Reflections on Ireland 2013

Recently, we went to Ireland on vacation. I had some extra miles that I wanted to use up, and Ireland is a place I've always wanted to take Jamie and Marco.  We invited my mother-in-law Sharon to join us.  A few years ago, we drove around New Zealand together and had a great time.  We thought it would be great to meet her in Ireland, rent a car, and have family time again like that. I was in Ireland back in 1995 and had a wonderful time and a pretty profound spiritual experience at the Cliffs of Moher (pictured above).  For the cliffs alone, I wanted to take Jamie and Marco there.

The Itinerary:  Driving Around Ireland

We decided to rent a car.  I used to come to Europe as a tourist and ride the trains or fly.  I can't tell you how different the experience is when you have a car.  A car gives you great freedom to explore and you see so much more of the amazing landscape of Europe with a car.  It's been very nice traveling across Europe in cars over the past 2 1/2 years that we've lived here.

For Ireland, I basically wanted to show the family a bit of Central Ireland, the West Coast, the Ring of Kerry, the South Coast, and the Wicklow Mountains as well as Dublin.  That makes for a big circle loop of Ireland.  We flew into Dublin, picked up the car and Grandma and headed to Athlone, Ireland in the middle of the country.  Dublin is in the Northeast on the Coast and we were traveling to Galway on the West Coast.  It's a mere 2 hours to cross the whole country.  So we drove half-way around the country and stopped off at Athlone.

From Athlone, we went to the lovely city of Galway on the West Coast.  This is a place that I fell in love with in 1995 and I wanted to buy a home there (not that I had the money).  In those days, it was cheap to buy a home in Ireland.  Today, it is outrageous (more on that later).  Athlone is a bit more rustic than a lot of the places we visited, and looks a lot more like the "old Ireland" I remember--the pre-boom Ireland when it was a poor country.  It was good to see Athlone, because so much of the rest of Ireland has changed dramatically that it's hard to see what it was like before globalization 3.0 took off.

Galway is a delight to walk around and we enjoyed catching the end of mass at Galway Cathedral--the newest stone cathedral in Europe which only dates back to the 1980's.  Our B & B was cozy and from Galway we were able to head up North to Connemara, Ireland which has a landscape like Scotland.  While there we were able to visit the Kylemore Abbey which sits on a lake in this unique part of Ireland.

We happend to be in Ireland on a sunny week.  So remarkably, we didn't get rained on once the entire trip.  This was great for seeing some of these sights that could easily be fogged in.  However, it was the coldest March they've had in Ireland in 100 years.  Even though it was only about 35 degrees Fahrenheit (or 5 to 10 degrees warmer than our home in Berlin), the wind chill made it pretty cold.

From Galway and Connemara we headed South toward the seaside town of Dingle.  Dingle is a touristy fishing village on the West Coast, but it's a good place to hear live Irish music in a pub.  So that's what we did, although Marco really didn't enjoy being around the drinking, festive people.  Dingle was even smaller than I expected, but once again, we had a lovely B & B within walking distance of the town center.  On the way down, we stopped by the Cliffs of Moher which drop off nearly 800 feet into the Atlantic Ocean and stretch for about 7 miles.  It is called the end of Europe and it certainly does feel like the end of a continent.  Across the way is nothing but ocean until you hit Canada.  It's one of my favorite places in all the Earth--a sacred place to me.

TO SOUTHWEST IRELAND

After Dingle, we drove around the Ring of Kerry and even took a car ferry as we made our way down to the Southeast.  This part of Ireland is much more "Irish."  You see Gaelic everywhere and people still speak the old language.  In fact, in this part of Ireland you can run into people that don't know how to speak English!  It's a more traditional part of Ireland.

We passed through small towns and hills and mountains as we inched our way toward Kilkenny, which surprised me by becoming my favorite stop on the trip.  I had expected Kilkenny to be the most boring of our stops, but I loved it.  The road leading to Kilkenny is part of the beautiful ring of kerry which takes you past mountains and lakes and waterfalls.  And Kilkenny itself is bigger than Dingle and has streets that are fun to walk around.  We stayed at yet another nice B & B there.

By this point, we were getting tired of the greasy Irish food.  People really do love their potatoes.  One guy next to me was eating a giant plate of mashed potatoes, with baked potato, and then french fries covering the top of it.  I guess it's not the Potato famine anymore in Ireland.  It was hard to find stuff that wasn't oily.

DRIVING AROUND IRELAND

Driving around Ireland was fun and relaxing.  I never feel like a natural driving on the Left Side of the road.  I've done it in Australia and New Zealand, but this was the first time that it actually started to feel normal.  There were a couple of moments pulling out of a petrol station into the wrong lane, but overall, it all made a lot more sense this time.  I look forward to tackling the U.K. next.

The roads in Ireland have improved dramatically since I was there.  Ireland's known for its bad roads and used to have an extremely poor infrastructure and the highest rate of car accidents in the world (now surpassed by China).  But thanks to all that E.U. Ireland, the post 1990's Ireland has much better highways and wider roads.  There was not much traffic in March and the weather was good for driving.  We brought a whole ton of Irish music CD's to listen to in the car:  Everything from early U2, to Enya, to the Corrs.  But in the end, we preferred to talk and just drive in silence looking out the window.  We never did play a single Irish CD.

The cost of petrol is about $9 a gallon.  Yes, it's awful.  Filling up the tank is about $120.  But the car we were in got such good gas mileage (a diesel actually) and Ireland is so small, it only required 1 tank to do our entire journey. Cars tend to get better mpg in Europe than in the US.  Frankly, I think Americans should pay more and ween themselves off cars more.

NO LONGER "A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY"

It was actually unnerving to see how much Ireland had changed.  It was very hard to find a thatched hut roof--although we did see them.  Instead we saw brand new homes in every corner of the country that we visited.  Of course, Ireland is in severe economic trouble:  one of the so-called "PIIGS" in Europe that is broke and needing a financial bail out.  Ireland is deeply in debt, and a ridiculous property bubble was to blame.  As Ireland's economy opened up, and the country courted international businesses by offering tax-incentives, the economy went up, prices went up, and the Irish went on a spending spree.  It seems everyone bought a house they cannot afford.  Today, many Irish people are in dire straights and owe far more than the value of their home.  It was no coincidence that there were so many B & B's in Ireland.  It's a way for families to earn money on homes they can't afford.

The amount of new-looking, suburban, American-style homes was alarming.  When I was in Ireland, I only remember seeing one street like that on my whole trip.  It was in Galway, and I asked my Irish friend Bartley how much it would cost me to buy that new, looking suburban home.  $80,000 he replied.  Amazing!  Today, that wouldn't get you a thatched hut in Ireland, yet everyone and their brother has a brand new McMansion.  Ireland is only at the beginning of what will be a very long, painful recovery.

Back in the 1990's, the lead character in the Irish film "the Committments" makes the comment:  "We're practically a Third World country."  And that's true.  Ireland was always considered the "poor, sick man of Western Europe."  Crime was high, jobs were scarce, millions were on welfare, there were still lots of hostilities with Northern Ireland, and Ireland was very homogenous.

But all that changed as tech companies and other new corporations relocated to Ireland and sparked an economic boom.  Ireland was labeled "the Celtic Tiger" named after the Asian Tiger economies like Singapore, Taiwan, and South Korea.  Ireland had never in its history been wealthy.  Poverty and misery were part of the Irish national identity.  And you got over it through humor, a love of the spoken word, and of literature.  It was a huge shock to the Irish system to suddenly find themselves as the fastest growing economy in Europe.  People bought expensive homes and immigrants from Africa and Poland moved into Ireland to take the lower paying jobs.  Ireland became wealthy and multi-cultural.

But all of that is coming to an end now---yet, like Greece and Italy (which I travel too often), the signs of poverty are not yet visible in the infrastructure the way they once were--and probably will be 20 years from now.

SOUTH AND NORTH TO DUBLIN

From lovely Kilkenny, we headed directly south down to a little seaside town called Kinsale on the Southern coast of Ireland.  Hotel and B & B prices were cheap.  It helped that it was slightly off-season and that there is so much competition now that everyone has a B & B.  While in Kinsale, we actually saw a seal swimming in the water front.   Very cute.  From the South we headed to the Wicklow Mountains where some of the scenes of my favorite movie of all time ("Excalibur") were filmed.  The director John Boorman lives in County Wicklow.  While there, we visited the ruins of an ancient monastic city (Glendalough) that dates back more than 1,000 years. Everywhere we went, we met a lot of funny Irish characters.  All lovely, friendly people, but our B & B host here was a real kick with his thick brogue and naughty sense of humor.

A lot of our hosts were Catholic, but Catholicism has been in a steep decline in Ireland since the 2000's.  There have been so many instances of sexual molestation and abuse by priests and nuns in Ireland that it has greatly disillusioned the Irish.  The sudden wealth of the people also led to secularism as did the way the Vatican and Irish Bishops refused to take responsibility for crimes committed.  Ireland, like Poland, went from being one of Europe's most committed Catholic nations to being just as secular as the other countries.

We awoke to snowfall on the ground one morning in Kinsale and saw it as we drove around Wicklow.  But the weather stayed clear for us as we headed into Dublin.  We walked to Trinity College and along the River Liffey before heading over toward St. Patrick's Cathedral.  It was Good Friday.  That evening we returned the car and headed to our airport hotel.

It was a wonderful, relaxing trip and it was great to have such focused time with the family.  We all greatly enjoyed having grandma with us and we hope to do a vacation like that again in the near future.  I'll continue to watch Ireland closely.  It's a lovely country with lovely people and it is a shame that the coming years are probably going to be more difficult.  But most of Europe is headed for hard times in the very near future.  I'm glad I'm here at this moment.  I hope we can help.

What to Make of North Korea?

North Korea is in the news again as they threaten to nuke American cities and destroy the U.S.  Yes, we have gone through this every year for the last 20 years--since North Korea's famines and floods worsened--and yes, they realized that extortion works if you want to receive food and financial aid.  Is this time any different? It's doubtful, but due to the quick ratcheting up of their threats, as well as their moving missiles into place, it's worth looking at what might be going on this time because this time it is not so obvious.

There are 4 possibilities (in order of probability)

1. Feeling ignored, it's another regular extortion attempt as they face famine and bankruptcy, but it's backfiring.

2. China is actually instigating the turmoil, in order to lower pressure with the US and other East Asian nations.

3. There is a power struggle behind the scenes, and a militant wing is asserting itself.

4. They are in such dire straits or insane that the regime  is prepared to start a war.

Let's look at each one individually.

1. Feeling ignored, it's another regular extortion attempt as they face famine and bankruptcy, but it's backfiring.

This is the most likely.  Since the end of the Kim Il Sung years, North Korea has regularly threatened war.  International mediators are sent in, and a deal is worked out in which North Korea gets foreign aid in exchange for calming the war rhetoric.  It's an old, stupid gambit that worked very well until recently.  In the past few years, U.S. administrations have gotten tired of this old act, as have South Korean politicians, and people mainly view it as a waste of time to have the infamous "six party talks."

Coming out of another miserable winter, it's likely North Korea is in dire straits and desperately needs to extort more money out of its enemies.  But the problem could be that the regime has cried wolf so many times, it's simply run out of ways to do it.  Instead of outflanking its enemies (say, striking a deal with Russia or a Gulf State), it resorts to Dr. Evil-like name calling that comes off as ridiculous and over-the-top.  Much like Saddam Hussein's "Baghdad Bob," the p.r. department for the NK regime just doesn't know how to sound scary and credible, hence they've gotten in over their heads this time.  Both the U.S. and South Korea are responding with a strong show of force.

2. China is actually instigating the turmoil, in order to lower pressure with the US and other East Asian nations.

Another possibility is that North Korea's only friend, China, is asking them to stir up trouble so that China can then come out looking like the hero.  Why would they do this?  Because China is currently caught in a tense relationship with Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines and other nations.  China's military (particularly on the sea) has been expanding and they have been making claims on islands that belong to other nations.  All of this has driven these countries more into the hands of the United States and its security apparatus.  Consequently, China is feeling the isolation.  Having their client state NK put on a show that they diffuse, could be an elaborate way of creating a bigger issue that brings the divided parties together.  Chinese Machiavellianism can be something to behold.

3. There is a power struggle behind the scenes, and a militant wing is asserting itself.

I seriously doubt that the 29 year old new dictator Kim Jung Un is behind any of this.  After all, he seems to prefer watching the NBA and hanging out with Dennis Rodman.  This game of high-stakes nuclear poker is something from a Cold War generation of leaders.  This is far beyond his abilities or mentality.  He's a puppet figure dominated by generals and older relatives and is part of an elite class that doesn't want to lose its status in North Korean society.  It's possible that this is an attempt by the puppet masters to make sure NK still has the threat card to play.  Because if they don't, the country is in real trouble.  They desperately need to be feared so that they can be sustained by other countries--particularly China. With so few cards to play, giving up the Dr. Evil shtick really leaves them with nothing but being a source of cheap labor for China.  And they don't like or trust China very much.

4. They are in such dire straits or insane that the regime  is prepared to start a war.  

This is the least likely possibility.  It looks like they have desperately tried to get the Chinese to defuse the situation (the Chinese declined) and they are fully aware that the U.S. and South Korea could utterly destroy them.  However, this is a nation that has been a religious cult (theocracy) for more than 60 years.  It's always possible that one of these poorly educated, mentally ill psychos could have a group of people following them toward destruction. But more realistically, it's a nation of a small group of elites that are addicted to watching foreign movies, doing drugs, and eating expensive caviar.

So how bad would a war be?

First of all, North Korea could probably not successfully launch a nuclear missile.  They have a hard time with basic missiles--they're not accurate, and they don't have great range.  The U.S. also possesses the technology to blow them up before they even leave the silos.

They could launch quite a barrage of artillery over the border at Seoul, but they would be hammered in return and quickly become disorganized and unable to function.

A better approach would be some sort of nuclear hostage drama, such as taking part of the border or claiming to sneak spies into South Korea that are armed with nuclear weapons.  It would be a bluff, most likely.  Even feeding their troops and keeping supplies open would be hard for the most basic military operation.  And I guarantee these will be the most incompetent generals ever to enter into a war.

The dirty secret (or perhaps it's not so secret) is that no one really wants to see a free North Korea.  At this point, North Koreans are incapable of integrating with the modern world.  There would be no lovely integration as there was in Germany between East and West Germany.  This integration would be expensive, messy, and ultimately impossible.  North Koreans have lived in such a bizarre situation for so many decades that they are all brainwashed, traumatized, and/or deathly ill.  A best case scenario would see North Korea having to be kept closed while decades of relief poor into the country.

The more likely "peaceful" outcome would be a massive global intervention of aid and troops that would seem like it is never-ending, as South Korea takes the lead in rebuilding the country.  It will take so long for even the most basic normal society to emerge that Somalia and Syria will look quite functional in comparison.  There will be a day of reckoning for North Korea and it will be unpleasant for the whole world.  This is the one place in the world where a day of nuclear threats is one of the better challenges to face.  And that is truly frightening.

The USA Will Not Become Socialist, But Wealth Inequality is Real

In a recent article in the USA Today, the point was made that America's youth (the millennials) are innovators and capitalists, but also have a strong social conscience.  They spend their money making corporations rich, and even start their own businesses--but they reward those companies that make society better.  So it looks like the next generation won't be raving, Socialist lunatics, so feel free to not jump off the bridge.  The United States is not going to become a socialist, communist nation, so let's set the panicked hyperbole aside because there is something much more important to talk about. IS THE USA SOCIALIST?

The United States can no more become a Socialist, Communist paradise than I can become the next LeBron James.  It's set in our American DNA.  In the same way that I will never be nearly 7 feet tall and able to physically dominate NBA athletes, the United States will not be able to turn itself into a Socialist nation.  The US is the most individualistic, hyper-capitalistic society in the world.  It has always been this way, and it will always stay this way.  The word "socialism" itself is over-used and used badly and broadly at that.  Sweden is "Socialist."  Germany is "Socialist."  Japan is "Socialist."  They are also all capitalist.  There's always a mix of both socialism and capitalism in a modern, successful economy--the U.S. included. The U.S. Post Office, Medicare, the construction of the freeways and railroads, the power grid and the Homestead Act are examples of when U.S government intervened to make sure things were done and resources distributed fairly, or set up to serve all people using taxpayer money.  Medicare is not left up to Capitalist market forces.  If it were up to true capitalistic market forces, the old in the U.S. get insured in the U.S. even though they should be less insurable because of their age. Somehow, 80 years ago as a society, we decided that this isn't fair.  Both political parties (Democrat and Republican) still want it this way.  Is this Socialism?

One area where the US certainly dabbles in "Socialism" in the broad, sloppy sense is in the high finance industry.  Our tax dollars definitely get distributed to Goldman Sachs to make sure that it continues to exist.  Whether you believe that these banks and investment firms are "too big to fail" is beside the point.  Major corporations receive government subsidies and protection that would be labeled socialist if it were aimed at the common man or lower income regions.  Corporate Welfare is enormous in the United States and very much backed by both parties. States too, are willing to give taxpayer money away to corporations, yet continue to tax the citizens. Is this socialism?

Recently, a story has been floating around the internet about a teacher who wanted to show his students the futility of socialism.  His millennial students believed in some form of wealth distribution, so he started to grade the class cumulatively.  The students had their grades averaged out so that everyone would receive the same grade.  Nobody would receive an "A" and no one would receive an "F."  The first test averaged a "B."  The second test averaged a "D" and the students were upset.  When the third test rolled around, the average was "F."  Of course the students were upset.  The ones that had worked hard suffered low grades, and the ones that didn't work hard had their grades...(sort of) elevated.  The professor seemed quite satisfied that he had proven the idiocy of Socialism to his students.  Well, he would have made a good point...if they were North Koreans.  But since they are American students, he actually did them a disservice by setting the stage incorrectly. It was a false analogy.

Socialism Isn't the Danger. Inequality and Imbalance is:

What is currently happening in the USA is more like this:  A school is filled with some of the top, hardest working students on the planet (time and time again, we see that Americans work longer hours, with less vacation, and have more productivity than just about any nation on earth). Very few of these kids are truly lazy, because they come from a successful neighborhood that has always believed in hard work and has been far more successful than other neighborhoods.  But when these kids get to school, one of the kids is put into a separate classroom than the others.  This lone kid will get the full attention of the teacher, and whether the student learns or not, he is guaranteed an "A+."  The rest of the kids are in a second classroom.  There is a second classroom and the teacher who will lavish his attention on 2 of the 30 students, and those 2 kids will get an "A" because he helps them so much.  For about 23 of the students, they are going to work really, really hard, but will never get above a "C."  Only about 5 students in the class have no pride or concern for their work, because the reality is most people are not hardwired to enjoy being unproductive and a total failure.

In this school system, only a select few even have the potential to get an A or even rarer still, an "A+."  And it is not because of the quality of their work; it is because of privilege.  Somewhere along the line, hard work and studying were no longer rewarded equally.  The class changed its paradigm so that upward grade mobility was no longer as possible.  The teacher's attention belonged only to 2 students.

This has happened in U.S. history before (the Roaring 20's anyone?) and it is happening now.  It is not about Capitalism vs. Socialism.  It is about a deeply Capitalistic society which reaches a tipping point where a super-rich elite class is created to the detriment of the whole country.  The U.S. always changes course and corrects the imbalance when this happens. It does this through government. The Great Depression and World War II brought top tax rates to a high of 99% and 95%.  They were in the high 80's under the Republican Eisenhower.  Even Reagan raised taxes on Capital Gains and raised taxes in 1982 and 1984. So the Patron Saint of Low Taxation Ronald Reagan raised taxes.  So much so, that the business magazine, "Money" (not exactly a Leftist, Socialist, Commie-pinko rag...it's called "Money") wrote:

"Reagan's behavior might not pass muster with those voters today who insist their Congressmen treat every proposed tax increase as poisonous to the republic."

That's an understatement.  Ronald Reagan would have been hung, drawn and quartered by the anti-tax, anti-socialist brigades of today. But U.S. history has never been American's strong-suit.  That is one of the country's strengths and one of it's biggest weaknesses.

The British Magazine The Economist (another Conservative magazine that cares about capitalism...it's called "the Economist") writes about the shorter life-spans of poor Americans being a problem for the wealthy (not just the poor, but the wealthy!):

"One need not be a radical egalitarian to find this picture morally troubling."

Wealth Inequality Should Matter to the Rich

In the same way that hardcore North Korean Socialism is dangerous, destabilizing and soul-erroding, so is hyper-capitalism.  Societies historically fall apart when the rich get too rich and the divide between rich and poor is too great.  This is not a direction any civilization wants to go, for it ushers in its demise.  This is why the United States has always wisely made adjustments to swing back in a more equitable direction when we have reached the point that the Middle Class is no longer upwardly mobile.  A country of extreme rich and poor is dangerous to the wealthy--let alone the poor.

Last week, the crisis in Cyprus illustrated this point.  Like many countries, Cyprus is economically falling apart, and it seized the assets of the rich to survive.  Cyprus as a tax-haven has probably seen its last days.  And there will be others to come making it more difficult for the super rich to store their money because what they are getting away with is untenable.  Many of the rich are Russians happy to not be paying into the new Russia and hoarding their wealth for themselves by living outside of Russia and not paying taxes.  Super capitalist  Mark Faber, (once again, not a commie, pinko socialist, but a very wealthy investment guru) says that this is a growing danger around the world.  The rich (and he doesn't mean you, he means multi-billionaires) are no longer safe:

"The problem is that 92 percent of financial wealth is owned by 5 percent of the population. The majority of people don't own meaningful stock positions and they don't benefit from a rise in the stock market. They are being hurt by a rising cost of living and we all know that the real incomes of median households has been going down for the last few years."

Exactly.  The economy reaches a point where it is like the 2 classrooms I described above.  The wealth becomes so unevenly distributed that it becomes dangerous to all of society.  What people often fail to realize is that Reaganomics and Thatcherism were meant as pragmatic (conservative) corrections in 1980/1981---not as a recipe for all-economics, for all-time.  An inflexible, ideological economic program is against the principles of true conservatism.  Today it's harder to find a true conservative than it is a martian, although they are starting to make a comeback in the U.K.  That is why Reagan and Thatcher would not be welcome amongst "conservatives" today. As much as they reigned in bad economic policies from the 1970's, they would not have advocated extreme ideological economic policies from their own party.  Pragmatism trumps ideology for the true conservative.  Their skepticism about government was matched by a skepticism about ideological solutions.

In my 2008 book "Faith in the Future," I wrote about "the Disappearance of the Third World."  I meant that globalization was creating a new, highly global, educated, and wealthy class of people in most every nation of the world.  No longer would the rich in a country like Russia, Nigeria, or China be laughingstocks compared to the rich in the USA or Europe.  A new superclass was being created.  But as this happens (as in Russia, China, and now in the U.S.), the disparity between rich and poor goes beyond normal boundaries and becomes far too extreme.  (I also discuss the divide between rich and poor in a section entitled "a New Divide Between Rich and Poor," in my book Passport of Faith 2006).

I also pointed out in "Faith in the Future" that the poor are themselves getting richer at a faster rate than at any time in human history.  In underdeveloped and emerging nations, more poor people are being lifted out of poverty than ever before.  This is something I have literally seen with my own two eyes.  A new middle class is emerging globally in countries that did not have a middle class.  But in developed nations like the United States, wages are stagnating and the middle class is shrinking as the underclass grows and the super-elite pull far way from the pack playing on another field entirely.

What Happens Now?

The millennials are showing us what will happen.  In a healthy society (like the United States), a major correction will take place.  Just as there was a swing toward hyper-capitalism in the 1980's which resulted in a new wave of globalization--but, alas,  also with a credit bubble, there will be a swing toward equality over the next 20 years.  The truth is that the era of fast economic growth (1980-2008) did not really happen as it was perceived.  It could not have existed without massive debt and bubbles. So attempts to replicate it in the same way will not work.  More modest and balanced growth is the only course for the future.

In countries like China, the nouveaux riche and the income inequality will eventually get challenged by a revolution from the middle or lower classes, or the rich will abandon the country completely as they take their wealth to places like Australia, The USA, and New Zealand.  The United States has the opportunity to not have such a messy adjustment as some of these other nations.

Morally, all of the world's major religions teach the need for materialism to be tempered and some wealth to be distributed: that is not solely a Marxist idea.  It's possible to desire prosperity and value hard work without turning into a religious Darwinian materialist.  Jesus preaches far more about the dangers of money than he does about the dangers of over-sharing.

The coming re-balance will be slow and painful.  It will take a full generation to enact and not without more economic pain as we climb out of an unsustainable bubble that lasted a full generation, but the United States will come out stronger.  That is why it is time to abandon the extreme rhetoric about socialism.  The real danger that lies before us is not of being hostage to Marxist Socialism (which is far too boring for Americans), but of being slaves to an unrealistic expectation of material wealth at the expense of others.

To see the imbalance, please watch the video based on Michael I. Norton's Harvard Study.

Can Movements be Saved When They are in Decline?

3W's Ken Oldham passes on this article by David Brooks on "How Movements Recover."  It has to do with the Republican Party and the Roman Catholic Church and the way movements in trouble are often divided into "Donatists" and "Augustinians."  The Donatists want to re-purify themselves by isolating themselves from the culture.  The Augustinians want to generate movement again by engaging the world.  Which path is better?  The article suggests the Republicans are held hostage to Donatists while the new Pope Francis is taking the Augustinian approach. What about movements in general?  Usually they run out of steam for a long time.  They live in total denial as long as possible.  Then there is mismanagement and slow disintegration.  There is the disillusionment of former believers in the movement and the demonizing of those who point out the loss of momentum.

Real movements are meant to be a correction, only a moment in time---like the Civil Rights Movement.  When the change is made, it no longer needs to exist.  But "movements" like the  Republican Party, the Catholic Church, and the Church of God want to continue existing even though they've lost momentum.

During the period of decline (or even during any changes or adjustments), there's always a group of people that call the movement back to its roots.  The logic being that if only the things that were done in the past were still being done, then everything would be alright and the movement would still be strong. This is useful in recalling the heritage and distinctive issues that made the movement successful at one time.  But it is then taken a step further:  "If only things were like they were, we would be in a better place."

This is a fantasy.  What made the movement move at one time were certain conditions and variables in place that allowed for momentum and growth.  Those conditions and variables, however, inevitably change over time.  Society changes, laws change, generations change, leadership changes etc.  The change is resisted through denial and staying the course--even as the course proves to be ineffective and the movement declines.

This is followed by a pro-active glorification of the past.  Instead of remembering what America was like before Civil Rights laws were in place (when I would not have been able to drink from the same water-fountain as my own father because I have brown skin), or the corruption and violence of Christendom, or the divisive/hostile spirit in the movement in the past (as was the case in the Church of God)--all that is remembered is the success and the rituals/tactics that led to that success (in that particular time).  An unrealistic view of history is adopted and the hope is to replicate this idealized vision in the future.  LIke I said, it doesn't work.

As the anger sets in that it is not working, there is a demonization of anyone who is not sounding like the "pioneers of the good old days."  Criticisms and adjustments are not allowed:  only propaganda and ideology.  During this phase, the movement gets very dualistic: "You are either in or you are out." Diversity is not welcome.  While once people joined the movement out of inspiration, now they are repelled by the movement's hostility to reality and its ineffectiveness.  Or the movement can just go silent:  Completely unable to define who they are, what they are doing, and why they are relevant.

Some movements need to die because their time is passed (Women's Voting in the USA).  Others need to die because they are destructive (Mao's Cultural Revolution).  And still others could die (and be replaced) or survive and flourish.

What is necessary for new life in the movement, however, is an adjustment to current day realities that still preserves some of the spirit of the movement's original message.  It's not rocket science, but movements are often not led by the right people as they decline.  They don't have the skill-sets to pull of the adjustments needed so their default position is ("let's go back to what I know"). It's the one-trick pony syndrome.   Pope Benedict clearly didn't have the skill-sets or the know-how to look like he was engaging the 21st Century.  He retreated into pomp an circumstance and never looked like he was fully engaged with the world around him.  His red Prada slippers were emblematic of his disconnection and lack of awareness with what people wanted from him as a leader. Pope Francis, however, has done the opposite in his first two weeks.

What movements will run up against is vested interests.  Those with the money and titles often don't want things to change and they can retard growth for a very long time.  They know only one way of operating and if that is discarded, they are lost at sea.  To eventually get out of this, people have to get tired of the complacency and ineffectiveness of the movement (if they still even care--and that's not a given).  A visionary (usually an excellent communicator and a charismatic figure) must arise to show a third way. A way in which the movement can retain some of its core ethos, but yet make it relevant and alluring for current realities. A tipping point has to arise in which there are more people following that leader than idealizing the past or staying complacent or indifferent.  If so, the movement can have a new life--although it will be different than the past, and may not necessarily be as big again.  But hopefully, it is healthy, effective and relevant.

There are no guarantees that movements can recover.  The vast majority don't: especially religious movements.  As I said, movements are usually there to usher in an adjustment and then they fizzle. Their job is done.  But for those movements that have become institutions, it is only through wise, talented leadership that they have a chance at surviving.  It is hard to get there without some form of civil war breaking out as vested interests and old identities and traditions get challenged.  That is always an ugly, but seemingly necessary phase.  Avoiding the conflict phase however, only prolongs the inevitable disintegration.

Time to Laugh: Africa Laughing at You

I continue to watch the rise of Africa very closely.  It's now been about 10 consistent years since Sub-Saharan Africa began to see a sharp upturn in economic growth.  Much of this has come from China's investment in Africa as a way to tap into the abundant natural resources there.  All across the continent, China is doing deals with African governments and bringing in hundreds of thousands of Chinese to work on African soil.  They mine, they create infrastructure, and they pay.  This sounds like classic imperialism--and in some ways, it is a form of colonization. But it also creates opportunity via new roads, for instance. But it is the cell phone, above all else, that is unleashing an entrepreneurial spirit in Africa.  Businesses are able to function better, markets are more accessible, and money is transferred more easily and more securely.  Of course, there will be a great divide between the richest and the poorest, but there is also clearly a middle-class emerging in many African countries.  On my own travels in Africa, the rapid modernization has become very evident.  There will be some derailments in the near term, and Africa has some serious challenges (the challenge of geography and climate will not be going away anytime soon), but in the long term, Africa has an opportunity to set a new , better course.

I love this video because it shows a different Africa--and in a funny way.  I look forward to the day we don't even assume that Africa is only a backward, troubled land.

A Very Great Young Man

I am still in Ireland, but wanted to post this video.  Grandma Sharon told us about this unique Cafe in Albuquerque and I wanted to see the video.  So here it is.  We have a supporting church in Albuquerque that is due for a visit, so I'd love to stop in and visit.  I'll be back to share about our experiences in Ireland in a couple of days.  Thanks for being patient while we take this vacation.  

As I said over on my Facebook page (yes, I do have a personal Facebook page now...as well as a Three Worlds page) and Twitter account (3WCHOG), I'm proud of this young man and proud that the United States is a country where this is possible.

Easter Vacation in Ireland with the Family

Hello friends.  I've been silent for a few days.  That's because I have been on vacation.  On Saturday, Jamie, Marco and I flew from Berlin to Dublin, Ireland for a week of driving across this beautiful country.  In Dublin, we picked up Jamie's mother Sharon, and together we are trekking around this beautiful country.  I cashed in some of my air miles and wanted to take the family someplace that they have never been--and some place that I love.

I first visited Ireland in 1995.  I also visited Northern Ireland more recently.  That first trip to Ireland was very special.  I had an extremely powerful spiritual experience on that journey at the Cliffs of Moher.  Maybe one day I'll tell the story here on the diary.  Suffice to say, the Cliffs of Moher (on the West Coast of Ireland), is a special, spiritual place to me.  It was great to get to show that to Jamie, Marco, and Sharon as they have heard so much about my famous Cliffs of Moher story.

Ireland has changed a lot since I was last here.  Back in 1995, Ireland was pretty much a third world country.  The runt of Europe--backwards and poor.  All of that changed with the boom of the mid-90's, which led to the "Celtic Tiger" era of Ireland, when globalization arrived and the economy and real estate went through the roof.  Then the banking crisis of 2008 hit, and much like Greece, Spain, and Italy---the country and it's infrastructure looks good, but go down deeper and you see that the nation is actually bankrupt and in severe trouble.  More about that later here on the diary.

For now, it's enough to say that we are having a great, very relaxing time, and enjoying spending focused time as a family and with Grandma.  We rented a car and are driving around much of the country visiting a lot of key regions.  Our trip will end up back in Dublin where we picked up our car.  I'll be writing more about the trip here on the diary and including photos.  At the moment, we are in Dingle, Ireland where we just heard live Irish folk music a few minutes ago in a local Irish pub.  We saw the Cliffs of Moher earlier today and head to drive around the Ring of Kerry tomorrow.  More coming soon.

Is Beyonce Peaking? The 12 Year Mark

Since it's my diary, I can write what I want m-kay? Over at my twitter account (3WCHOG), I speculate that Beyonce may be now peaking as a pop-star and that from here it's all downhill.  The former Destiny's Child lead singer has released a new single "Bow Down/I Been On," is truly awful.  Musically it's atrocious and the lyrics are vulgar:  especially for someone who has carved out a pretty good niche as a female artist that is appealing to younger audiences as well as older audiences.

My theory is that the biggest pop stars:  Michael Jackson, Prince, Whitney Houston, Madonna, Mariah Carey--the biggest of the big--only have 12 years of relevancy before they become irrelevant retro-acts.  Great artists can have less (Jimi Hendrix only lasted about 3 years before dying and the Beatles had a good 7 year run before choosing to break up while on top), but no artist can have more than 12 years of being truly relevant. (I'm not talking about their first album to their last album.  I'm talking about their period of relevancy in which they influenced the music scene and set the tone).  12 years. That's my theory.

I'd argue Prince was relevant from 1978 to 1990 (Batman Soundrack).  He still wrote a lot, still a great performer, but not a part of the cultural musical fabric anymore.  It's nostalgia.

Madonna?  1983 to 1992 "Bedtime Stories" produced by BabyFace.  After that, her influence really waned.

Michael Jackson (solo artist) 1979-1991 (Dangerous).  Dangerous was a lousy album, but he still got his airplay even though it sold half as much as "Bad" which sold half as much as "Thriller."  The albums after that nobody remembers and were not on the radio.

U2 (and I say this as a fan) 1987-2000.  That's being generous actually.  They ceased to be the biggest ban in the world, or influential, or trendsetting with "Pop" and the Pop-Mart tour.  "All that You Can't Leave Behind" in 2000 was an album that was completely tanking.  Were it not for the September 11th attacks and their embracing that moment (especially with their song "Walk On," their period of relevancy would have ended in the mid-1990's.

Bruce Springsteen 1975 to 1985 (The Live Album from the Born in the USA Tour).  After that, Tunnel of Love (my favorite album) did poorly.

Some of my favorite artists like The Police or Duran Duran had even shorter lifespans.  Led Zeppelin and the Doors ended tragically before their relevancy ran out.

Some often forgotten people who had excellent but shorter runs were:  Phil Collins, Kool & the Gang, Hall & Oates, The Bee Gees, Abba, and Guns N' Roses.

Perhaps it's that 12 years is a good portion of a generation and after that, there's no way to not become a nostalgia act.  And of course, it's rare that any artist can put together a string of great albums.  The absolute best artists may produce 4 or 5 really great albums in their careers.  But even then, they usually peak pretty severely.

Of course an artist can come back with a great album (Bob Dylan's "Time Out of Mind", Paul Simon's "Graceland," Aerosmith in the late 80's/early 90's, and David Bowie's latest come to mind), but it doesn't make them musically relevant.  They just remind us of their good musicianship and why there were once relevant.

I don't really believe Beyonce writes her own songs.  There's no evidence of that.  She doesn't show the slightest inkling of knowledge about music.  She's got a pretty airy voice compared to Whitney, and her type of R & B is not my thing.  But she is an incredibly hard worker (like a machine) and she built up a great brand---one which was appealing across a pretty big demographic sway.  But it's about time for her star to fade.  She comes off as nice, but she is one of the least interesting personalities out there.

With her new edgier, "R" rated single, she is making a miscalculation that a lot of clean-cut artists make:  they think dirtier will keep them relevant as they age.  But the reality is that millenials prefer the clean cut sound to the darker, negative vibe.  But I'm sure all her producers and writers (especially her husband Jay-Z) are all Gen-Xers and will steer her (like they did Britney) toward a harder edge as she ages.  Beyonce has dabbled in this before, but the new song is over the line, in my opinion, and will cost her.  Janet Jackson made the same mistake--getting more sexual and raunchy.  She lasted from 1987-1997 ("The Velvet Rope" ushering in her demise as a relevant artist.

"There is a season to everything.  A time for hits, a time to play Vegas."

To hear Beyonce's lousy new song.  Here it is.

Greg Wiens: A Seismic Shift Needed

I am currently writing from beautiful Lago di Garda, Italy in the Italian Alps (Dolomites).  I am here to visit the 2 church plants in Italy and speak there.  For the past 2 1/2 weeks, I've been on the road in England, Hungary, and Italy with Greg and Mary Kay Wiens.  Greg is the State Director of the Church of God in Florida and also a founder and leader of Healthy Growing Churches Network (a movement within the Church of God that is bringing revitalization to churches and the movement as a whole). Greg led the 3W Seminar in London on "Why Church plants die and Why they Succeed."  It was excellent.  That was followed by being the speaker at the 2nd "Budapest Lectures" where he gave an expanded presentation on that subject that encompassed a lot of information on what makes churches, ministry team, and pastors healthy.  It was a wealth of information.

Now he is with me helping to take a look/assess the church plants in Italy.

Both Greg and I feel like it is do or die time for the Church of God Movement.  As I wrote in my 3rd book: "Mosaic: A Journey Across the Church of God," either we make some serious re-calibrations within the next 10 years or there won't be much left after that.  What we need is an organizational, missiological, and evangelical overhaul in the church of God movement.

It's been great having a lot of time with Greg over what will end up being a 3 week trip, to process and discuss all of these issues in-depth.  We're both committed to ushering in health and are willing to make the hard decisions to do so.  There is a price to pursuing health and making wise choices.  It's not the default position of old churches or old movements.  Quite the opposite, in fact.  Instead, they lose the desire for health, fight change, and even lose the ability to identify what is healthy and what is not healthy.  The longer an organization or church stays dysfunctional, the more it punishes (and chases off) it's visionaries and reformers.  That leaves even less opportunity for change.  It's a process of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.  The system stays the same:  unthreatened but dying nonetheless.

I'm glad to see that Greg has stayed the course and still has a passion for the Church of God despite the slings and arrows that that inevitably brings.  And I'm glad to see that Greg joins me in not romanticizing the Early Church as the Church of God did/does.  The Early Church was a mess much of the time.  One that was not immune to having to be corrected and even shut down.   Christian organizations and churches (like people) have to change if they are to mature.

I'm very proud of the leaders in the Europe/Middle East region.  Everywhere from London, to Paris, to Berlin, to Budapest, to Russia, to the 3 churches in Italy and beyond---we are seeing churches willing to take some risks and usher in healthy change.  It is absolutely phenomenal to be here right now.  I think Greg was able to see that despite our small size (Europe being the hardest mission-field), our churches are on the cutting edge of thinking out of the box.  It is an exciting time here!

And of course, I can't say enough about our Three Worlds Mission Team which has shown that it is possible to work in unity, free from division and competition, and being committed to empowering others (particularly the young), instead of ourselves, our reputations, and our careers.  They are catalytic people that are making a regional difference.

All of Greg's sessions have been marvelous.  Here is a sample of his thinking from the recent HGC Conference where he shares the need for Seismic Shifts.  Thank you Greg for all you do.

HGC Network Closing Session 2013 from Mike Brookins on Vimeo.

2nd Budapest Lectures Under Way

I'm writing to you today from Budapest, Hungary.  We are in the middle of our 2nd ever "Budapest Lectures" which brings top leaders from the Church of God to Hungary to provide in-depth teaching to the leaders of the churches in Budapest and which is open to the rest of the region.  The first speaker was Rainer Klinner of Germany who did a wonderful job and took the Hungarian leaders into deep subjects.  This week we have Florida State Coordinator and leader of Healthy Growing Churches, Greg Wiens, along with his wife Mary Kay. Last weekend, Greg led a 3W Seminar in London which was superb.  We are discussing "Why Church Plants Succeed or Fail," but the material actually discusses in-depth, what makes a healthy church (and a healthy leader).  This information has been worth its weight in gold.  Both in London and in Budapest, they have greatly enjoyed these very enlightening sessions.  I can hardly wait for tomorrow's sessions.

The Budapest Lectures will take place 4 times a year:  Winter, Spring, Summer, and Fall.  I believe we already have the next 4 speakers lined up.  This summer, 3W's Ken Oldham (Egypt) will be teaching.  It is our hope that this will also be our first Budapest Lecture that will include CHOG guests from other countries.  Our desire is to open this up to leaders from throughout the region.  Four times a year, every year, they can choose to join a training session.  It will build up CHOG unity (remember creating inner-connecticity is the 3rd part of our 3W Prism) and it will create opportunities for fellowship, synergy, and education.  We hope to see Budapest CHOG becoming like an airport with people constantly coming in and out to refuel and take off again.

3W's Ken Oldham and Dan Kihm will be helping to lead the development of the Budapest Lectures over the coming years.  And we are grateful to Pastors Peter Kiss and Laszlo Debreceni for being willing to host all of us.

Exciting things happening in Europe/Middle East!