Those of you who have either read “The Shift Age” or have heard me speak about the Shift Age, know that the accelerating global electronic connectedness is one of the three forces that has, is and will continue to reshape our world.  There are now 4 billion cell phone subscribers in the world.  Facebook has more that 200 million users.  Twitter is approaching 20 million users and all these numbers are increasing every day.

There is no longer any time, distance or place in human communication. That both transforms reality and creates new realities and opportunities.  It is as though human communication is completely fluid and like water, can flow anywhere without boundaries, channels or hierarchies.  Humans can interact with other humans in ways never before experienced in history.  Our connectedness is a force in and of itself.

What has occurred these past few weeks in Iran will be regarded as one of the events in the geopolitical world that is both a confirmation of this new force and a signpost to our future global orientation.

Even a month ago, it would have seemed hard for most people to imagine that Twitter tweets would be used as news sources about a major event in the New York Times, ...]]> [Note:  This is a column reprinted from the current "Shift Age Newsletter" as it is very timely and has already received a lot of positive comment.  If you are not yet a subscriber of the newsletter, please go here and click on FREE subscription]

Those of you who have either read “The Shift Age” or have heard me speak about the Shift Age, know that the accelerating global electronic connectedness is one of the three forces that has, is and will continue to reshape our world.  There are now 4 billion cell phone subscribers in the world.  Facebook has more that 200 million users.  Twitter is approaching 20 million users and all these numbers are increasing every day.

There is no longer any time, distance or place in human communication. That both transforms reality and creates new realities and opportunities.  It is as though human communication is completely fluid and like water, can flow anywhere without boundaries, channels or hierarchies.  Humans can interact with other humans in ways never before experienced in history.  Our connectedness is a force in and of itself.

What has occurred these past few weeks in Iran will be regarded as one of the events in the geopolitical world that is both a confirmation of this new force and a signpost to our future global orientation.

Even a month ago, it would have seemed hard for most people to imagine that Twitter tweets would be used as news sources about a major event in the New York Times, The Globe and Mail and on CNN and other news channels.  This has now happened with the Iranian crisis.  The autocratic theocrats of Iran sent journalists packing – and beat them if they didn’t, jammed broadcast signals, and tried to shut down web sites.  They were largely successful in these efforts.  However, due to twitter, facebook, cell phone videos and email the world has been kept informed of the brutality that is going on in Iran.  Here the water metaphor is perfect as it always finds the cracks, the holes in the dyke, the weak spot in the levee, the porous part of the structure and flows through it.

I have several followers from Iran on Twitter.  I did my part by tweeting that the world was in fact watching, that their messages were getting out and that their struggles were known and supported. It was interesting how often such tweets, both mine and others, were RT (retweeted).  This is another new unique experience, people feeling participatory in a struggle half a world away through personal communications.

It is clear what lies ahead for Iran.  Autocratic governmental power and centralized authority kept in place through brutality, misinformation, xenophobia and false prophets will ultimately collapse.  This is particularly true when the educated, the young and the affluent are the ones in the streets being beaten.  As long as the current leaders are in power in Iran there will be an exodus of the best and brightest out of the country – if they are allowed to leave.  These leaders are so insular and consumed with maintaining their power that they do not realize the new reality of global electronic connectedness on a personal level.

If internal political upheaval does not bring these leaders down, the tidal waves of personal communications due to this electronic and immediate connectedness will.  The nation state structure cannot defend against it anymore.

A year ago, on the syndicated program “First Business”, when oil was trading in the $50-55 range, I predicted that oil would go over $80 during 2007, which, at the time was a contrary view, as oil had been down trending for several weeks at that point.  

As a futurist, it is my job to look into the future and try to discern what might happen in the months, years and decades ahead.  I look at patterns and large dynamics that translate into macro trends that then translate into specific developments.  It is an odd sensation, but whenever any of what I have predicted becomes reality, it feels as though I have already experienced it.  When oil crossed the $100 price barrier these past few days, it was as though I had already experienced that.  My reaction?  Of course it went over $100 a barrel, what’s the big deal?

The long term trend in oil and gas prices is ever upward.  I do think that the trading range for oil for the next year at least will be $80-125.  ...]]> The price of oil topped $100 on January 2 and again on January 3.  During these past two days I have received emails and phone calls from regular readers, complimenting me on my correct prediction. As I wrote here more than two months ago, the price of oil would not only cross the $100 price barrier, but would trade in the $80-125 range for the next year.  

A year ago, on the syndicated program “First Business”, when oil was trading in the $50-55 range, I predicted that oil would go over $80 during 2007, which, at the time was a contrary view, as oil had been down trending for several weeks at that point.  

As a futurist, it is my job to look into the future and try to discern what might happen in the months, years and decades ahead.  I look at patterns and large dynamics that translate into macro trends that then translate into specific developments.  It is an odd sensation, but whenever any of what I have predicted becomes reality, it feels as though I have already experienced it.  When oil crossed the $100 price barrier these past few days, it was as though I had already experienced that.  My reaction?  Of course it went over $100 a barrel, what’s the big deal?

The long term trend in oil and gas prices is ever upward.  I do think that the trading range for oil for the next year at least will be $80-125.  There are few if any situations I can see where the price could fall below $80.  However there are some situations that could take the price up over $125.  The rebel uprising in Nigeria, which was the cause for the breaking of the price barrier, is just an example.  What if there was a successful terrorist attack on a major oil pipeline in the Middle East?  What if Mexico or Russia, or Canada, all major exporters of oil decided to export less as internal market demands forced them to keep more of the output for their own countries?  That is already occurring in Iran.

What might happen if the dollar continues to decline against the Euro?  The headquarters of OPEC is in Vienna.  What if OPEC made the decision to switch the price of oil to be benchmarked to the Euro?  Even if that radical step were not taken, a declining dollar will force the price up, in dollars.  Euro economies will not experience an increase in price as the dollar has declined.  The truly powerful upward demand pressure on the price comes from China and India whose currencies are less tied to the dollar than the U.S. would like them to be. 

As I will discuss in my annual predictions next week, 2008 will be the year when the concept of peak oil will move into the larger awareness of the public.  A great number of scientists and energy experts believe, as do I, that the world is now passing through peak oil.  When the understanding of this probability sinks in it will trigger some oil producing companies to start to manage sales for the long term.  This could well drive up the price as production will be limited as these countries look for long term revenues.

Of course the great news in the rise in the price of oil is that incredible amounts of investment capital are now flowing into the alternative, renewable energy field.  Now that people in the U.S. and around the world have accepted the fact that oil will most likely never be cheap again, the rush toward alternative energy will accelerate as there will be a perception that large financial investments can be recouped. 

It is gratifying when my predictions about the future prove to be true.  It is one of the reasons you read this column.  I appreciate your readership and will strive to continue to provide you with clear views into the future.  It is my job as a futurist to do so.

In a recent poll conducted by the Democracy Corps, a Democratic group, likely voters, were asked what they thought were the two most important national security priorities for the government over the next few years.  Coming in first, with 42% was reducing dependence on foreign oil. A distant second was combating terrorism at 26%.  Third was the war in Iraq at 25%.  Strengthening America’s military came in at 12%.  This is very interesting to say the least.  It means that the relatively clear connection between oil and terrorism, and the perception that America could at any time be brought to its knees by foreign oil producing states has become the greatest security fear of voters.

One thing that politicians pay attention to is voters.  Once again, the people are leading the politicians when it comes to a common sense view of oil and the world.  It has been clear that since 9/11, when the Bush administration told us that going shopping, instead of a patriotic conservation effort, was the correct reaction to the attack that this group of non-leaders had no stomach for an obvious, common sense energy policy.  Now that the voters say that energy independence is the number one security ...]]> The dramatic increase in gasoline prices over the summer combined with the perception that oil revenues fund terrorism has created a new perception on the need for the U.S. to import oil. It is now becoming clear to a growing number of Americans that dependency on foreign oil compromises our security.

In a recent poll conducted by the Democracy Corps, a Democratic group, likely voters, were asked what they thought were the two most important national security priorities for the government over the next few years.  Coming in first, with 42% was reducing dependence on foreign oil. A distant second was combating terrorism at 26%.  Third was the war in Iraq at 25%.  Strengthening America’s military came in at 12%.  This is very interesting to say the least.  It means that the relatively clear connection between oil and terrorism, and the perception that America could at any time be brought to its knees by foreign oil producing states has become the greatest security fear of voters.

One thing that politicians pay attention to is voters.  Once again, the people are leading the politicians when it comes to a common sense view of oil and the world.  It has been clear that since 9/11, when the Bush administration told us that going shopping, instead of a patriotic conservation effort, was the correct reaction to the attack that this group of non-leaders had no stomach for an obvious, common sense energy policy.  Now that the voters say that energy independence is the number one security issue, even President Bush, along with a slew of other politicians are scrambling to catch up to the electorate.

Since American politicians are so quick to campaign on a strong defense, the electorate is forcing them to become green if they want to get or stay elected.  The vested interests of big oil and their influence on legislators is being trumped by the vested interest of staying in office.  This will ultimately lead to more governmental support of alternative energy, conservation and perhaps even some leadership.  It is interesting that the electorate, as it did in the Dubai Ports phenomenon, has taken over the political conversation and forced policy change.

It will be amusing to see how self-styled ‘hard liners’ on defense will embrace green policies now that it is clearly the most important long-term security issue today. Self reliance, that American virtue so eloquently written about by Emerson in the 1840s, is now the central building block of security policy.  While the electorate now sees this, the key question is what the individuals that make up this body politic will actually do in their lives to lessen dependency on oil.  As I wrote in the last post, I sense that we have moved to a tipping point in the U.S. where energy has moved from a cost category in our minds to an issue of survival, survival of the country and long term, survival of humanity.

Americans may not yet be saying that they will give up their energy based lifestyle, but they are saying that they would like it to be run on something other than oil purchased from other countries.  Imagine how different the world is going to look when petroleum is one of many sources of energy that we use every day.  Imagine the possibility of renewable energy and an America that produces all that it needs. Being self reliant and not funding terrorism.  A transformative vision that is attainable with commitment, innovation, a bit of fear, and leadership. 
 

In speeches I give and in the book I am writing, I call the period from 1985-2005 “The Threshold Decades”, because it is the time that is between what was and what is and will be. In 1985, the values and institutions of the developed nations were still Second Wave or Industrial Age; by 2005 they had become Third Wave or Information Age. During this twenty year period we fully moved into the Information Age. Just think of all the things that came along or occurred during this time: cell phones, Cable TV, numerous communications satellites, the Internet, PC market saturation, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the beginning of the Global Economy and high speed broadband to name just a few significant things. Large organizations were down-sized and lost layers of management. Entrepreneurial companies sprang to life and ...]]> Modern man has moved through three different ages in the last 10,000 years. The Agricultural Age was from around 8,000 BC until the 1700s. The Industrial Age was from the 1700s to the last two decades of the 20th century, when the Information Age began. The great Alvin Toffler referred to these ages as the First Wave, Second Wave and Third Wave. Each wave or age had different economic characteristics. The dominant economic structure in Second Wave societies was a centralized hierarchy. The dominant structure in Third Wave societies are flat networks.

In speeches I give and in the book I am writing, I call the period from 1985-2005 “The Threshold Decades”, because it is the time that is between what was and what is and will be. In 1985, the values and institutions of the developed nations were still Second Wave or Industrial Age; by 2005 they had become Third Wave or Information Age. During this twenty year period we fully moved into the Information Age. Just think of all the things that came along or occurred during this time: cell phones, Cable TV, numerous communications satellites, the Internet, PC market saturation, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the beginning of the Global Economy and high speed broadband to name just a few significant things. Large organizations were down-sized and lost layers of management. Entrepreneurial companies sprang to life and flourished, organizations became flat and dispersed all over the world. The network model largely replaced the centralized hierarchy.

In looking at the current conflict between Israel and Hezbollah I see it, in part, through this filter. The reporting in the main stream media has had several angles. One of the most prominent is the “Israel is fighting a tougher opponent that in the past” or “Israel is meeting stronger resistance than expected” or “Israel is taking much longer to win this time”. This is largely due to the conditioning we have had about the superiority of the Israeli military. Why? Because of the overwhelming victories and the lightening speed in which they achieved them in 1967 and again in 1973. The Six Day War; what a historical oddity!

The difference can, in part, be explained by looking at the conflict through the Wave or Age theory of history. The Israeli military, just like the US military, is a centralized, hierarchical organization formed during the Industrial Age as were all the supremely successful organizations of that age. The Threshold Decades time of 1985-2005 was when that type of organization came up against the newness of the Information Age. When were the great and fast military triumphs of Israel? 1967 and 1973, an Industrial Age time when the Israeli military hierarchy clobbered the Egyptian and Syrian military hierarchies. Hezbollah however, is a flat organization with little or no hierarchy, that is easily dispersed and very mobile. It is a virtual organization. Sound familiar; like you are reading about a new company in one of the new Information Age business magazines? Yes, exactly. As entrepreneurs can operate from anywhere if they have the latest, most powerful technological tools and connectivity, so can a terrorist organization such as Hezbollah operate with the latest technological weaponry of killing and murder.

Hezbollah is an Information Age military organization in its structure, the Israel military is an Industrial Age structured organization. The old model meets the new model. The old rules of engagement meet the new rules of engagement. This is why it is taking Israel longer to ‘win’ this time, though if one values human life, wars are never really won, just ended..