Modern day China is a land of immense opportunity- a country that will surprise, enthuse, annoy and charm; a place many new things must be learned and, equally importantly, many unlearnt.

The Country.

Looking at China today we see the world’s second economy and -arguably, the most influential market today. China’s growth and wealth has assured rescue plans all over the world and is becoming increasingly important in calming our global economy. Yet, at the same time; China is not the international player Japan (previously the biggest economy in Asia) once was. China’s presence on the world stage is rather more subtle; there are (almost) no big Chinese brands of importance and Chinese investments in (Western) companies (or governments) are received with a certain level of suspicion -and thus not very widely reported.

Business.

When looking at the development of the Chinese domestic market we see interesting patterns developing and (slowly) emerging. But let’s take it from the beginning.

In recent years, talk of China (in the socioeconomic sense) has almost always covered cheap labour and bad products – essential elements that defined ‘the factory of the world’. What is often forgotten is the fact that China has a civil history older than that of all of the Western countries- it is a country with a long, rich history of culture, art, music, and poetry. For a large part of the last two millennia China was the world’s largest economy. Only in the later stages of the Qing Dynasty (1644 – 1912) did this country’s economic development slow down, which, combined with Europe’s rapid development during and after the Industrial Revolution, let the latter surpass China.

Today the Chinese government has implemented a program that is aimed at elevating the country from a low-cost production economy to a high-tech innovation driven economy. If the last 3 decades of Chinese development are indicative of what the future might bring, the ‘traditional’ high-tech countries would do well to gear up and prepare themselves for competition.

Add to this the fact of China’s recent increase in urbanization. Currently (according the 2010 census) China boasts 160 cities with a population over 1 million people. To put that into perspective, the Benelux has (if one measures by actual city borders): zero. The size of China’s urban middle class was about 230 million people in August 2011, or 37% of the total urban population -coming from 80 million in 2007, forecast to be 700 million in 2015 and expected to hit 1.4 billion in 2030. This is about 100% of the entire population of current day Europe.

Obviously, this will attract many people looking to make a quick buck. Yet, looking at examples in the last 10 years, we see that ‘a quick buck’ in China is often short lived and detrimental with regards to your ROI and brand value in the long run.

Coming here.

So what does starting a company in China entail? There are many different elements in the equation that need to be given some (and some a little more) thought. For instance, what does the government have in store for that particular industry, or indeed, all of the industries? Have a look at the latest 5 year plan the Party published (KPMG has published a fairly decent summary). Here you will be able to find leads with regards to subsidies that might be available, and let it be known, that there are many. These subsidies may be related to the industry of interest, but might as well be related to where the government wants to develop a region and how they wish to (financially) stimulate companies to locate there.

These are only some of the elements that come into play when starting a business in China. What is often overlooked is the sheer amount of options available and how important it is to understand the steps that need to be taken in order to file all correct documents, in the correct manner, with the right people. There are several organizations that can help you do so- your local chambers of commerce being the starting point most likely. It is also advisable to get in contact with a good local accountancy and have a localized lawyer look into the company structure and administration plans- they have a thorough understanding of the local market and requirements and will thus be able to give correct advise and help avoid tax or regulatory problems.

This has very little to do with your own business, marketing or brand so far. Yet, these steps are incredibly important with regards to the circumstances and ‘Umwelt’ you are creating for your company; these steps will help you to be sure you ‘understand’ what you are walking into and how you can make this potentially highly rewarding endeavor as smooth as possible. Once you’re ready and set is when the fun begins.

Market.

How will you tap into this wealth of new eager consumers? In deciding where to establish a business it might not be a bad idea to look into the local consumer- what are their patterns and desires? What is the cultural orientation with regards to certain products and services and how well integrated is the use of social media? These are important indicators of what will work and what will not, in terms of communication and brand strategy.

A key fact that must be kept at the forefront of your thoughts, is that despite the current run on the ‘Chinese consumer’, this consumer is still very much undefined and diffused, at best. China, in all its splendor and sheer size, is still a country with one dominant ethnic group; the Han Chinese. Yet, the Han-Chinese are an ethnic group that has become an amalgam over time, and is comprised of hundreds of different ethnic groups. Many of these have different cultural interpretations and dialects – thus, different consumers all across the board.

The 1st and 2nd tier cities in China are highly competitive marketplaces, where everybody is fighting for the same pie and many of pieces have been given away already. Is being in Beijing or Shanghai really necessary? Or is this choice driven by ‘this sounds right’? Because it might not be.

Some argue that focus groups and quantitative research are the best way to create a solid business strategy. Certainly, this is a good place to start. Yet, in a marketplace that changes as rapidly as China’s, do not rely on research only. When you focus purely on what people might be thinking today, you’ll have already lost the battle for tomorrow.

A brand that leads and is relevant to people will always be more successful then a brand that follows.

The Chinese consumer is quickly catching up. They know what is going on and they know what they want. They are highly status-oriented and very willing to share their brand preferences. While in Europe ‘showing off’ the brands that you care about is increasingly becoming an act that is frowned upon (in terms of FMCG’s) in China it is called ‘shi’ (which means ‘shining’) and is one of the favorite pastimes of the generation Y consumer.

With the rise in quality of life in China, we also see an increase in the demand for more security- not only in terms of the protection insurance of oneself or ones possessions, but more importantly, in the demand for clean drinking water, safe food, energy and clean air. For those of us from Western backgrounds, these are all things that we take for granted as being ‘normal’. Yet with the rapid developments over the past few decades and subsequent increase in energy use, food consumption and urbanization, these are now genuine concerns for the Chinese consumer and they are increasingly vocal about it. Consequently, the government has been sure to stimulate the reduction of energy use, the reorganization of the agricultural industry and to install incentives for clean(er) technologies.

This also presents an enormous opportunity. The clean tech industry is heavily subsidized, and building using technologies that will increase sustainability will be heavily subsidized according to the 12th 5-year plan. Currently China is the world’s greatest investor in these kinds of technologies, and is spending 1 in the 3 dollars they spend on defense on clean energy development, as opposed to the USA’s 1 in 54 dollars.

This is also a good indication of what will be top of mind in the Chinese consumer in the decade to come.

At times, the average Gen-Y/Millennial/Digital Native might feel somewhat lost with regards to what is happening in the world and how we can find our piece of that world to truly make our own. We live in a world where we all have our own respective podiums in social media. Our connectedness is -historically seen; unprecedented, while our know-how on world-affairs and ability to deal with information surpasses that of the average computer from the year we were born. (This is an aesthetic argument, don’t quote me on that)

But do we still have the context necessary to put ‘life’ into perspective?

Our education focuses all it’s effort on helping us become valued contributors in a (semi-)liberal market economy. It, unfortunately, doesn’t give us any scope or insight in how this market-driven world works and what it’s consequences are on the larger reality of life. And, increasingly, we see our education become irrelevant in what we end up doing, how we do it -and most importantly; why we do it.

But how is that related to progress?

My question exactly. When I hear talk of progress and I watch the news, and see it related only to economical/financial news, hardly any mention of health, the state of nature, bio-diversity, quality of food, or -dare I say; quality of life. But what of the increasing inequality both abroad and at home? What of cuts on education-budgets? (Which could prove to be a push towards out-of-school education in relation with the ever increasing amount of stored knowledge in 1′s and 0′s and alternative platforms for education arising.) Then I haven’t mentioned the increasing amount of people on either uppers or downers, increasing obesity in kids, rising prices of food, increase in gen-modified foods which haven’t been very extensively researched, (Don’t mind me, I am aware of the possibility of genmod’s ending up as the only option to feed the world at some point, I don’t know, but I find the code-of-conduct of -for instance, Monsanto, not very heart-winning.) What about the rising nationalistic sentiment in countries all over the world? (Most visibly in the ‘developed western world’.) How do these elements tie into what we have coined progress?

The negativity that is projected on society, is taking its toll on people’s imagination, creativity, hope and even love. I feel we are wasting human potential. Might it be an idea to use the second wave of the Information Era in order to self-organise? To try; city by city, community by community, school by school, market by market, brand by brand, push towards a frame-work for society that re-institutes a societal-fabric that allows for an engaged and responsible paradigm for policy-making, business ethics, educational models and media-platforms.

I feel the current ‘trend’ around sustainability might allow us to renew the frame-works and incentives in which we work and live. It can function to re-trace the current consumption/waste model (in every aspect of society). I also feel (and some might perceive this to be ignorant, but the belief is fueled by the people I keep on meeting even as I have now moved to the boiler-room of capitalism that is Shanghai) that business (brands) can (and must?) take a leading role in the development of these systems and enable people to articulate their ideas and suggestions for code-of-conduct, policy and different ways of consumption.

Talk about stuff like this with your friends or random strangers you meet on the street of cities you have never before visited or with trees or your grandmother or your colleague and your sister and mother too. Or not. Suit yourself.

I’m just saying that if the rest of the world is doing well, chances are likely you will be too.

Happy hunting.

Love, L

In business this would cost you your reputation, turnover, agility with regards to technological development, and thus eventually your entire business. Governments so far are lucky as they are not (yet) going bankrupt (despite the economic reality in which several governments are operating) and can continue to ‘work’ because we seem to be holding on to the idea that the democratic-process will and can bring change.

I’m not entirely sure on that one frankly, but let’s wait and see.

What I am rather sure of is the increasing role of platforms in our lives. Platforms that deal with ways to engage with the enormous amount of information we are faced with on a daily basis. We live in a time where the question of; “What is relevant and how does it impact my life?” will be more frequently asked than ever before in the history of our species.

And thus, companies will have to ask themselves how they can be relevant to their consumers.

Google and Twitter jumped to the mark by opening up a phone-to-twitter phone line when they saw the reaction of their users toward what was happening in Egypt. Doing the same they do here, using a mix and match of ‘old’ and ‘new’ technology; enabling the masses.

Whatever you might think of Wikipedia, Twitter, Google, Huffington Post, Mashable, Wikileaks or Facebook; what they do, is creating relevant information for people when and where they want it, it enables them to connect with like-minded individuals, share the information they want to share and allows them to ‘follow’ people they like, think are interesting or the opposite of the two.

So how is this relevant to brands?

Let me show you an example by Greenpeace, who seem on the right track but just missed out on one part in my humble opinion; true engagement.

Their old Rainbow Warrior (1957) has sailed the oceans and will now be put to rest. So they wanted to build a new one. One that holds Greenpeace’ values high and can be seen as a boat with which they will fight the necessary fights over the well-being of the ocean in the future. But Greenpeace is an NGO and gets most of its money from individual donations. So they launched a (very good-looking) campaign (A New Warrior) to try to get people to donate money for the continuation of the Rainbow Warrior saga.

In this quest they have launched a website that enables you to look at the blueprint, construction schedule, progress so far, a donation ‘wall’ (which will be realised on the boat as well) and buying necessities for the boat like a GPS, life-boat, couch or an electronic steering-wheel. Which is a great idea I find.

But why do it halfheartedly? Why not empower the people -who are literally the lifeblood of your organisation, to have a say after they gave you a part of their resources? There are tons of ways to get people more actively engaged with Greenpeace’s cause when you give them the opportunity to do so and become true ambassadors of your cause. Give them the tools they need and they will do the task at hand and help you reach the goals you have been working hard to reach for the last 40 years (congrats Greenpeace btw, and thanks for doing what you do).

Examples? Ok.

Give ‘them’ (the people who invested in your organisation) a say in your agenda by enabling them to co-decide on the course of the boat they ‘co-own’. Greenpeace provides them with a list of possible cases and background info on these cases and let them decide. Surely, this brings a lot of potential ‘unknowns’ into the equation, but it will most definitely lead to higher involvement and commitment to your organisation.This will also lead to them telling their friends about it which will lead to more relevance to their friends (someone I know did this and that) and thereby a bigger crowd for your message.

What does this mean for the organisation? In Greenpeace’s case it would mean they would become a ‘research and execution’ platform with a following of highly involved people supporting their goal and protecting their interest. Which is a great thing to be I’d say. You can’t sink a rainbow -type deal.

There are lots of possibilities for ‘non-NGO’ organisations to engage with their ‘eco-system’ / ‘tribe’  / ‘crowd’ / ‘consumers’ in such a way, yet it seems that we aren’t quite there yet. If I’m honest I see opportunities like these in child-care (yeah really, so much to be won there), for Innocent Drinks, Amnesty International (I know it’s an NGO, but I like them), Simple Shoes, the Cradle to Cradle organisation, Williams F1 Triodos Bank and We Generate (last two are Dutch). Just to name a few.

Peace.

I’ve started calling it the second wave due to the fact that the Industrial Revolution was divided into two parts. Part One was about the discovery of technology itself, the incredible efficiency of which humans all of a sudden seemed capable of in terms of production.

Part Two came when we started using these discoveries for exploration (physically as well as imaginary) and increasing connectivity between people and places. This resulted in developments such as railroads, the combustion engine and steamboats.

I feel the same has been happening in our Information Age. Despite the fact that it is not called a revolution (but than again maybe that’s more constructive), our world has drastically changed in the last 15 years. My parents, who have grown up with television being a new development, are now checking their email on their HTC and iPhone and are ‘friends’ of mine on Facebook. When at a party with friends, we switch seamlessly between playing someone’s own tunes (made on a music-software downloadable for free), to iTunes, to Spotify, someone’s iPhone, and on to the good old record-player, playing punk from the 70′s, skipping cd’s.

Let me elaborate on my (non-academic) theory of ‘the second wave’.

We are currently finding ourselves in a world which, through technological development, has brought us all so close together, it fits into our pockets. The start of Facebook (biography) and Hyves (Dutch, interview with founder), LinkedIn (interview with founder) in 2004 and the acceptance of Wikipedia as a trustworthy source of knowledge followed by the increased use (and importance) of social media in the media landscape. I believe this is the start of this second wave.

From the start of ARPANET to the point of acceptance of TCP/IP as the standard for ‘the internet’ (a term coined in december 1974), I think we can term this period (74-79) as the start of the Information Era.

What happened in the following decades is the kind of development one also sees when you start living with someone. Remarkable beauty, small irritations, inspiration, resistance of giving up certain boundaries, and slowly but surely a deeper integration of social structures of two entities.

With the arrival of the bigger social media platforms and the enormous flow of information we thereby started to release about ourselves, every social dynamic changes. An example thereof was my post about a guest-lecture by Hill & Knowlton, which got me in the picture with their marketing director and eventually led to being offered a traineeship with them (WPP). Or my friend Omar who after our adventure with Mr. Branson decided to start his platform for ambitious people which now scores over 10K hits a month. Or, Bas Grasmayer who before he finished his thesis became a blogger with Techdirt on future of the music industry.

We have reached a point in which media -and consequently the information-flow it creates, is now so dominant in how we live our lives that it has started to reflect in the ‘grander scheme of things’ in a way never imagined.

It started with WikiLeaks, it went on to bring over a 100,000 students to London in a protest against educational cuts and has now claimed to be the driving force behind the current uprisings in the Arabic world, whereby the happenings in Egypt were even baptised a ‘Twitter revolution’. Which is a ridiculous statement if you’d ask me. (As most of the communication took place through a muslim dating site, if I’m informed correctly.)

People, are waking up. People -quite possibly spurred by their knowledge of what is going on through the increasing amount of information and their increased ability of communication, feel more connected and are thus willing to risk more for what we here in the west consider ‘normal’.

So now what?

We have the power to re-structure and conceptualise the world. It will take a lot of bright minds, positive attitudes and the willingness to look out for others as you would for yourself. But as a civilian, consumer, parent, student, friend and lover, your every move has the potential to reach millions. What if we would rethink our use of the tools now so readily and freely available and decide to use it in a constructive, collaborative manner that enables us to take out the corrupt elements of our societies and create a more equal and honest playing field? Whereby responsibility for other human beings and the planet that gives us all this splendour, is made the highest good?

A small example is the accumulation of what we now call Wikipedia, the creation of Wikipedia cost 2,000,000 hours to build and is watched by 400,000,000 people every month. Which sounds like a lot but if you put that against the 4 hours of TV the average US citizen, day whom count about 300,000,000, watches every, it’s not that hard a sum to make.

Point being, we can together, tackle the problems of global warming, inequality, poverty and rising food-prices. All it takes is cooperation. Because whether or not we like it, and whether or not we feel it, we live on a planet that has X amount of space and X amount of resources which all of us need to sustain ourselves.

I would like to propose a new idea.

Let’s start a movement (petition wise or something) that raises votes to abolish the arms industry. Completely shut it down, I mean, you can’t wage war if there’s no weapons to do so with, and if you still want to, you can go at each other with sticks and knifes or something, no longer bothering innocent people with your bullocks.

The idea to push governments to shut down the investment in weapons and closing down the military seems reasonably impossible and –no doubt, people’ll start calling me a short-sighted idealist again. Then first of I’d like to point them to the philosophical argument of being an idealist (because I agree, I am one, yet not a short-sighted one), which would be idealism is; the philosophical theory that maintains that the ultimate nature of reality is based on mind or ideas.

-So, if a realist would come to me and argue of safety, I’d challenge him or her to quantify safety as an independent entity. Safety is a psychological entity that only exists in ideas or mind. I assure you that by abolishing the weapons industry we will be ‘safer’ as there are lesser external threads on the internal concept of safety. So that’s point one, point two would be that the world is more and more connected, and more and more people seem willing to overcome nationality, background, or ‘cultural heritage’ in favour of collaborating, discussing and creating a world that is ‘one’. Making it increasingly viable to –well, just give it a try. Governments are to be (especially in countries that claim to be democratic) subject to the people, and this would be an interesting chance to see whether or not we truly do live in a democracy.

Who’s with me?

Join the facebook group please.

The thing is, I want to be ‘for’ things. I want to say yes, I want to focus my energy on constructive matters, not destructive. And, knowing the history of protest around ‘global gatherings’, they’re not so constructive. Of course the feeling of unity amongst those who come there to voice the need for stronger measures on the reduction of carbon emissions, the need for a new paradigm in terms of our energy supply in general, and new policies when it comes to the way we interact with ‘Mother Nature’, is one tempting me to go. Yet, I feel its not all. With the ones that dictate the global political debate (US) likely not to even be there, it will be a facade of incompetence.

I truly believe that, within the current economic system (that despite the opportunity that has been around in the last years, still stands and is enforced by governments to keep it the way it is) we would be better of (and closer to change) if we’d focus our energy on the companies that actually create the pollution and waste. Let’s urge them to make a change, not simply because it’s something we think they should do; but more so because it makes more business sense in general.

See, looking at others to take responsibility is something we have been doing for years and years. Businesses look at the law and look for loopholes. This has been the case since the start of business and business law. When businesses look at their turnover, and see change, they move.

Carrotmob is an initiative that has shown this.

“Buy Nothing Day” (a facebook initiated ‘day’) is another one.

By keeping our focus on the government that are dependent on business for their income we will not likely see the change we would like to see. Yet, we need them in order to get the ‘wholesome’ effect.

We are stuck in a web of economic numbers, we are all, whether we like it or not, dependent on this web for our livelihood. So though we might not agree with it, we will have to either completely dissolve the current system (to which I have little hope, nor do I think it will benefit increasing equality amongst the people of the world) or we need to get ourselves together, pick the system apart and reshape it the way we would like to see it. If we want to get rid of corporate influence in our society, we will have to group ourselves, create platforms upon which individuals are enabled to work in a cell-based structure, if we want companies to be environmentally sustainable, let’s ‘reward’ those who are and disregard those who are not, and most of all, let’s stay away from negativity. And if we want our energy supply to be fully sustainable, let’s do so by voting ‘green’ into parliaments, the energy issue has to be resolved from two sides.

In Copenhagen, having lived there, we will see a huge amount of ‘riot-police’, these kind men and women will be pulled in from all over the country and are not properly trained to ‘control’ huge crowds. This means they will be afraid once the people start buzzing, atmosphere get a little grim (which is also not very smart) and they will charge. This will be widely read in mainstream media and thus will ‘once more’ show that anti-globalists, anarchists, environmental protesters and however else we are being catagorised, are a bunch of aggressors that only scream about change and do not wish it to be constructive.

That sucks, because I know for a fact that we do want it to be constructive, we simply need to organise ourselves, form collectives, create platforms and be patient. It took the world 150 years to organise the world the way it is currently organised, and if we want to change it, lets do so cell-based, de-centralised and thought-through.

Peace and love.

We’ve all heard about the Millennium Development Goals of the UN. It so happens, I’m not a big fan of institutions such as the UN. Especially not when, though it is a ‘voluntary’ organisation for countries to join, and establish somewhat of a ‘world-government’ type deal (or so is my interpretation), it’s regarded as a ‘second-choice’ in terms of political decision time. (remember the Iraq War?)

Anyway, the UN also has some good ideas. They have, in the years running up to 2000, decided to form a set of goals that are for the betterment of mankind in general (eradication of poverty / ensure environmental sustainability / achieve universal primary education / promote gender equality and empower women, for example). This, I find, is a ‘good’ thing, ‘we’ (Westerners) ought to break through the inequality we find in our world which is, for a good deal, maintained through Western behavioural patterns. So; 1-up for the UN.

Now, despite the good efforts, Ban-Ki-Moon, the tribal chief of the UN, has warned the people of the world that because of the economic crisis the goals are under pressure (see the full report here). Yeah. Right. The eradication of poverty for instance, in 15 years, can indeed be done, but the simple fact of the matter is that as long as western companies (and thus governments) still make money on this form of inequality, this will not be achieved easily (remember the ‘secondary choice’-thing). Same with the gender equality idea. This is not even achieved in ‘developed’ countries. Next to that there’s this counter movement of ‘new-feminism’ in which gender equality became some sort of chauvinistic idea, but I’ll leave that to your own judgment. In my opinion men and women are not equal, yet, should be given equal rights and men and women should be judged on their individual qualities when it comes to whatever it is you’d like to judge them on. Let’s be happy men and woman are not equal, it would be a monotonous world.

As it is, maybe we should look around and see what small initiatives are doing, and how you and I as individuals could support those initiatives. In this case, for instance, by supporting them in an effort to win an award where UN money is given away, in name of the Millennium Awards. (Because like it or not, the money will go somewhere anyway.) And I’ve got just the NGO to do that for!

As part of ‘doing my part’ I’ve joined Satara to assist in the further development of their strategy, communication and business-wise. Satara works on Ghandi’s philosophy “We need to be the change we wish to see.” We’re currently working on a spring/summer 2010 collection, produced in India, empowering women that are manufacturing the collection (by hand). We do this through paying honest wages, education and setting up a more secure social system. Satara’s profit is re-invested in a local education project in order to stimulate and enable local parents to send their kids to school instead of being forced to be dependent on their income to feed the family. (read the whole story here)

This is Moniek van Erven, telling you the story of Satara;

You can help out by voting for Satara both on- and offline;

Vote online via the following link.

Or via text-message;

Text ‘nhd satara’ to 4999 (in the Netherlands) (remember the single space between nhd & satara)

You can find more on the UN Millennium Awards here (Dutch) and here (English).

As it is, this was shameless self-promotion, but it’s for a good cause, hope you’ll help us out! Thanks in advance.

Love and Peace.

The idea of our wasteful behaviour was brought to my attention (once more) by a (new) friend of mine, who was talking about a documentary about how big corporations don’t wish to sell their products under a certain price, in order to maintain the year-long efforts in building up a reputation that would justify profits margins of 70-190%. It happens to be the case that I wrote a thesis on the relationship between a company’s reputation and it’s general ‘corporate social responsibility’. And I can’t help but feel the hope sink towards the bottom of my being, when big corporations such as Samsung (here/here examples of how they are ‘good citizens’) for instance, seem to think that throwing money around in a seemingly altruistic fashion will cover their ‘efforts to maintain a price worthy reputation’. (or something of that kind, I am not entirely sure how to name this kind of behaviour)

These efforts consist of systematically wasting brand new products that are not sold and thus dumped, dissembled and partially burned. We see DVD players, HD TV’s and MP3 players go down in price and most people get happy, as it is now available for a bigger public. Yet, for the corporations that manufacture these products (being ‘stock-market-companies’), these kind of ‘free-market’ dynamics create a problem. A reputation problem. The products that are sold under the general price-level of the company will give the brand a ‘bad name’ or so it the thought. But destroying the products, where we ‘the people’ don’t see or hear anything about it, will only show up in the books, somewhere deep and buried.

She also talked about fashion-labels ‘un-stitching’ their labels and shipping their clothing off to ‘development-countries’. This I see as somewhat of an attempt to do something about the unequal dynamics in our world, not too bad. But also, here we again, talk about a matter driven by the fear of ‘losing face’, but mostly, bad business-strategy. If, apparently your product is not good enough to sell your stock (or mis-priced, mis targetted or whatever), perhaps you should thing about what and how you produce, how you market it, and how you price it.

But I’m drifting off.

Apples.

Do you eat the center part of an apple? If not, why not? Have you ever tried, or do you simply don’t eat the center part of an apple because you were taught to do so? (when mum was still citting the apples for you and gave them to you in one of those brightly coloured bowls, yesh, we’ve all been there) Just think about it. Why would you not eat the center part of an apple, it’s tasty, it’s healthy, and ehm, it gives eating an apple yet ANOTHER dimension. It’s great.

To illustrate what you could do to stop the wastefulness of our Western being. I don’t want to ask people to simply start ignoring red-lights when you think it to be safe you see. It’s in the little things, and starts with yourself. Anyway, I’m off eating an apple.

Love and peace.

As I understand it, banks have been the major factor in destabilising the current world economy. This, of course, cannot have been done without the help of our dear governments, in terms of law and regulation of this world economy of ours, yet, the lobby and money thrown at them (the government), is, no doubt, a circumstance to be taken into account. From what I heard, Goldman Sachs was one of the financial institutions that was under a lot of pressure and almost went bankrupt, hence they received a ($10 billion) bailout (because the system is never wrong, it’s ‘the market’ that suffers from global tendencies that arise out of nothing). Than, they were among one of the first to repay this ‘bail-out’. One could argue, look at those good guys, they want to ride the bicycle without side-wheels. Yes, one could indeed say this. One could also argue, that perhaps, they feared the government looking over their shoulder and saying, “Ehm, perhaps you guys should change your ways”, perhaps. Who knows what they were thinking, I sure don’t.

What I do know, is that I find it very interesting that in a time like this a bank, that was so severely hit by the economic turmoil of the last year-and-a-half, can make a $2.7 billion profit, and before that, had already decided to set aside $11.4 billion, for salaries and bonuses, adding up to $386.400,- on average for every employee, secretaries included (how sweet, but what about the cleaners?). What I also know is that, for me, this whole spectacle brings forth a funny feeling in my tummy.

The thing is, not so much that is seems to happen, cause well, it does. The thing to me, more so, is the fact that it happens, and the lack of response from the world. It is all just accepted, as if it is normal. The money, according to David Vinair, came from “risks taken in turbulent markets and speculation in stocks and currency” besides that, “there is less competition”. (There’s that funny feeling again) I mean, I’m not doing business with the kind people of Goldman Sachs, because well, I barely have money to start with, yet, my mind feels slightly numb at reading this kind of news, and the powerful institutions we have looking out for our well-being (yes, I mean governments), seem to sit back and take it, because their power only goes to a certain point.

Fair enough.

Oh wait, no, it’s not that fair. Small business-owners go bankrupt, starters on the housing-markets can’t get mortgages because banks are sitting on their money, people loose their jobs and people who had a mortgage are now increasingly finding trouble to repay the money and keep their house.

Can anyone tell me why we accept this? I’m lost.

Peace and love.

The more or less part is based on the fact I’d like to address travel. Because I’m traveling to India in, ehm, 17 hours. After I had finished my thesis (according to me, not my coordinator), I was stoked and annoyed with the fact (very dualist I am aware), and decided to get out of the country for a while, as it has been a very intense last 10 months. I’ll leave out the details, you’ll just have to believe me. (BTW, really stoked about the visual identity of Cradle of Design I received just now, looks great and will be ‘alive’ August)

Alright, travel.

The thing is, I’m quite surprised about the reactions people have been giving me about ‘just leaving’. A selection; “Wow, you’re nuts” (that’s not a very original one though, and not necessarily concerning the travel part), “How do you afford that?”, “I wish I could do that”. I think you can, both afford it, and do it (Yes we can type deal, but than for real).

First of all, it doesn’t have to be all that expensive; put some time in finding a ticket. I found a ticket for 420,- euro’s two-way. (here) It took me 3 days and the great help of Femke, but still. Than, I became a member of an organisation called WWOOF which is an NGO that enables us Western kids to really engage in ‘cultural understanding’. You work on an organic farm in a local, small community, 5 hours a day, in exchange for food and a spot to sleep. This ‘work’ ranges from building sheds, milking cows, teaching kids English, sweeping the place, cooking or planting seeds. It gives you the opportunity to get a taste of the local community and learn about organic agriculture (no use of chemicals and/or pesticides). Next to that the people (seem to be) (are) very willing to teach you things such as yoga and/or meditation, local cuisine, language and culture.

The thing is, besides that it’s very cheap travel, it also helps you to not just ‘do’ a country (the typical backpacker-attitude where we all just gather on the other side of the world and get wasted on both alcohol and hallucinates (don’t get me wrong, nothing wrong with that, but you can do at home too) but really visit a country and gives you an opening into a culture in order to ‘live’ it (although for a very short time). (articles on ‘vagabond-travel’ here & here)

Next to that, the I wish I could, is, for me anyway, just an excuse. I’ve once learned, at some point, that if something scares the living shit out of you, it’s probably because you haven’t got a clue what to expect and it’s easier to just let it sit there in your mind and move along the steady path of current life. In my opinion, this results in people (I’ve met loads of them and so have you I guess), saying, oh yeah, but you’re young, easy life, etc. Well, sure, I am young, sure, I have an easy life, but I’m also building a company, I’ve also graduated, I’ve also done loads of network building in the last months, some projects etc. ect. It’s not an excuse not to do other stuff. If you feel like leaving for a while, do it. Life is too short to have to say; “Oh, I wish I had done this, or that.” It’s a choice, sure, but well, if you feel you ought to do something, go f&%^* do it. The only time is now and if you have the opportunity, grab it. Don’t be afraid of things you don’t know, all learning comes with pains and gains, and scary things are most likely the ones that’ll teach you most.

I think we can all agree on the idea of life being a journey, and I found this quote from Vonnegut the other day;

“Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God.”

Now, I don’t necessarily believe in the monotheistic view upon God or anything (more so that it is all one, including all of us, which in itself is monotheistic again, circle, circle, let’s talk about that some other time), but the opportunities arising in our lives are too often past by and left alone, which is a bloody shame.

For now, I wish you all love and peace, hope to see you upon return, take it easy.