone voice their desire for one.

Similarly to the public not perceiving any leader as befitting of the role of Prime Minister, Labour, as the main opposition party, hasn’t shown itself as ready to govern effectively, and more importantly differently, either. The Conservative-led coalition government has been responsible for some of the least egalitarian social and economic policies since Thatcher. Therefore the electorate, the wider public and the political landscape is arguably ripe for a refreshing brand of politics that seeks to facilitate a fairer society. The platform is there for Labour to showcase an alternative. But alas, they’ve struggled to rise to the challenge and they seemingly lack the chutzpah to dare to be different in promoting a new political agenda.

The opportunity has been there for Labour to seize over the last five years of being in opposition. Subsequent to the financial crisis, a strong voice articulating the frustrations, anger and solutions to the problems caused by the financial sector has been lacking from mainstream politics (the financial sector is also home to some of the Conservative party’s biggest donors, essentially bankrolling polices that serve their own interests while they continue with their transgressions). We’re also in the midst of a housing crisis where there is an extreme paucity of affordable and social housing. Meanwhile, the middle classes are in receipt of £9 billion of housing benefit as they swell the buy-to-let to let housing market and take advantage of low-income private renters. Now is the time for Labour or indeed any party to show there is another way but for the past five years it sadly hasn’t been forthcoming. Hence the coalition has managed to find its way to 2015 without any major mishaps due to a lack of credible alternatives.

So what of 7 May? I expect another hung parliament, probably with a confidence and supply arrangement instead of a formal coalition. Although regardless of the arrangement, unless there’s a meaningful shift in what the parties are able to offer in differentiating themselves from each other, this election will see the continued hiatus or indeed the end of the British two-party political system. If so, British politics could be experiencing political déjà vu in another five years.