THE CONCEPT OF «AMERICAN DREAM» AS A TOOL FOR CONSTRUCTING NATIONAL IDENTITY IN AMERICAN MEDIA

Abstract

The article investigates the functioning of the «American Dream» concept as a mechanism for constructing national identity in American media discourse (2019–2026). It is demonstrated that despite an evident decline in public trust in the concept, both dominant media discourses – liberal and conservative – continue to invoke it as the symbolic core of national identity, reflecting its particular ideocratic function amid deep social polarization.

Purpose: to identify the mechanisms through which national identity is constructed via the «American Dream» concept in liberal and conservative American media discourse (2019–2026) and to propose analytical tools for describing these mechanisms.

Methodology. The methodological foundation combines critical discourse analysis in the tradition of N. Fairclough, framing analysis, and corpus linguistics drawing on COCA data. The theoretical framework comprises the typology of cultural-civilizational models by O. Leszczak and R. Stefański, A. Lieven's concept of the «two souls» of American nationalism, R. Smith's concept of «multiple traditions,» and W.B. Gallie's notion of the «essentially contested concept.»

Scientific novelty. The study is the first to conduct a comparative analysis of liberal and conservative media discourses of the «American Dream» within the chronological framework of 2019–2026, applying a comprehensive discourse-analytical methodology. Three original analytical constructs are introduced: «consumerist ideocracy», «semantic struggle over myth» and «the paradox of crisis confirmation».

Conclusions. The «American Dream» functions as the central ideocratic mechanism for constructing American national identity. The liberal discourse reframes the concept in terms of «state obligation» – through the categories of systemic justice and inclusivity; the conservative discourse reproduces the classical model of personal choice – through the categories of labor, family, and meritocracy. Despite fundamental differences, both discourses invoke the same symbol, confirming its status as an «essentially contested concept» and demonstrating the operation of the paradox of crisis confirmation.