Last week, Oxford editor CJ Carnacchio penned a column in regards to the new “bad” thing in society — negativity. He wrote about the “cult” of positivity. That, in turn spawned a letter to our Oxford paper. Since not everybody reads the Oxford Leader, I thought I would share that letter. I find it interesting and would like to hear what you folks think. So, with out further eloquence . . .

* * *
I don’t always see eye to eye on yourcolumns, though I always read them as food for thought. You struck something big in ?’Negative? is the new ‘racist.?? ( https://www.oxfordleader.com/Articles-i-2010-03-03-234483.113121-sub_My_Way.html ). I already ordered a copy of Barbara Ehrenreich’s book ‘Bright-sided: How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking Has Undermined America.? Thanks for mentioning it.
I agree that the ‘Cult of Positivity? has had devastating effects. ‘Just think positive? is another way of saying ‘ignore the problems? and allegedly they’ll just disappear. That’s fairytale thinking (you know, where gallant prince charming magically saves the powerless damsel in distress.) Enter reality. We ‘woke up? to a serious economic collapse, one that’s been in the making on for a number of years, the same years that the ‘Cult of Positivity? and its offshoots soared.
Unfortunately, numerous individuals who tried to call our attention to mounting problems were called ‘negative? too. When the reality became undeniable, rather than constructively study the problems, the public entered Phase II, a cultural favorite: finger pointing. While folks out on Main Street have been busy pointing fingers at each other, in a feeble attempt to figure out whose ‘fault? it is, CEOs have been reaping millions in bonuses and buying OUR government’the one that’s supposed to be ‘of the people, by the people, for the people.? That’s one of the ways ‘divide and conquer? works. And contrary to what some so-called positivists would have us believe, things can get a lot worse if we continue with ‘business as usual.?
You mentioned ‘mush-filled self-help books and slick motivational speakers? being used in the ‘Cult of Positivity.? That goes along with something David Ingleby addressed years ago: ‘the role which psychology plays in regulating the lives of individuals resembles closely that which religion formerly played’Formerly, religion was an absolutely central part of European culture; it is no coincidence that Bishop and Knight are lined up next to King and Queen on the chessboard, for church and state were intimately linked. The church exercised its power on three levels: through concrete institutions such as schools; through ideas’theological and commonplace; and through practice, such as devotional services. Psychology not only assumed the role of religion, but won ground from medicine and law? (Ingleby’s italics, found in The Investigation of Culture: Current Issues in Cultural Psychology, 1990). This was the type of ‘European culture? that our forefathers did not was to see replicated when our nation formed. Pointing this out has been seen as ‘negative? too.
Perhaps the most alarming aspect of the ‘Cult of Positivity? is its link to ‘not thinking.? Many novels on popular bestseller lists promote the message (i.e. Here If You Need Me and The Elegance of the Hedgehog.) They go so far as to label thinking individuals as ‘snobs? and belittle them as ‘arrogant atheists.?
This so-called logic insists that faith requires not thinking, something I’ve repeatedly heard (but don’t believe) in various churches and book clubs where deep thinking and questioning is taboo. Critical thinking is likewise considered ‘negative? and shunned by individuals who forget that ‘critical? also means ‘important? or ‘crucial.?
With these types of messages persistently bombarding us, it’s no wonder that, as a society, we positively can’t think about a constructive way to deal with our critical situation. Challenging the ‘Cult of Positivity? is an important first step. Thanks for drawing attention to it.
E. Jankowiak
Oxford