p_c_neary@hotmail.com

Welcome to the Party

Old friends and long-time readers know I really enjoy this Bruce Willis/Die Hard meme:

Post this on Kik, Graham!

It captures that moment when people suddenly find themselves involved in things they never imagined being a part of. Today, let’s welcome the Democrats of Maine to the party, and of course, their new Senate candidate, Graham Platner!

First off, let’s brush aside the silly objections. This may seem obvious to experienced adults, but no, Mr. Planter should not be disqualified from running for office because of things he posted on Reddit (or other social media). I (like many of my college friends) thank God every day that my young adult exploits were NOT captured for a global audience, nor my every inane utterance immortalized by “the internets.” Perhaps comments about rape victims bearing some responsibility, calling FOR political violence, or using the words r*tard or gay as slurs may give some voters pause, but the candidate takes responsibility and apologizes for things he said “during a dark time” in his life, while suffering from PTSD. End of story.

Nor should anyone be overly concerned about the Totenkopf (“Death’s Head”) tattoo he once had on his chest. Does anybody think Graham is a Maine Nazi? Really? Like many a Marine before him, he got (more than) a little drunk and got a tat he thought looked “badass.” If I thought for a second he supported National Socialism, that would be different. I don’t, because he doesn’t.

What about his more recent infidelity? In this day and age–that being the age of Trump–it’s hard to argue infidelity is disqualifying, even if recent. His wife defends him, and suggests they’re in counseling. Sounds like they are addressing the issue, so what’s your complaint?

Maybe it’s the allegations of boorish or perhaps physically aggressive behavior towards women? These are contested, and while they suggest a not very healthy view of the opposite sex, again, is that even a thing anymore? Now we can lay the #BelieveAllWomen movement to rest once and for all, as #Only BelieveWhenItsPoliticallyConvenient just doesn’t work, does it?

There are many who criticize candidate Platner’s working-man credentials. Yes, he is a member of what passes for royalty in Maine, as his grandfather was and his parents still are, frankly, rich. He went to several exclusive boarding schools, the least expensive of which cost over $10,000 a year. His Dad did indeed “buy” him a house with a cash loan of unspecified terms. His Mom bought him the company (literally an oyster boat) he now runs, and her restaurant is the sole purchaser of his oyster take. He and his wife live off his tax-free, full military disability retirement (currently US $48,000 annually). While he’s in no danger of becoming homeless, he is also not personally wealthy.

He deserves credit for honorably serving his country in war, and suffering PTSD as a result. It would help his case measurably if more of his close war-time Marines came forward to vouch for him, but perhaps that is planned for the campaign. He has undeniable charisma: when he speaks on the stump about the system being rigged against the average citizen, you can see the crowd warming to him. His stated policy positions, while few, are sure to excite the progressive left: Medicare for all, dropping support for Israel, higher taxes on the rich, citizenship for illegal/undocumented aliens. But his personae cracks all the liberal shibboleths: a gravelly-voiced, profane guy with a barrel chest and huge biceps, swearing when necessary and comfortably politically incorrect.

As you can see, Graham Platner has his faults, as any candidate does. So what makes his candidacy so alarming? Democrats respond to all of his questionable traits with a single word: Trump. It’s almost like Platner is running against Trump, not Senator Susan Collins. But he’s not. He’s running against one of the most decent, hard-working, honest Senators in American history. I had the honor of briefly working with Senator Collins when planning an event when I was in the Executive Branch. A mutual acquaintance told me to give her a call, and gave me a number. I called–expecting to get a staffer–but the Senator’s unmistakable voice came over the line instead! She was gracious and helpful and down-to-earth . . . and not just in the political way some can summon, as I was clearly in no position to vote for her or help her. She was, and is, the genuine article.

While Democrats once hailed her as the type of moderate who might limit the damage of the Trump era, her vote to approve Trump’s nomination of Brett Kavanaugh led directly to the repeal of Roe vs Wade (which she regrets). Little mentioned is the fact she has voted for all of President Obama’s and Biden’s Supreme Court nominees, too, and against Trump’s nomination of Amy Coney Barrett (on procedural grounds). Moderates are valued only moderately, I suppose. Now Collins’ Senate seat is hot, in order to “regain” the Senate for the Democratic party. For what? Will a one- or two-seat Democratic majority have a major influence on Trump’s final two years, when he won’t be impeached and seems intent on ignoring the Congress in toto?

So the Democratic Party has decided that President Trump has reset the bar on politics, morally and ethically. As long as a candidate is not much worse than Trump’s predations, he or she is acceptable. I have long argued that the way to restore honor, to embrace decency, to maintain a shred of dignity is to continue to insist on those standards, not lower them in order to win. It bears repeating: a moral standard is not lost when it is first broken; it is lost when it is at last abandoned. Our laws against murder still stand despite being violated daily. But once we begin to say, “well, it’s not really murder if . . . ” or “someone else did it first” that morality is truly lost.

The people of Maine have a democratic choice. On one hand, they have a proven commodity who made (in some voters’ minds) a bad choice, and one she has admitted to. On the other hand, they have a political novice with a life-long history of bad choices, some very recently. And he hasn’t admitted to them. He denies knowing about the Totenkopf tattoo, despite being a “history buff” whose former date said she learned about it from him. He has never explained why he chose the “dating” site called Kik, which is known as a hang-out for grown men seeking teenage girls (there is no evidence he did so) when there are other, more popular sites for adultery. And when he posted a towel-only clad selfie on that site, he strategically held his cell phone to block the tattoo, why? He said he got his home due to the VA loan program, but he has never taken a VA loan, because his dad loaned him the money. Most of these issues are trivial, until you consider what a serial liar might say in the same circumstances.

I don’t blame Graham Platner for trying. I don’t even blame the Democratic Party for wanting to win the Senate. I do blame anyone who suggests the way to bring American politics back to normal is to win-at-all-costs and accept lower standards. The only solace here is we no longer have to listen to the hypocrisy. The GOP was once the party of family values, but they surrendered that position to win. Now the Democrats have done the same. Welcome to the party!

Review: Magnifica Humanitas

The Holy Father Pope Leo XIV just published his first encyclical, entitled Magnificent Humanity (in Latin, above). It’s a long read, coming in at 42,000 words, so here’s a few things I’ve gleaned from my initial study of the document.

It is worth noting the provenance of both the Pope’s choice of Leo as his Papal name, and the subject of this encyclical. Robert Francis Prevost has confirmed he chose the name Leo in part to recall the last Pope so-named, Leo XIII. That Pope published a very important encyclical entitled Rerum Novarum (“On New Things”) in 1891. That document decried the atheistic, inhumane end-states of socialism, communism, and laissez-faire capitalism. It demanded a living wage for the working class, humane working conditions, and support for families, while decrying all forms of exploitation. For those wondering what effects a Papal encyclical can have, the modern concerns for the working class can largely be tied back to his authoritative document.

In his encyclical, Leo XIV consciously cites his predecessor’s work, and calls out the technological challenges facing humanity today, much as the industrial revolution challenged the earlier world. To illustrate the challenge, Leo offers twin biblical analogies: the tower of Babel and the restoration of Jerusalem. In the first circumstance, men chose to honor themselves and become self-sufficient, masters of their own destiny, resulting in division and disorder. In the second, the Jews returning to the ruins of Jerusalem worked together to jointly rebuild their city in a display of common good. Technology is only a tool, to be used for good or evil: what type of future do we want to build with AI?

Pope Leo begins with a review of Catholic Social Doctrine from Rerum Novarum to the present. Those who see Catholicism as a set of cultural “don’ts” will find this part of the encyclical an eye-opening list of Popes, documents, and teachings that directly affect the lives of the common man and woman: the absolute necessity to freely associate (ie., unionize), to keep one’s earnings (private property), to care for those less fortunate, to be treated fairly and not simply as a consumer or producer, but as a human being. While the Church explicity rejects socialism or communism, it likewise counsels that unregulated markets or simple majoritarian democracy can produce their own evils.

From this review, the encyclical recalls five principles of Catholic Social Doctrine which must drive our approach to the AI technological challenge:

The common good, that is rules and actions which allow all to flourish
The universal destination of goods, to be shared by all
Subsidiarity, described as solving issues at the lowest, or most local, level first
Solidarity, or the responsibility for all to be involved
Social justice, allowing all to lead dignified lives.

Only after all this does the Pope begin to address how this well-developed set of doctrines apply to the artificial intelligence revolution.

“So-called artificial intelligences do not undergo experiences, do not possess a body, do not feel joy or pain, do not mature through relationships and do not know from within what love, work, friendship or responsibility mean. Nor do they have a moral conscience, since they do not judge good and evil, grasp the ultimate meaning of situations, or bear responsibility for consequences. They may imitate language, behavior and analytical skills, or even simulate empathy and understanding, but they do not understand what they produce, for they lack the affective, relational and spiritual perspective through which human beings grow in wisdom.” –Chapter III, Section 99

Pope Leo specifies that AI and the larger technological revolution must be harnessed for the good of mankind, not exploited for the few at the risk to the many. Here he highlights:

the search for truth in public life. Everyone must commit to the development of shared truth, since truth is the basis for community. Truth is neither relative nor personal, but a basis for communication and communion.
education in the digital environment. Youth must come to understand education is not a series of tests or qualifications to pass, but an extended period of hard work and experience leading to knowledge. Families, schools, and communities must work together to ensure the real education of our youth.
the transformation of work. Work is not a necessary evil, but a fundamental aspect of human life necessary for dignity. Charity to the less fortunate is a necessary but insufficient response; work is the path to maturity and dignity.
the fragility of families. The family is the first and foremost common good. Technology must not undermine the family or it will damage the social fabric of the community.
new forms of slavery. The digital age poses new challenges where technology is directly optimized to enslave its users, or the system itself demands slave-like conditions for the materials necessary for its maintenance.

“More gravely, the pervasive technocratic paradigm in which we are immersed, and that is amplified by the digital revolution and AI, threatens to normalize an anti-human vision. In that vision, the fullness of life is equated with having more, reducing weakness, eliminating uncertainty and exerting total control. When efficiency becomes the ultimate measure of value, human beings are tempted to see themselves as a project to be optimized rather than as persons called to relationship and communion.” –Chapter III, section 112

In the final section, the Pope turns to the issue of international relations in the AI era. He criticizes the return of “political realism” in the notion that power, not charity, is the ultimate determinant between peoples and states. He insists human beings must not pass along the immense power of life-or-death decisions to autonomous systems. In a seemingly throw-away line that has received much attention, he states, “Today, more than ever, without prejudice to the right to self-defense in the strictest sense, it is important to reaffirm that the ‘just war’ theory, which has all too often been used to justify any kind of war, is now outdated.” Leo is not rejecting the Just War theory first promulgated by Saint Augustine; Leo is an Augustinian, for Heaven’s sake. He is decrying the manipulation of Just War doctrine to provide a justification for any war. To further the point, he just put Just War theory on the table as a discussion topic at an extraordinary consistory of the College of Cardinals later this month, so stay tuned!

This encyclical does not contain specific policy proposals for the topics it covers. Those proposals are rightfully the realm of our elected representatives; in Catholic terms, they are prudential, not theological issues. Rather, it introduces the principals all should invoke in developing our policies and rules for artificial intelligence. Like Rerum Novarum so many years ago, it is clear-eyed look at the promises and dangers of technology in a rapidly changing global environment.

Let’s pray Magnifica Humanitas has as great and lasting effect as its predecessor.

Cranbrook, Kent

How to describe the boxed area of Southeast England, with London and the Thames on the north and the sea on the other sides? It’s often referred to as the garden of England, but here’s a more emblematic analogy: The Shire. Yes, from J.R.R. Tolkein’s tale of hobbits, dwarves, elves and others. The hobbits live in The Shire, a bucolic farmland of hard-working, fun-loving little people with hearts of gold, endless appetites, and steel spines. The Shire represents a pre-industrial idyll of England, standing athwart the grime and poverty of the coming industrial revolution.

Cranbrook is a small town that fancies itself the capital of the Weald, an Old English term referring to this vast woodland area. It’s a teeny capital: just a few streets, only one real intersection, not even a stop sign, less a traffic light. We’re staying on High Street (American translation: Main Street), about a block from the all the action, that is, the intersection. There is a fine collection of pubs and restaurants, all terribly quaint, a grocery co-op immediately behind the house, and walking trails and nature reserves galore.

First Alicante, then Madrid, then London, now (wait for it) . . . Cranbrook? One of these things is not like the others, as they used to sing on Sesame Street. What are we doing here? Last year, I promised my dear wife we would get a dog sometime during the year. As the year wore on, and we looked at our travel plans (including the near-future ones), Judy came to the conclusion we simply couldn’t get a dog right now. We’re traveling a lot, because we still can, but soon a day will come when we can’t (travel, that is). So she forwent her immediate dog fancy.

In exchange, she countered with a novel idea: perhaps we could rent a dog. Not literally, but figuratively. We joined an international house-sitting website which matches people wiling to take care of other’s pets in exchange for staying in the owner’s home, free. No money exchanges hands, but the owner gets a vacation free of worry about their pet and the pet-sitter gets to “live in” rather than just visit a new place. I readily agreed, as long as we could fit it into our existing plans.

Judy started applying for “sits” in the UK in June, as we had plans for Alicante already set, and we just held off on scheduling our return flight, which we were using points to fly on Virgin Airways, Heathrow to Los Angeles. But we were planning months early, and many people don’t even post their requests until a few weeks out. We had no nibbles, and were going to go ahead and close out the idea, when we saw a sit in lovely rural Cranbrook, Kent. Not only that, it was two weeks long (longer than most, which are a week-to-ten days) and gave us just enough time to visit Madrid and London on the way from Alicante. Best of all, the dogs we would be sitting were Vizslas, the breed we owned for almost thirty years! This was a dog-fix extraordinare for Judy! We applied, were interviewed online, and finally got the sit, partly because we were so darn enthusiastic about just sitting the dogs. The owners were telling us all about the charm of the area (selling us), and we were “that’s nice, we just want to be with your dogs!”

Our “rental” Vizslas, demonstrating one of their two modes: indoor inactive

So here we are in the Shire with Toffee and Treacle! Treacle is thirteen years old, so she’s limited to shorter walks around the local nature reserve, or up the High Street to the Church and back. Toffee is only six, and she’s the type of dog, if you tied a treat on a string hanging from a stick in front of her snout, she could walk the Camino de Santiago, in a week. Probably need a few extra treats.

Things are very quiet here during the week. We have adapted easily to the laid back pace, which revolves around the dogs’ eating and exercise schedule. On the weekend, things get pretty busy, as tourists and big city types abscond from London in search of the pretty English countryside, which is what the Weald offers in abundance. Better still, it’s bloom season, and everybody seems to have roses or other perennials adorning the outside of their cottages.

The heat wave which chased us from London moved on, and we moved out to cooler climes, so outside of a hot sun in the middle of the afternoon, the climate is very comfortable. We have the windows full open all night, which sometimes necessitates a duvet on the bed. Remember, I told you the English haven’t discovered air conditioning yet! Perhaps with global warming this newfangled technology will become a local fashion.

Inside the pub at The George for our 44th anniversary brunch

Weekends require a longer walk with Toffee, who seems to know her way around the local forests quite well. I was navigating using AllTrails, an app I have found most useful for such things while traveling, while Toffee kept stopping at various crossings, indicating which way I should go. She may be a local, but I had GPS. Between us, we navigated several miles of dense woodland and returned safely.

Things we noticed during this Spain & England visit? England is way more expensive. I expected it in London, but even out here in the countryside, groceries, pints at the pub, and restaurant meals are $$$$. I spent £33 on a glorified chicken sandwich and fries the other day at a local pub, and yes, that’s almost US $45! The Tube in London is still cheap, there are good free museums, and you can shop around and find less expensive meals, but England in general is much more expensive than Spain, or even the US.

You have to love the English trail system. Every forest, every reserve, and even the farmlands have public rights-of-way that allow you to stay off the roads and wander from town to town. Which is a good thing, because the local roads are narrow, people drive fast, and they always seem to be on the wrong side (sorry, couldn’t resist. It’s my response to being told I ‘had an American accent.’). The trails themselves vary between trodden dirt paths in the forest to paved and maintained paths in some meadows. Whatever their condition, they are a true delight and a national resource one must enjoy when out and about.

The Spanish appeared younger, happier and healthier than the English we met. It’s a gross generalization (is there any other kind?) but an accurate one for our experiences this trip. Perhaps it’s just an artifact of where we visited and stayed, but maybe not. Almost nobody engaged us in political discussions, with the exception of our dog-sit host: the husband and I had a long talk about the Trump phenomenon and Sir Keir’s problems at #10 Downing Street, and it was all quite pleasant. I have always found Europeans to be quite happy to talk about their own politics when they meet an American who shows interest. Certainly everybody we met was welcoming.

As we walked the dogs in the nature reserve trail the other day, Judy said she was “ready to go home” and I agree. The cruise, the time in Spain, Madrid & London, and the Shire have each been very enjoyable, but we’re ready to get back to Mexico, where the locals assure me the rainy season just started with a big thunderstorm!

London calling

You may have heard rumors of travel nightmares in Europe because of the roll out of the EU’s new Entry/Exit System (EES). It’s a biometric system designed to replace stamping passports, so it is a form of progress, if done right. Sadly, this is the EU, so it’s not been done right. Right would be capturing your fingerprints and face scan either online or once at an entry point, then speeding you through automated gates every time hence. Instead, the EU is sending all non-Schengen passengers through the same entry point, which is causing long delays, so long, that passengers are missing their flights, whether they had previously enrolled or not.

The title? Just an excuse to link to The Clash

Forewarned, we arrived at Madrid Barajas airport four hours early for our early evening flight to London Heathrow. First problem, British Airways wouldn’t allow us to check our bag until less than three hours before the flight. Unable to check our bag, we couldn’t head through security, let alone customs and immigration. At the designated time we dropped off the bag and quickly passed through the security lines into the secure area. Thinking we were in the clear, since we were at departure gates, we started looking for a lounge to while away the time, when it occurred to me (perhaps those years working the US DHS), “we went through security, but not customs and immigration!” How?

Barajas international airport segregates non-Schengen passengers at a remote terminal, and by remote, I mean a five-minute, high-speed rail-line remote! We arrived at that terminal to find the promised chaos: a massive number of automated checkpoints, only a few people explaining in Spanish, and a mad mix of foreigners trying and being turned away. Luckily, we had enrolled in the EES when we disembarked our transatlantic cruise, so we made our way to an empty kiosk, read in our passports and got our faces confirmed, and moved on. But very many other people were left cycling through different kiosks, unsure of what was happening.

We found an excellent lounge to kill the extra time, and just as things started looking up, British Airways snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. First a forty-five minute take-off delay, then another forty-five minutes after we boarded, because they couldn’t properly load a pallet of non-luggage cargo. Now our early evening arrival was a mid-evening arrival. Okay, at least the sub-two hour flight to Heathrow was uneventful, until the pilot aborted the landing at one hundred meters altitude. For those unfamiliar, that’s about the height of the upper deck at your local stadium. Seems he came in too fast, and this being Heathrow, we were now at the back of the landing queue, costing another thirty minutes. And even then, with a different runway, we made a very fast and hard landing. Safe still beats late, though. We taxied to an empty area and our entire Boeing 777 disembarked to . . . busses. A large, international arrival at a major European hub, on the national airline, and . . . busses? Hmmmm.

The UK created its own new pre-arrival entry system last year, and we enrolled, so we whisked through immigration, but once again many Americans (and others) were caught up in “do you have an ETA?” discussions. Of course our bag was nearly last off the plane, so we dashed to the Heathrow Express and arrived at Paddington station fifteen minutes later, around eleven pm.

We have been visiting London and staying near Paddington for decades. There are several small neighborhoods there where rows of former townhouses have been repurposed into boutique hotels, at about half the going rate for American-style hotels in London. You’ll get a quirky room (our bathroom is up several stairs), no air conditioning, and a full English breakie. And walkable to Paddington, which connects everywhere in London.

You may have rushed past that “no air conditioning” comment. It’s not common in London, and since our time in sunny Spain was a little cooler than anticipated, we were more worried about layers when we emerged from the Tube. Alas, a heat dome settled over the area just in time for our arrival, including the warmest May temperature on record (35 Celsius, 95 Fahrenheit). And London has long records. We had to recall all our travel survival tips, remembering the joy of frequent cold showers, pub stops, and visiting a (outrageously expensive at twenty English pounds-per-person) little cinema for air conditioning (Hint: The Sheep Detectives is great fun!). We made it through the first day of the heat wave that way, but the inability to get any airflow or cooling at night sent me back to find another hotel in the same area, this time with a/c.

And we were lucky, since we have already seen and done all the tourist must-sees/dos. We narrowed our agenda down to evening hours, or added in all those breaks and stops. For example, we took in an evening performance of a new Sherlock! production at the Regents Park open air theater, which would have been dreadful for the matinee.

We planned a picnic in Kensington Gardens, but instead of building it ourselves, we simply strolled into a Marks & Spencer and picked up all the necessaries in a few well-organized minutes. Pro-tip: we always travel with small, packable rain coats, which make an expedient picnic blanket. Add in a great public park with much shade, and Bob’s your uncle!

Sunday we trekked to Marylebone to visit Saint James Catholic church at Spanish Place, a Gothic structure with a lot of history. The church survived because it was bequeathed to the Spanish government and gained immunity from the back-and-forth persecutions of the English Reformation. We just enjoyed hearing a Mass in English for a change.

A short walk away we reserved our first Sunday Roast at a pub called The Prince Regent. It’s an English tradition to serve roast beef with Yorkshire pudding, roast vegetables, and a sticky toffee pudding for Sunday brunch. Somehow we had heretofore missed out on it, and it was delicious.

We arranged mid-morning tickets to the special exhibition of works by Francisco de Zurbarán at the National Gallery. Having seen some of the Spanish master’s work at the Prado, it was great to find a more complete collection spanning all his work in London.

This final painting is quite unique: it features a pensive Virgin Mary looking on at Jesus as a young man who has cut his finger on a crown of thorns he wove. Jesus seems more curious than pained, but Mary clearly suffers a premonition.

Right next door, we had lunch in the crypt cafe under St. Martins-in-the-fields, a favorite of ours whenever we’re in London. There’s something a touch unsettling at the floor tombstones, but a memento mori is always a good thing.

Most of this trip was replaying favorites from past visits: the picnic, a walk along the “little Venice” canals behind Paddington station, riding the Tube, going to the open air theater, pub visits, the National Gallery, St. Martin’s. We got a roast (first time), fish and chips, and very good Lebanese food. We suffered for my (not air-conditioned) sins. We’ve not grown tired of London yet, as Samuel Johnson observed, for there’s still more to see and do.

Admiral Nelson still stands his watch toward the Elizabeth tower, which contains Big Ben (but you already knew Big Ben was the bell, not the clock)

Madrid, Villa y Corte

We’ve transited through Madrid before, but never stayed, so this trip we gave ourselves a little stopover of four days/three nights to hit some of the high points. Madrid, the capital of Spain, is literally the central city. The evidence for settlement here goes back to the Celts, who built a fort near a ford here in the Fifth Century BCE. At least one of the prominent theories for the derivation of Madrid is from the Celtic word for ford. Madrileños (people from Madrid) prefer the nickname gatos (yes, cats) because they see themselves as stylish and nocturnal: I can confirm both allegations.

Madrid would be just another small fort-city on the Spanish meseta (plain) if not for Phillip II, who chose it as the royal seat in 1561, precisely because it was in the geographic middle of the peninsula. Oh, that and it was surrounded by forests, which satisfied his passion for hunting. And to please his wife, Elisabeth, who hated the cramped, cold, fortified city of Toledo and longed for anywhere else (reverse Spanish Green Acres?). Phillip’s choice turned the sleepy village into the seat of the great Spanish Hapsburg empire, and eventually the world-class city it is today, although its long-standing nickname remains Villa y Corte, or “town & court.”

The Plaza Mayor is the central square of Madrid, lined with cafes but free of any central shade, lest you get close to the statue of Felipe III. We stayed just around the corner, and the Plaza was a pleasant place to stroll through or take in an aperol spritz and watch everybody else strolling by. The cafes are a mix of the good, bad, and ugly (Pizza Hut?), so do your homework or else walk a few blocks away where numerous excellent restaurants await.

We ate at two centenarios, restaurants that have been operating as such for at least one-hundred years. The first was Sobrino de Botín, which proudly displays its Guinness world record as the oldest continuously-operating restaurant (since 1725). And the legend holds that their oven has been continuously burning for 300 years. We staked out the opening for lunch and scored one of the few walk-in, outdoor tables. Botín’s pride and joy is cochinillo asado, or roast suckling pig. We enjoyed the prix fixe menu, but were not wowed by the piggys. But that chef was certainly moving them from shelf to plate!

The other was Restaurante Los Galayos, which impressed us in every way. Here we tried another must-eat local dish named Cocido Madrileño. This is a hearty stew served in multiple stages. All the ingredients are cooked together, but then the meat and vegetables are removed from the broth. Thin, angel-hair like pasta is added back in, and the broth is served as a first course. Then the pot with the sausages, chicken, pork, carrots, potatoes, and artichokes arrives, which you place back into your remaining broth. Add in a pitcher of tinto verano (a wine and soda mix popular among locals; they leave the sangria for the tourists) and you have a quintessential Madrid lunch feast.

Stuffed doesn’t begin to describe the aftermath

We also had a delightful tapas lunch in the Mercado de San Miguel, a fashionable “gastro” experience that–while admittedly touristy–was nonetheless tasty. Get here early (before two in the afternoon) and take turns holding down a place at the cafe benches while munching on everything from seafood tapas to jamón ibérico to sushi to meatballs to pastries.

Of course you must visit the Prado, Madrid’s world-beating art museum. Sorry if I have no pictures to share, as they have a “no photos” policy. But here are some tips: get a reserved, timed ticket. You don’t want to join the throngs standing in the hot sun to get in. But when you go online to get that ticket, skip the “sponsored results” section on Google and make sure you are on the actual Prado website (here it is) and not a fake site like this one. Or you’ll end up paying twice, or arguing endlessly with your credit card company.* You can buy the audio guide, but don’t use its built-in tour, which is haphazard at best. Plan what you want to see beforehand and make your own way, stopping to marvel at the other surprises along the way. Finally, pay no attention to any of the helpful information signs painted on the walls. Apparently they reorganized some time ago but left the old signs up, which will send you on an endless doom-loop in search of a bathroom (by the way, aseo, not baño, in España).

The Palacio Real is the Spanish royal family’s official residence, and the largest royal palace in Europe. It is a magnificent baroque structure, full of the art and the wealthy trappings one would ascribe to Spain at the peak of its worldly power in the 17th century. A self-guided tour is sufficient, even if the audio guide is somewhat erratic in its presentation. Be sure not to miss the royal armory, recently reopened, for an extensive review of medieval weapons and armor.

Next to the royal palace is, yes, another (bloody) church (abc). What’s different about this Cathedral is it’s fairly new, only being completed in 1993. Formally named the Cathedral of Saint Mary the Royal of the Almudena, it was started in 1883 but left uncompleted by the Spanish Civil War, and only finished much later, after the fall of the Franco dictatorship. It’s a neo-Gothic structure, with baroque additions, but much of the art work is modern. Take a look:

From modern to ancient: a short walk from the royal palace through the parks surrounding it rewards you with an incongruous site: the ancient Egyptian Temple of Debod. Seems when Egypt was building the Aswan High dam, several ancient temple complexes were scheduled to be flooded. Spain donated to save the temples, and Egypt rewarded them by deconstructing one and moving it to Spain. It now sits in a park with an overlook of the parklands of the royal estate, Madrid’s suburbs, and sunset every evening.

We know we only scratched the surface of Madrid’s offerings. There’s shopping on the Gran Via, matches for Real Madrid, and so much more art, architecture, and culture. We’ll certainly look to visit again, as it is a convenient hub for travel in Spain. One final note: even in May, the daytime sun was quickly pushing the “unbearable” level, so hats, sunscreen, and extra hydration are a must. Or just plain your visit cafe-to-cafe, alternating between cañas (small beers) and Aquarius electrolyte water!

* Yes, I know better. It turns out, I finally figured out how I was duped. I had long ago gone to the fake website, realized it and backed out. When the day came to buy my tickets, Google helpfully highlighted the result because I had been there before, so I mistook it for the real website. Not helpful, but a learning experience.

Affordability, part three

In parts one and two, we addressed the feeling that the American dream is unaffordable, while demonstrating the data doesn’t support that feeling. So what gives? Hidden in that data are some points which illuminate the challenge. First, everyone is better off over the last fifty years, but some groups are “mo-better” as they say than others. While the data are conflicted whether there are some more poor or lower income people, all data agree that the rise in the upper-income or rich tier is much greater than the rise in poor or lower income one. Both come at a cost to the size of the middle class.

Now take that data and compare it to the population and the economic environment. Younger people are blissfully unaware of the economic challenges other generations faced, just as they are unaware of history in general. When confronted with the inflation, unemployment, or Treasury rates I witnessed when I was their age, they simply stare: it doesn’t compute. Setting aside whose fault that is, the fact remains: they feel cheated, and also feel distinctly put upon by “the system.”

What younger cohorts are aware of is the life-styles of the rich & famous or at least the influencers. Consider this: Back when I was growing up, if anybody bought something expensive or showed-off with something ostentatious, my mother would refer to them as “wanna-be Rockefellers” or just “Rockefellers” after the famously rich and famous New York clan. She had no experience with the Rockefellers and probably couldn’t name one of them; she just knew “about them” and viewed them as the epitome of rich people who no longer needed to care about money. It was a useful, if envious, metaphor.

Today, every young person has social media providing a nonstop drip of addictive examples of the lifestyles of everyone who has more than they do. And social media only highlights the more and better. And given most young people are just starting out, while the largest generation of baby-boomers is atop the population pyramid (with more time, more resources, just more), that’s just about everyone. Everyone is doing better than you are, with the subtext of “what’s wrong with you?”

Which is not to say everything is rosy. Gas prices really are high . . . but just as high as they were four years ago. Rents are high, but only in the most sought-after neighborhoods. Mortgage rates are up above the last decade, but about where they were in 2008. There have been spikes in gas, dairy, meat, chicken, coffee, but there have always been such spikes, and nothing today is different about that. What accounts for the fatalism among the younger generations?

“I thought getting a college degree was the answer to everything,” said Lucy Kinyanjui, 22, a senior at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University. From a NY Times article on the bleak job prospects for college graduates.

One thing that is different is student loan debt. Nobody ever graduated with multiple decades of student loan debt payments back in the day, except doctors or lawyers; others were happy to finance them, and they were willing to pay. There weren’t too many defaults by those groups. Now it is common, and includes graduates with no useful skills. America rushed to push people into college, because college graduates earned more than non-college graduates, so if more people attended and graduated, everyone would be better off, right? No, because what made college graduates more financially successful was not the certificate, but the education. As universities competed to enroll this increasing stream of admissions, they (1) raised their tuition to astronomical rates (showing that even people with no formal economic education understand supply and demand), and (2) catered to their students with bespoke curricula that allowed them to avoid challenging knowledge in favor of comfortable pablum. The result was a sheepskin not worth the cost of a good wool sweater, and a ton of debt service.

But that’s only a small, if very vocal, part of the electorate. What about the vast majority who didn’t go to college, didn’t rack up debt, but still feels precarious? They feel precarious because they are. Part of the reason is the continued movement of blue-collar (and now white-collar) jobs out of the country to other places where they can be done just as well but at much less cost. It came for the auto workers first, but it’s after the paralegals now too. Add in advances in artificial intelligence (AI), and even more info-tech jobs are precarious! The trend is not necessarily fewer jobs, but different types of jobs. The introduction of the calculator didn’t do away with jobs requiring calculation, it made them more productive; the introduction of the car certainly spelled doom for buggy-whip manufacturers. This trend is obvious across multiple industries and professions: foreign competition and automation in general tend to create winners (who get very rich) and losers (who lose their jobs), and it’s rarely clear who will be who. That’s real uncertainty. But we’ve been through this before, with the sure-thing of a college degree, a Masters in Business, Law as a profession, coding, etc. And there are jobs and growth potential in health care, but that doesn’t interest younger generations. I don’t blame them: nursing the aging, entitled baby-boomers wouldn’t be my cup of tea, either.

This is why the AEI data in my last blog post was so revealing: there you see the growth in the rich and upper income groups, which grew faster than others, while the Treasury data shows they also accumulated more wealth (not just income) at the same time. Does the fact that Elon Musk exists, and controls a bazillion (technical term) dollars do anything to you? No. Perhaps it irritates you, or did once his politics changed. He didn’t inherit his wealth, didn’t extort it, didn’t win the lottery. He quit a PhD program to found an early internet company, making him rich when he sold that company for US $22 million at age 27 in 1999. His politics aside, he revolutionized how we launch satellites, took on and beat NASA, and is in the process of changing how we access the internet, anytime, anywhere. Maybe he is overvalued as they say in the stock market. But maybe he just did some remarkable things and monetized them. His wealth has no effect on you, though. Unless you want to compare yourself to him. Musk and others like him are that thin, light blue line on top of the AEI wealth chart. How much can they make? If they keep innovating, it is practically unlimited. How little can The Biggest Loser make? Zero. The difference only grows.

How does all this play out in the upcoming elections? Poorly for all sides. I contend President Trump won re-election because the electorate–especially low information people who vote infrequently–got fed up with the Biden administration’s wild economic policies (an Inflation Reduction Act that increases prices?) and decided to give Trump another try despite his well-known downsides. Team Harris did trot out some wild ideas to address the cost of living (remember the minority set-aside for black men to sell legal marijuana?), but there was no there, there. Trump and his team promised to reduce prices with no explanation. Promises beat incoherence.

Trump’s agenda-less approach to high prices has been ineffective and made those key swing voters very upset. If nothing changes in the next few months, they will swing once again in the mid-terms, giving the Democrats the House and perhaps the Senate. Promises beat incoherence again. Before liberals and progressives raise a cup of cheer, two cautions. First, whatever majorities they achieve will be small, and neither filibuster- nor veto-proof. Leaving them with the burden of addressing their promised fixes to affordability by either compromising with Trump (fat-chance) or simply performing legislative protest (my, how they do love chanting and singing). Neither is a good start to the 2028 Presidential campaign. But what if the Democrats put forward a progressive Abundance agenda? That’s the second caution. They don’t have one. Even after Abundance (the book) came out last year, it caused as much conflict as excitement on the left. The only thing that unites the left is hatred for Trump, which will be enough for the legislative elections, but bodes ill for presidential politics.

Which is a shame, as parts of the progressive abundance agenda could resolve some issues (like housing and energy production/distribution). I don’t see any quick or easy national solutions to “affordability.” More likely, the problem will ease over time. First, because younger generations realize the complaints aren’t having an effect. Second, people become inured to higher prices over time. I’ll always think a new car should cost US $2000 because I remember the VW Bug ads at $1999. I don’t like it, but I don’t expect to find new cars at that price anymore. Third, individuals will take matters into their own hands, by moving to less expensive areas, accepting longer commutes, taking less-exciting, more stable jobs. Fourth, believe it or not Millennials, the Boomers will die off, creating the largest wealth transfer in human history. Behave yourselves, and there might be a pot o’ gold at the end of their rainbows. Just don’t expect Uncle Sam to fix it in the next election cycle. Oh, and beware estate taxes. If you support them as a way to soak the rich, you just might find you taxed away your pot!

Affordability, part two

In part one, I focused on personal data and experience to address the main complaint of other generations in America today: the American dream is unaffordable. My thesis was that the problem may feel real to younger people, but the problem is one of perception and desire, not economics. In part two, let’s zoom out and look at nation-wide data to sharpen the point. In this post. I’ll rely on research by two distinguished, nonpartisan institutions: The Pew Research Center (hereafter Pew) and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). I’ll point out the challenges to their data and interpretation, where pertinent.

Pew has been tracking the movement of people between the various income classes (lower, middle, upper) since 1970, using large, representative data samples. You can see their full report here. What they have found is the American middle class is shrinking! Both the lower and upper tiers have grown, but the upper income has grown the fastest. Note that no matter how you slice it, more Americans are better off than ever before. This does not mean everyone has done better; there are winners and losers hidden inside the data. An “upper income” person could have made disastrous financial decisions and ended up in the lower income tier, or a middle income person might have lost a job and done the same. But the overall trend is toward fewer people in the middle class, slightly more in the lower tier, many more in the upper tier. The Pew data also shows (in other charts) that the upper income tier is growing faster than the other two (I’ll come back to that).

One concern about this trend is that the erosion of the middle class removes a traditional “stepping stone,” eventually leaving just rich and poor, although the data only supports a 16% drop over fifty years, which is not exactly dramatic. One concern about the Pew data stems from their methodology and definitions. They use income as the measuring stick (which is fine), but they define middle income as income that is two-thirds to double that of the U.S. median household income, after incomes have been adjusted for household size. Lower income is the amount below that, upper income the amount above that.

That sounds–and is–reasonable. Here’s the problem, illustrated with a hypothetical: if tomorrow Bernie Sanders shook his magic money tree and rained dollars on every American, such that they doubled their income, the Pew data would remain unchanged. But the poor would not be poor, the middle class no longer middle. Thus if everybody gets equally richer, the Pew data still shows no improvement, because its definitions are relative. And one thing that is not in doubt is that Americans in general have more than ever before.

This explains so much . . . and ain’t AI fun?

AEI has done similar research starting from a 1979 baseline and using five tiers. Their full report is here. AEI’s critics point out it uses an absolute standard to determine its tiers, meaning it treats an income in New York City as equivalent to one in Newburgh, New York, when clearly they afford different levels of economic activity. Also, such a standard allows the highest levels to”pull up” the standard, making everyone seem better off when in fact the rich are doing the best.

AEI’s data also shows a hollowing out of the middle class, but clarifies that it is primarily as a result of movement up, not down. If you look at the “all-blue” chart (below), the lower-middle and poor/near-poor are both shrinking, while an all-new category of “rich” appears and is growing.

Finally the venerable Federal Reserve reported that wealth (not just income, but the sum total of all valuable things one owns) is growing across all the income tiers, but that the wealthiest have grown the fastest! This is very important data, as I believe it explains the differences between what the economic data shows, and how people feel about affordability.

From the Board of Governors of the US Federal Reserve

The dollars referenced in this final chart are constant ones, meaning they account for inflation (and thus the price rises that accompany it). What they show is that everybody has much more wealth than they did back in 2010, but a group of the super-wealthy (top .1%) and wealthy (top 1%) have done the best.

These three data sources do not make the argument that all is well with the wealth distribution in the United States. But they do demolish the notion that there is an affordability crisis reflected in the oft-repeated meme “the American dream in unaffordable.”

What accounts for the difference? I’ll address that in part three!

Affordability, part one

If you aren’t sick of the word “Affordability,” 2026 will give you a reason to be so. The issue of the cost-of-living is number one in voters’ minds in nearly every poll. The Democrats believe this is an issue which will guarantee them victory in this year’s mid-term elections and later in the 2028 Presidential contest. The Trump administration has varied between calling it a hoax and suggesting things aren’t as bad as they seem. I recently read an interesting New York Times investigation about why young adults in America today think life is unaffordable. I would quote directly from the headline, but in case you don’t know, online headlines change, regularly. So here’s the article, and I insist you give it a quick read. Go ahead, I’ll wait.

The article failed to convince me. Not that the young people who were featured believe life is unaffordable; that much is manifestly clear. I don’t believe their feelings are factually correct. Here’s why.

In 1982, when I was released from the institution (some say graduated from the Academy, whatever), I had a steady job lined up with annual pay and allowances of US $17,000 (and I still have the 1040 to prove it). Yes, I did have free medical care, which was worth exactly what we paid for it. If you want to translate all that to today in constant dollars, it would come in right around US $100,000. So back then I was in a similar situation to the youngsters in the Times bemoaning today’s affordability.

What was different was my spouse was still attending college (a course here and there at first, due to our finances), and we had two children in the first three years of our marriage. No child-care dilemma there! So that “I’m waiting until I can afford to get married or have kids” refrain leaves me cold. Marriage or raising children is almost never a financially advantageous move, nor should it be measured that way. It reminds me of the cranky old man who says he doesn’t go to see a doctor because there are so many sick people there. Misses the point entirely.

What else was different back then? Inflation was coming down from 12.5% in 1980 and 8.9% in 1981. It would bottom out just around 4% for the next several years due to a good, old-fashioned recession. You know, the kind with an unemployment rate of over 10%! Compare that to today’s 3% inflation and 4% unemployment. Oh, and the federal funds rate (which drives mortgages and credit card rates) was over 10%, double today’s approximate 5%. Anybody who says the average young person’s economic outlook is worse today is either accessing medical cannabis, or didn’t learn any recent history.

So what causes today’s young adults to feel so aggrieved? Times are tough, and there is great uncertainty. But to believe life is so bad you have to move in with your parents? You can’t get married? You can’t afford to have children? What gives?

Housing

First, housing prices have skyrocketed, making that initial move into a home much more difficult. Not impossible, but certainly more difficult. Owning your own home puts you on the plus-side of the investment ledger, starting you on the way to financial independence. But you have to get that starter home, first. There are many starter home options available. But they’re not where today’s young adults want to live. In the Times article, one young single-man from Atlanta observes he can’t afford to live in his parent’s neighborhood, and the places he could afford to buy would involve a ninety minute commute and “he does not want to live that way.”

This is the essence of the home ownership challenge: you don’t start with the place you want, you start with the one you can afford. We started renting outside the beltway near Washington DC. Since we had one car, I took an hour-long commuter bus to/from the Pentagon each day. The only good thing to come from that was I learned how to get on a bus, fall asleep, then wake at my designated stop. To this day I don’t know how I did that. When we decided to buy, we had to settle for a fixer-upper townhouse even further out. We spent weekends painting and repairing the place, with our young children in one room with toys to keep occupied. They didn’t want to move there when we finished getting it ready, as they envisioned living there being just like those locked-in-a-room weekends!

It was far from ideal, but it got us started in a series of moves which eventually got us the nice suburban homestead with a big yard, then a smaller, closer-in townhouse appropriate for empty-nesting, and finally a very close-in concierge apartment for aspiring expats. Sometimes we made money on the house exchanges, sometimes we didn’t. But we had great places to live, which changed and improved over time. You don’t get to start next door to where you want to finish.

Adding to this is the desire to live in urban areas, which are more exciting and far more expensive. This is a lifestyle choice that hampers all others. Especially with the possibility of remote work (an option only available on scifi shows in the 1980s), living in a suburb or even a distant small town is a practical possibility. But it won’t be exciting. Cities in general have done a lousy job creating additional housing or rental properties in their urban centers, and there is little evidence that is about to change (Mayor Mamdani/the abundance agenda or not).

Social Media

Second, today’s young adults are force-fed unrealistic expectations in their social media diet. It’s rare for any influencer or even “friend” to cover how bad their job is, how crappy their relationships are, or how desperately poor they really are. Nope, on social media, everything is avocado-toast-on-the-way-to-hot-yoga-before-scoring-those-Taylor-Swift-tickets-while-planning-that-Caribbean-adventure-tour. Perhaps when meeting ftf (face-to-face) you might get more honesty from real friends, but who has time for that?

Those non-stop positive vibes online create a great FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out) which encourages young adults to chase ephemeral experiences as a means of alleviating the sadness at not being able to achieve the more important, longer lasting ones (owning a house, getting married, having kids). As the young Atlantan interviewed in the Times put it, “There’s a sense of futility at this point. I’m not going to rough it for five years to save for a house I’ll never be able to afford. So why not live my life the way I want to?” The Times even mentions a University of Chicago study which finds that such house-despondent young adults are more likely to spend money on leisure pursuits or risky investments. Which is another way of saying they are making conscious choices which preclude them from obtaining the things they really want to get. Funny how it sounds both judgmental and accurate when you put it that way.

Options

Third, most people would agree that having more options is good. But it can be bad. If your options constantly expand, they can change from options to requirements. Perhaps you’ve heard it put “needs versus wants.” Back in Reagan World, cable television had only a few channels (cable news, sports, music videos being the most popular) and cost about US $10 a month. This in itself was an increase in options over the 1960s three over-the-air broadcast networks and some part-time local public station. We were forced to watch a limited variety of “hit” shows like Dallas or M*A*S*H, which only aired once a week, with a season that started in September and ended in April. And if you missed a show, reruns weren’t available until Summer! Somehow, an entire nation survived.

Today, there is an unlimited supply of televised material, mostly dreck. There are apps to help consumers understand when they might have multiple subscriptions to the same service, or zombie subscriptions they simply never cancelled. Needless to say, almost everybody is spending more than the US$33 (in constant dollars) equivalent to the 1980 cable cost. We have options to the point we can no longer rationally choose among them. Now you hear about a hot new show, subscribe to the service, binge-watch it, then move on to the next recommendation, show, and subscription.

And here I have only touched on televised material as an example. Want on-demand music? Check. Want on-demand meals from different restaurants delivered at the same time? Check. Want robo-drones flying your latest Amazon package to your door within the hour? Check. The problem with these options is that the convenience becomes addictive. What once was a cool, occasional option now becomes a way of life, and the costs add up.

Finally, I question the reality portrayed by the youth in the Times article for one more reason: my anecdotes, or as I like to call them, my grown daughters. They are slightly beyond the young adult stage described by the Times, but as leading-edge Millennials they matured through many of the same conditions. They followed very different paths, but got married and had kids quickly by today’s standards. One did the stay-at-home Mom routine evolving into part-time office work, the other followed a professional career path. They and their spouses economized, made rational (not exciting) choices on where to live and work, and had purchased homes before they were each thirty. They somehow eluded all the angst and bad choices which were haunting the Times’ subjects. They stand as stark counter-examples to all those who say it just can’t be done anymore.

To which I would respond, “it can’t be done easily today, and it never could.” The important things in life (a loving spouse, kids, a home of your own) are both costly and priceless. You either recognize that and sacrifice to achieve them, or you don’t achieve them. If you choose the latter option, it’s not on the generation ahead of you, the economy, or bad luck. It’s on you.

Alicante: Roman & Medieval

Touring around the town, as one can do during an extended stay, you get the opportunity to dig a little deeper into the local history and culture. Here are some gems we uncovered while doing so in Alicante.

Settlement in the region goes back to the fifth century BCE (before the Christian Era). The climate, sea access, and fertile soils made it a natural place to settle. As was often the case around the Mediterranean Sea, things really took off once the Romans arrived. The original Roman town, called Lucentum lies stop a hill just a couple kilometers north of the current town. Oddly, it lies smack in the middle of a sprawling suburban village, setting up the juxtaposition of ancient ruins surrounded by modern villas and giant housing complexes.

The site today; the same dichotomy of modern and ancient extends 360 degrees

The government has done a fine job preserving the outlines of the entire original Roman settlement, and even explaining how the remaining outlines of the buildings indicate they were used. All the critical pillars of Roman society are present: the gates, the fortifications, the street layout, the forum, the baths, the sewer and fresh water collection systems.

I’m not sure if I ever saw this before: they color coded the gravel in each building to indicate what they think that structure was used for

Remains of Roman baths. Note the bricks which supported an elevated, heated floor

Roman towers in the distance, where farmers could head if a slave-rading party approached

The site had a small (three Euro) entrance fee, was well signed in Spanish, Valencian (a relative of Catalan), and English. It was an easy walk from the local tram station, and of course there were bars nearby to rehydrate with a caña or aperol!

On another sunny day, we decided to trek to the top of Mount Benacantil, the rocky top upon which Santa Barbara castle sits. Last year, we took an interior elevator to the top, so this year we thought we might chance hiking up, if we left mid-morning. We got lucky in that it was an overcast day, but the hike still stretched us.

We started down there, and this is half way up!

The castle is as imposing as ever:

I couldn’t help but notice the artillery pieces still held a perfect gunsight on the port:

They added some new features, including a video display of the history of the city, as well as some additional info on the siege of 1708-09. The latter makes a great story. During the war of the Spanish Succession, England & Austria took sides against France & Spain. The English occupied Alicante, until a French force landed and forced them to retreat up to the redoubts of Santa Barbara castle, which were impregnable to bombardment. The French Commander informed his English counterpart that his forces had dug a mine, and were going to ignite it and blow up the keep protecting the castle. The English commander decided it was a ruse, and refused to send a representative (under a flag of truce) to inspect the threatened mine. Instead he began digging down (from the castle) a counter-mine, to intersect the French effort and destroy it. On the designated ultimatum date, the English commander held a soiree at his headquarters, designed to show his complete confidence that the French effort could not succeed.

Note the two dark eyes and nose; the lost section of the castle is to the right

The French set off their explosives, but instead of damaging the exterior wall, it took down a significant chunk of the mountain top, killing most of the English officers and raining down chunks of rock, destroying over 400 homes in the city below. The surviving English garrison surrendered. Best of all, the explosion permanently changed the features of the rocky mountaintop, creating an image in stone called the face of “the Moor” (note: the castle was originally constructed by Moors when they controlled southern Spain).

Finally, I had noted in my research a teeny museum in the city center, the museo de belenes (Nativity Scene Museum). Free to access, but open only a few hours on a few days per week, this city government museum displays the artwork characteristic of Nativity scenes in Europe, and some from around the world. The tradition of Nativity scenes, marking the birth of Jesus, was probably started by St. Francis of Assisi in the 13th Century. It grew as a devotion across the continent and spread worldwide, involving both live recreations and small home displays of figurines. This museum features the latter, along with the characteristic artwork which evolved to cover other religious and secular historical scenes.

The Holy Family looking for the inn, set in the square outside Alicante. The church in the background is the Monastery of the Santa Faz we visited during a recent pilgrimage, and instantly recognizable to all locals.

Looking at the displays, I was reminded of the complaint some raise that Christians “white-wash” the semitic origins of their faith. That is, the characters are often depicted as white, even northern European figures. First off, it’s not true, as some of these figurines display. But the larger point is that everywhere that the evangelists spread the Gospel, they depicted the Lord (or the Virgin, or the Saints) in ways that make them relevant to the local population. When Christianity spread to Europe, that meant making the figures “look” that way, and even set Biblical scenes in modern (for each age) setting, indicating Christ’s story is eternally relevant. When European missionaries went to the New World and Asia, they did the same thing, not to mention how many different ways the Blessed Virgin Mary has appeared in local guise. Sometimes people confuse being culturally relevant with cultural appropriation.

None of these excursions would be “must-see” visits, but they were all easy, informative, and enjoyable. Best of all, we could drop them into our daily routine when we wanted, so we never felt rushed, nor did we think “is this how I want to spend my limited time?” Just another example of the benefits of slow travel.

Caminar & Comer

When we travel, we try to check out local news sources to find out what the locals are up to. Sometimes it’s a dry well, other times we strike gold. This past week was the latter here in Alicante.

Beginning the procession from inside the Co-cathedral

First, Judy saw mention of a local fiesta about the “Santa Faz.” The Holy Face? So I looked it up, and sure enough, there is a monastery of the Holy Face in the greater Alicante area, dating back to the 15th Century. According to local lore, in that period, a monk from Rome smuggled part of the Veil of Veronica to Alicante to spare it from whomever was sacking Rome at that time. The Veil of Veronica? A Catholic legend that a woman named Veronica wiped Jesus’ face (as he walked the cross up to Golgotha), thereby receiving an image of his passion on the veil.

Mel Gibson’s take on the story

There’s no contiguous evidence for Veronica’s story, and some theologians believe even her name is simply a mistranslation referring to the veil (Vera icon = true image in Latin/Greek). But veils purporting to be the true image have been around since the 6th Century, and at one point the Vatican collected up the many versions to try to establish some sort of registry. Unfortunately, before the work was done, the accounting was lost, so no one knows which was which. They subsequently found paths to different places like Alicante, where they continued to be venerated. The Church has approved worship of the Holy Face (as an icon of Christ’s passion) without going any further toward validating any of the individual veils.

Locals in Alicante believe the veil has miraculous qualities, and they honor it annually with a procession from the Co-Cathedral in the city back to the monastery. The images you see in my photos/videos is NOT the veil itself. Too many people tried to touch or grab it over the centuries, and it suffered from public exposure. So the religious authorities constructed a tableau to put it in for further public exposition. The procession happens every year on the second Thursday after Easter. It starts inside the Cathedral, with prayers and a welcome from the alcalde (mayor), as the event is well-coordinated with the local authorities. The pilgrims carry cane poles with sprigs of rosemary signifying their status. It then winds through the narrow streets of the old town until reaching a major modern highway, one-side of which closed. About halfway (5 kilometers) to the monastery, local businesses set up booths offering snacks, wine, and freebies (note the many orange baseball caps, for example).

Arriving at the monastery , there is a full-scale fiesta with booths, carnival rides, etc. We inched our way closer to the main door, and found an outdoor Mass, and the chance to receive Holy Communion. We didn’t stay for the tour inside the monastery, and instead found one of the special public busses set up to take us back to the city center. As we rode home, we could still see families on the early stages of the walk! The government estimates about 330,000 people processed this year!

This adventure was the Caminar (walking) portion of the week; now for the Comer (eating).

Around the same time, the Alicante city government also sponsored “Alacroqueta,” a competition to see which local restaurant serves the best croquettes. Alicante views itself as a national leader in croqueta cuisine. Croqueta began as a solution to leftovers: take whatever didn’t get eaten, form it up into little balls (maybe add a little sauce), dip in batter, fry it up, and serve it again. Over time, they became a go-to form of tapas, the little snacks served alongside drinks in Spanish bars.

As a form of marketing mixed with self-promotion, the city sponsored a public snack-off. Fourteen finalists (after a first round competition earlier in the year) were selected to sell their best croqueta creation at this event. If you bought even one, you got a QR code to vote for best croqueta. The competition went on for four days, and we visited early on Saturday before the lunch rush.

Among the competitors we tried ones filled with kimchi, jamon iberico/mushroom/truffles, and Spanish chorizo. Each croqeuta cost two euros, and drinks were three or four (very inexpensive). We only lasted two rounds of tasting, because while the croquetas are small, they are very rich and fried, thus very filling. A tapas crawl (similar to a bar crawl) here comprises walking from bar to bar, trying their signature tapa with a caña (small beer) or small glass of wine while standing in the bar, then moving on to the next bar. For the locals, the standing and walking and waiting while chatting with friends is part of the experience, while tourists are easy to spot for ordering many different tapas while staying in the same bar.

In both cases (the caminar and the comer) it was fun to join locals enjoying their town.