The Fourth Economy: Inventing Western Civilization

The book is now available on amazon for kindle or in paperback, and on Barnes & Noble for nook.

Read it if
- you want to learn how a pattern of social invention and revolution that began in medieval times will define the next few decades
- you want to know what comes after the agricultural, industrial, and information economies
- you are tired of the drum beat of doom about the economy and want something hopeful

Western Civilization has been through three great transformations. You get to live through a fourth. This is the story of social invention and progress, a pattern of revolutions that has just begun to repeat. Welcome to The Next Transformation.

Showing posts with label church. Show all posts
Showing posts with label church. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Renaissance Popes (Helping the Protestant Cause)

Bad popes and CEOs, while possibly not a sign of the apocalypse, are a sign that an institution has gone rogue. When the church is about the glorification of the pope, or the corporation is about enriching the CEO, it is an institution in bad need of reform or reinvention. It is hard to imagine three popes who could do more to dissuade Europeans of respect for medieval authority than the 3 Renaissance popes Alexander, Julius, and Leo.

Think of the fun Fox and MSNBC would have reporting on these popes. A pope with sword on hip, swearing at his soldiers to urge them on in military campaigns? Another pope who, when a cardinal, was rebuked for hosting orgies?

Alexander rather fittingly took his name from the conqueror Alexander the Great rather than some milquetoast saint. Pope Alexander purchased the papacy in 1492. As Columbus was discovering a new world, Alexander was bribing fellow cardinals for their vote, an investment that he and his children would recoup.

Where a modern CEO might think it fun to throw multi-million dollar parties for a child, Alexander’s gifts were more creative. He bought his children lavish wedding parties, private bull fights, political positions and even armies with which to conquer new territory. Alexander had at least 7 known illegitimate children, a natural enough product from a man who seemed so at ease with sex. As pope, he once hosted a party that included a contest matching his guests with prostitutes and then dispensing gifts to the guests who demonstrated the most impressive feats of virility.


The next pope had once tried to depose Alexander, an attempt that led Alexander to try to assassinate this impetuous cardinal. It is hard to imagine someone as reticent and peaceful as Pope John Paul even surviving in this era, much less aspiring to the papacy. The church had too much power to be left to any but alpha males with little compunction.

Julius was bold enough to lead armies and raze St. Peter’s Basilica and commission a new one in its place, a feat that made Michelangelo and his ceiling more famous than this warrior pope.
Erasmus, who did so much to open the door to secular learning, penned a satire after Julius’s death titled “Julius Exclusis.” In this piece, Julie protests that St. Peter would block his entry to heaven.


Peter: Is there no difference between being holy and being called Holy? . . . Let me look a little closer. Hum! Signs of impiety aplenty. . . Priest's cassock, but bloody armor beneath it; eyes savage, mouth insolent, forehead brazen, body scarred with sins all over, breath loaded with wine, health broken with debauchery. Ay, threaten as you will, I will tell you what you are.... You are Julius the Emperor come back from hell....

Julius: Make an end, or I will excommunicate you....


P: Excommunicate me? By what right, I would know?

J: The best of rights. You are only a priest, perhaps not that you cannot consecrate. Open, I say!


P: You must show your merits first....

J: What do you mean by merits?


P: Have you taught true doctrine?

J: Not I. I have been too busy fighting. There are monks to look after doctrine, if that is of any consequence. … I have done more for the Church and Christ than any Pope before me.


P: What did you do?

J: I raised the revenue. I invented new offices and sold them... I recoined the currency and made a great sum that way. Nothing can be done without money. Then I annexed Bologna to the Holy See.... I set all the princes of Europe by the ears. I tore up treaties, and kept great armies in the field. I covered Rome with palaces, and left five millions in the treasury behind me....


P: Why did you take Bologna?

J: Because I wanted the revenue....


P: And how about Ferrara?

J: The duke was an ungrateful wretch. He accused me of simony [the purchase of office], called me a pederast.... I wanted the duchy of Ferrara for a son of my own, who could be depended upon to be true to the Church, and who had just poniarded [plunged a small dagger into] the Cardinal of Pavia.


P: What? Popes with wives and children?

J: Wives? No, not wives, but why not children? [1]


As Europe became more secular, it made a kind of perverse sense that the church and its leader would also become more secular but this still did not set well with Europeans. Luther’s protests about the excesses of Rome found ready ears. In Erasmus’s account, Peter expresses dismay that there is no way to depose such a pope and in this speaks for many Europeans. Although revolutions may seem obvious in retrospect, people do look for a variety of options before the overthrow of the social order. It took a lot to embolden Europeans to give up on popes.

Alexander and Julius convinced many Europeans that the papacy – and by extension the church – was corrupt and unworthy of respect. This provoked two responses that each undermined the grip of the church.


The one response was probably best characterized by intellectuals like Machiavelli and Erasmus, who were less concerned about the excesses of the church than the need to complement religion with secular teachings and human will. Machiavelli actually admired Julius’s boldness. And even though Erasmus criticized Julius, he seemed more aligned with the Catholic Church than the Protestant movement. These men saw progress through a further embrace of the secular, but an embrace that came in the arms of something other than the church.

The other response was best characterized by Martin Luther and John Calvin. They did not approve of Europe’s secular tilt and sought, instead, to create a church uncorrupted by so much power and money.


As it turns out, these two approaches had more in common than an opposition to the status quo and the power of the Catholic Church. A church that kept itself pure by letting others care about secular things like money, the rule of territory proved a perfect complement to the newly emerging nation-state that was secular in its interests and focus. If all the world had to be funneled through the church, the church was either going to be an obstacle to progress or it was going to become secular. But if the church was to focus on religious matters, then we have the birth of a new kind of world.

----------
[1] Will Durant, The Reformation (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1957) 279-82.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

The Swinging Pendulum of Social Evolution

The Rothschild brothers didn’t seem like elites when they began their career. Mayer Rothschild began his life living in a Frankfurt ghetto, forced to leave the sidewalk when even a young child ordered him to “Step aside, Jew!” He had the vision to send four of his five sons to the most important cities in Europe.

Mayer's son Nathan Rothschild was in London when the English began their war against Napoleon. This war was incredibly expensive. Coordinating efforts with his brothers, Nathan was able to raise huge sums of money for the British by selling war bonds throughout Europe – primarily through his brothers in Frankfurt, Paris, Vienna, and Naples. Nathan not only raised money for the British – he made the Rothschild brothers rich and famous. By the time of his death in 1836, he might have had more liquid wealth than anyone in the world. Because they helped to invent modern financial markets, the Rothschild brothers rose from the German ghetto to become elites with power enough to dictate terms to kings.

The Rothschild brothers and others like JP Morgan helped to pioneer modern financial markets and then, in the next century, philosophers like Keynes, policy-makers like FDR, and business visionaries like Charlie Merrill and Dee Hock “democratized” financial markets, creating access to credit and investment markets for the people. Alan Greenspan or Ben Bernanke is supposed to manage interest rates and reserve rates so as to do what is best for the general economy and the average person – not just a few powerful bankers. Access to financial markets is now considered a right.

Martin Luther, John Calvin, Huldrych Zwingli, and John Knox were among the revolutionaries who wrested control of the church away from the elites and helped to put it into the hands of the people.

Later, Louis XIV and Henry VIII help to pioneer the nation-state and then, centuries later, revolutionaries like Jefferson and Franklin wrested control away from the elites and into the hands of the people.

The swings between power held by the elites and the people seem to me inevitable. The elites pioneer and prosper. They are the social inventors who create the great institutions like church, state, and corporation. But once those inventions have become an integral part of the social fabric, along come revolutionaries who turn control of these inventions over from the elites to the people.

Next up for Western Civilization? Wresting control away from the CEOs, the last of the monarchs, and putting power into the hands of the investors, employees, and communities whose fate is so inexorably tied up in the actions of the corporation.

Am I a populist or an elitist? A Republican who wants the people’s interest represented by a trusted group of elites or a Democrat who wants the people to directly represent their own interests? At this point in history, I’m a populist, a Democrat ready to see the power of the powerful corporation dispersed.

Thursday, March 8, 2007

The Post-Capitalist Corporation

The corporation will soon undergo a transformation akin to the change of the nation-state during the age of Enlightenment.

Once the medieval church lost its grip on Europe, the modern nation-state grabbed power. For centuries, religious wars defined European politics. Huge swaths of the population were murdered by competing religions that used monarchs and rebels to compete for ascendancy. It was not until religion was made a personal matter and nation-states focused on issues of politics that warfare became less frequent. Governments could focus on quality of life instead of imposing religion through force.

Today, power has shifted from capitalism, from "the bank," to the corporation. JP Morgan sat on corporate boards and formed corporations like General Electric and International Harvester. The purpose of these newly formed corporations was financial gain. The aims of the bank, financial returns, still define the aims of the corporation just as the aims of the church to impose a homogeneity of religious belief first defined the modern nation-state.

Talking about the aims of the corporation today without talking about profit is about as odd as it would be to talk about the aims of the nation-state in 1650 without talking about which religion it ought to enforce on its subjects.

The idea of financial gain within the corporation being a matter left to individuals may seem foreign to us, but our grandchildren will accept it as easily as we accept transcontinental flights or leaving the matter of religion to individuals. It is yet another dimension of turning employees into entrepreneurs, of giving the individual more autonomy.

Thursday, February 1, 2007

4 Revolutions and the Rise of the Individual Over the Institution

A pattern of revolutions has brought us out of the Dark Ages and into the modern world. This pattern has been repeated three times. During your lifetime, it will repeat for a fourth time. This will be the next great revolution.

If I were to ask you to name some technological inventions that helped us to become modern, you could probably name quite a few – things like the printing press, the steam engine, the automobile and the computer. But if I were to ask you what social inventions helped us to become modern, you might pause. We are less inclined to think of things like schools and universities, banks and corporations as inventions and yet they are. Our social institutions and customs are at least as different from what they had in medieval times as is our technology.

When a technology inventor comes up with a radically new product, they call it an innovation. When a social inventor like Martin Luther or Thomas Jefferson comes up with a radically new institution, they call it revolution. Such revolutions have created our modern world. A fourth is about to transform it once again.

The First Revolution - the Church
In 1300, you could be burned at the stake for a number of offenses. If your neighbor's donkey had died or crop had failed, he might bring an accusation against you for being a witch. If you spoke out against the church, questioning its doctrine. Or if you simply owned a copy of the Bible in your own language. All of these, and more, were capital offenses.

In the early 1500s, Martin Luther became the most visible agitator for a change to the church. He didn’t like the idea of church authorities substituting for his conscience or interpretation of the Bible. He may have articulated the first revolution when he said, “We are all priests.”

It took quite some time, and a tragic amount of bloodshed, but the individual in the West finally gained the freedom to choose how – or even whether – to worship. The power that once was held by the church – by the elites within the church – was now held by the individual. This church revolution was the first great transformation of the West. To appreciate how different this made us, consider the fact that in many Muslim countries today it is a capital offense to renounce one’s Muslim faith. Think about how different life is here in the West for this reason alone.

The Second Revolution - the State
The second great transformation involved the revolution of the state. We learn about this great and amazing story in our American history classes. Jefferson penned the words, “All men are created equal.” Again, the revolution was not immediate. After we won our independence from the British, for example, only white, landowning men could vote. But the idea of power to define policy – to define the laws and budgets that so influence our quality of life – the idea that this should be power ultimately held by the people is an idea that has spread. In just the last century, the number of democracies has increased from about 13 to 67.

It is not, ultimately, the aristocrats who decide on the politicians and policy that defines our society. Rather, it is the polity. As with the Protestant Revolution, Democratic Revolution dispersed power outwards from elites to the common person.

The Third Revolution - the Bank

The third great transformation involved a revolution of the bank – a transformation of capitalism.

Before this, the third transformation, it was common for a 9 year-old child to work 12 hour days in factories and for young women to not only work 12 hour days but to be, effectively, prisoners on a factory compound, able to leave only on Sunday’s. The power over lives that had earlier been held by popes and kings was now wielded by robber barons. Money and credit was scarce – to get a loan you would be subject to great scrutiny and bankers would decide whether or not the purchase you wanted was appropriate.

By 2000, capitalism had transformed in so many ways. As with the church and state before it, the power of the bank had been dispersed outwards to common people. The great management guru Peter Drucker was one of the few to note that by the end of the 20th century it was labor - people like us – who through their 401(k) plans and pension plans now owned the majority of the country’s equity.

The battle between capital and labor that played out through the actions of robber barons, unions, and in more dramatic relief through the policies of communists and fascists, was over. The battle had not been won. It had been dissolved. Labor had become the capitalist. Not only did workers have rights, but the average person with a credit card could now decide for himself whether or not to take a loan. Bankers did not decide whether you should buy the new refrigerator. You made that decision. Freedom of religion and the right to vote were followed by access to credit upon our choosing – not the banks. What would the banker of 1900 think about our literally tearing up requests for us to TAKE OUT loans? What would he think about us throwing away advertisements that guaranteed us credit?

Three revolutions have brought us into the modern world. But the church, state, and bank are no longer the dominant institution. In today's world, it is the corporation that has that role. My prediction is that the elites within corporations are going to find their power dispersed out, just as happened to the elites in the church, state, and bank before them. The CEO now making hundreds of times what the average worker makes is following in the footsteps of the Renaissance popes, the Enlightenment-era monarchs, and the powerful capitalist whose world was depicted in Dickens’s novels.

You live in a remarkable time. For one thing, all three past revolutions played out over a century or more. This next revolution will take place within decades. I will go into more detail in later posts, but the fourth revolution has already begun. For now, I will simply say that the Internet has dispersed information outwards to average employees. Increasingly, power, decision-making, and autonomy will be dispersed with it.

We know that a country is poorly developed if its head ruler makes more money than anyone else within the country. When the top salary goes to the top political leader, we rightly suspect a dictatorship or political abuse. it is different in developed nations. Within the U.S., for instance, President Bush’s’ $400,000 annual salary might put him among the top 1 million for income. People in the United States are free to make as much as they can, and many make more than our political leader. By contrast, it is the rare company where any employee makes more than the CEO. Imagine how incensed CEOs would be if the government was to define their annual goals and their maximum salaries – and yet that is just what these CEOs typically do to their employees.

This will change. Power will be dispersed outwards to employees from the corporate elites. Senior management will increasingly play a role that looks more like that of a venture capitalist, and employees will take on a role more like that of entrepreneurs, effectively using the corporation as an incubator for starting new ventures that translate into shared equity. As with the past revolutions, this transformation of the dominant institution will involve sweeping changes and myriad smaller social inventions. And like the past revolutions, it will be defined by the rise of the individual over the institution - an increase in individual autonomy that has repeatedly defined the West.

Martin Luther said, “We are all priests.” Perhaps the cry of this century will be, “We are all entrepreneurs.”

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

The Corporation is Today's Dominant Institution

Fortunately, you can't see air. If you could, it is unlikely that you could see anything else. In a similar way, when a particular institution dominates a community, it is nearly invisible.

In medieval times, that institution was the church; today, the dominant institution is the corporation. Its influence is so pervasive that we can’t even see it.

Think about the typical day of the average person. The alarm goes off at 6:30. The programming is courtesy of a corporation - the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. The very thoughts that first enter her head aren’t daily prayers sanctioned by her church but are, instead, news items and commentary approved by employees of a corporation. The radio that conveys this programming is made by the Sony Corporation and was bought from a retail outlet the Best Buy Corporation. This person lifts herself off the bed, a bed made by the Select Comfort Corporation. The alarm goes off at 6:30 because the time it takes to commute in her car (made and sold by the Nissan Corporation) plus the time it takes to get ready (using products like toothpaste, shaving gel, hair gel, and deodorant provided by the Proctor & Gamble Corporation) equals the time that the corporate employer expects her to begin working. She has scarcely gained consciousness and already her day is defined by corporate norms, products, and expectations.

Even the context for the use of the products listed in the above paragraph is a product of corporations. The very notion of “body odor” is a product of corporate advertisers trying to create demand for deodorant early in the 20th century. The idea of time zones was not an idea of governments but of railroads that needed uniform time zones in order to create schedules. It is one thing to notice that we’re bombarded by about 3,000 advertisements a day. It is another to notice that the very expectation of wearing deodorant or chewing mints is created by corporations, much less the expectation that we’ll all synchronize our watches and alarm clocks.

Our clothes and transportation are defined by corporations. Our working hours and the number of years that we need to work are also defined by corporations. More than 90% of Americans are employees and their role as employees is either defined by a corporation or an institution that patterns itself after the corporation. The level of pollution that we accept is defined by the needs of the corporation. Only when health needs of people and the planet are being too obviously ignored is that negotiated or changed. The extent to which children are allowed to be with their parents during the work day is defined by the corporation. Even our diet is defined by corporations and if the health consequences of this are harmful, then corporations are ready to offer prescription drugs that remedy the complications from the diet.

One of the real obstacles to transforming the medieval church was getting enough intellectual distance from it to see it, rather than simply see through the lens it provided. Our situation is little different today. Just take note of how pervasive is the corporation in defining your daily life. Once you do, you can begin to explore ways to define it rather than accept it defining you, taking to heart the warning that Emerson gave: "We have become the tools of our tools."

Why does this matter? It was impossible to change life, to make progress, coming out of medieval times without changing the church - and changing it fundamentally. Today, fundamental progress depends on changing the corporation, today's dominant institution.

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Welcome to the Next Transformation

In about 1300, the West began its first great transformation. When it was complete by 1700, the church had been eclipsed as the dominant institution by the nation-state – kings had more power than popes and it was the individual who chose his or her religion. Starting with this great transformation, the West has gone through three great transformations. You are living through the very beginning of the fourth.

In succession, the past transformations have given the individual freedom of religion, the right to vote, and access to credit. In the process, the church, state, and bank have been transformed. And the West has overcome the limits of land, capital, and knowledge workers as well through a succession of economic revolutions we’ve come to know as the Commercial Revolution, Capitalism, and the Information Age.

The next great transformation, the fourth in the series, will transform the modern corporation as the past repetitions have transformed the church, state, and bank. It will result in the individual having unprecedented levels of control over how he works and on what he works. In the process, the West will overcome what has replaced land, capital, and knowledge workers as the new limit to progress, it will overcome the limit of entrepreneurship by turning a growing number of employees into entrepreneurs, changing our notion of a corporation and its employees.

Key to all of this is this notion. We are well aware that progress depends on technological inventions like the wheel, the compass, the steam engine, the car, and computer. We seem less aware of the fact that progress depends, too, on social inventions like the bank, accounting, legal contracts, schools, universities, nation-states, and the modern corporation.

The next great transformation will disrupt everything. It is hard to image a world in which a group who might have been expected to take a role as factory workers in the 19th century or as knowledge workers in the 20th century will, instead, take on the role of entrepreneurs. Imagine having even 10% of the population busily creating and recreating the organizations through which we conduct business, education, and governance.

This blog will tell the story of next great transformation, will predict the next 50 years using a pattern that began 700 years ago. Pull up a chair around my kitchen table and settle in. This is going to be a fascinating series of events to narrate.

Welcome to the next transformation.
Add to Technorati Favorites

About Me

My photo
Working in the basement on the Escher Expressway (every direction down hill for fuel savings) and Mobius Strip DNA (for immortality).