> However, they aren't the same as "unreflectingly capitalistic" and "pre-occupied with monetary success".
They have become inextricably linked. Maybe early in the 19th C. you'd be right. After the rise of american industry and maufacture and its corresponding propaganda (edison, etc.) AND after the cold war, "capitalism", "democracy", "patriotism" all became intertwined. Such that today The American Dream is almost purely capitalist and pragmatic.
The American Dream has, to my eyes, for a long time been directed towards individuals - it is their dream. A person achieves their dream. Once, perhaps, The American Dream was a dream for Americans - a common enterprise, with common goals, something achieved for everyone or no one, etc.
The author of this article did not explain why ONO was part of a common enterpise, which its activity was making all our lives better and helping us achieve our ideals. He said,
"built originally by Eugenio Galdon and mostly by my friend Richard Alden between 2001 and 2011, is in the process of being sold to Vodafone for around $9.5bn, and nobody cares."
If that's doesnt read hollow and pathetic to you I dont know what could. It's complete mythologising of two people "building" a company, it's display of hurt feeling over the fact that $10bn doesnt impress people enough, its utter pre-occupation with self-aggrandizement and money.
The rhetoric in this article is almost suffocating its message and very few can tell - because this rhetoric has become the language in which we phrase our dreams today.