So, I read this article today http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Paul-Stewart/Drouin-Is-a-Pawn-in-the-Entitlement-Game/196/74188 If you don't follow hockey, the gist of this story is that the young man mentioned in the article was a very highly touted draft pick for the Tampa Bay Lightening (who the Hawks beat last year for the Stanley Cup. That part doesn't matter but just thought I'd put it in) He didn't seem to be fitting in very well and allegedly his agent had quietly asked for a trade. This is really not that unusual. Depending on which story you read from there, however, the team benched the kid, sent him to the minors for an alleged "reconditioning assignment" and then the player's agent made it public they had asked for a trade back in the fall. Since then, it has been a war of words.
I think article is a good read and I think the author's take on agents and parents makes a lot of sense to explain the "entitlement culture" that many feel is becoming rampant in sports. I think, however, the premise extends further into everyday life. Whether we are talking about entitlement as a government program, or entitlement as an attitude, the premise is the same. Someone believes they are owed something they are not getting, and frequently, when you dig down, the person who believes they are owed something have some person or entity convincing them they are owed. In the article, the author restricts his point to parents and agents who are telling their kids they are so special they don't need to go through the channels that other, lesser talented people have to go through. Yet, I feel like this context can be expanded.
Last night, (start your outrage now, William) Bill Maher ripped on both the Oregon militia AND a black looking student who was literally screaming a Yale faculty member over an email the wife of the faculty member wrote. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luhSVN5mgNY Both, to me, smack not so much of entitlement, but of the anger that seems inseparable from entitlement behavior. In the Maher video, he makes an excellent point that there are no shortage of wars the militia could be fighting in to defend the constitution, and if the student really wanted to get huffed about something, maybe she could go after the custom of forcing women to wear burkas. Instead, they are sitting in positions of comfort, believing they are so wronged and so trampled on that nothing short of angry outbursts and grandiose gestures will suffice to get their point across. Which kind of loops back to the point the hockey author was making. Way too many people in this country today, IMO, from all political spheres immerse themselves in the rantings of others, rantings that tell them they deserve more and being denied what they rightly deserve by some institution. It's not that all of these people from the hockey kid, to the angry student to the angry militia dude don't have a point from time to time, because they do. Still, because they are so whipped into a frenzy and amped up 24 hours a day, they are not able to go about their lives and pick their battles smartly. Eventually, it all becomes noise and people who might even be sympathetic just get pissed off and walk away. No matter what your political leanings are, nobody likes entitlement behavior and I think we'd have a lot less of it if people figured shit out for themselves. Those who block that process are the ones that really create entitlement behavior.