Further to the plans to make ‘happiness’ an integral part of public policy, Darrin McMahon (via Paul Kedrosky) at Cato takes a closer look at this hard to grasp concept and its historical roots:

Thus, one of the most striking developments in Western societies over the last several hundred years is the steady expansion of the hope and expectation of happiness in this life. Concomitant with this expansion has been the steady erosion of other ways of conceiving of life’s purpose and end. If other ways of doing so have not been entirely abandoned — there are those who still live for virtue, honor, one’s homeland, or family name — in a world that places a premium on good feeling and positive emotion, these other ends have nowhere near the power to channel and constrain our choices that they once did.

One of my concerns always has been that - especially in the European context – the idea of being happy is turned into a basic right and that the failure of public channels to provide it constitutes a justifiable grievance. It has also spawned a culture of hedonism or self-indulgence that is making it increasingly impossible for many to truly appreciate the sacrifices one needs to make to attain a certain state of happiness. That conclusion brings us right back to the basic difference between ‘happiness’ and the ‘pursuit of happiness’. It is startling to note that in Europe some are considering to incorporate ‘happiness’ into the same box of health, environment & welfare and thus putting an inordinate burden on governments to deliver on it.

And yes, this once more underlines one of the fundamental differences between Americans and Europeans. It stands to be reasoned however that as societies get wealthier and less effort is required to become happy, feelings of unhappiness can increase exponentionally. The proliferation of shrinks I dare say is an American phenomenon. Here is McMahon again:

On one level, then, we worry about happiness today with such single-minded focus because we can: Inhabitants of the world’s developed nations are the most fortunate creatures to have walked the face of the earth. And yet for all our focus on happiness it is by no means clear that we are happier as a result. Might we not even say that our contemporary concern is something of an inauspicious sign, belying a deep anxiety and doubt about the object of our pursuit? Does the fact that we worry so much about being happy suggest that we are not?

McMahon goes on to argue that individuals are far better positioned to find their state of happiness rather than the state delivering it to them.

For myself I still haven’t figured out what constitutes happiness, which to some extent also explains my global quest to discover it. Happiness probably falls apart in three key categories: where you are, what you do and who is accompanying you during the journey. I have nailed down the last part and am beginning to get a firmer grip on the 'what you do' part, but my deepest feelings of unhappiness are most often triggered by, “Why am I not living in New York?” or “Did I abandon Asia to soon?” or better still, “What if I returned to Europe?”. Of course these questions reflect precisely what McMahon says: the relative ease with which such goals can be realized these days contribute directly to our feelings of unhappiness.

This probably will be a recurring Peaktalk item, almost worthy of a new category.