Bright-Sided: How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking Has Undermined America
We all know someone who’s tried to push a copy of The Secret on us, insisting that one reading will change our life and that positive thinking is the solution when times are tough. But Barbara Ehrenreich, best-selling author of Nickel and Dimed and Bait and Switch, dispels much of the pseudo-science behind the powers of positive thinking in her latest book, Bright-Sided.
Although she would genuinely like to see more smiles and hugs in the world, Ehrenreich refers to the ongoing movement of positive thinking as a mass delusion, as applied to her own encounter with “Pink Ribbon Culture” during her bout with breast cancer. Her frustrations lie with those who insist that the only way to achieve success and money is through positive thinking. It’s not fair, she notes, that the sick, poor, or unemployed are thought to be in those circumstances because they emit negative thoughts.
In Bright-Sided, Ehrenreich delves deep into researching the “happiness industry” by talking to a variety of lifestyle coaches, career coaches, motivational speakers, mega-church leaders, and positive psychologists. In her final conclusion, she decides that fears need to be validated, and realism recognized. Otherwise, delusion is accepted as the norm and issues like the housing crisis can occur. In her view, we should be allowed to feel grumpy without feeling that we’re letting people, or our immune system, down.
Bright-Sided is a decent read, but several questions remain at the end: How exactly do you measure happiness? What are the tangible effects of other people’s positive thinking? And, most importantly, why does Ehrenreich, who chooses to think negatively, care so much?
- Categories: Education

http://www.takepart.com/blog/2009/10/20/bright-sided-how-the-relentless-...
What a strange premise -- It seems to me that negativity is only a problem when it isn't tempered by initiative and optimism. After all, the only way to create real change is to be critical of the status quo. To me the difference lies in what happens after the critique, people who simply stop at critique achieve nothing. People who are critical and then devise a method for positive change tend to be the ones that achieve greatness. As an example, Ehrenreich seems to have identified something of which she was critical and through her book initiated public dialogue on the topic -- and trying to publish a book is a very optimistic action, given the rate of rejection in the publishing world.
Of course we should be allowed to feel grumpy, but as you point to in your final paragraph, what's the real harm of positive thinking? We've all had a bad day when someone's cheeriness was more annoying than uplifting, but I don't understand why that should be such a big deal. You can ignore those people if they bother you. Be sad if you want, call happiness delusion if it makes you feel better, but why such anger toward those who make a choice to think positively? No one is forcing Ehrenreich to plaster a smile on her face 24/7...