qui tacet consentire videtur

I remember seeing a film with Palinurus years ago, ‘Enemy at the Gates‘, and one of the lines that stays with me is from the end of the film. Danilov (Joseph Fiennes) the Soviet political officer renounces Marxist-Leninism after Tanya (Rachel Weisz) the love interest seemingly dies when returning to her love and expert sniper Vassili Zaitsev (Jude Law). His words, before letting himself get shot by a Nazi sniper:

I’m such a fool, Vassili. Man will always be man, there is no ‘new man’. We tried so hard to create a society that was equal, where there would be nothing to envy your neighbor. There’s always something to envy… a smile, a friendship, something you don’t have and want to appropriate. In this world, even a Soviet one, there will always be rich and poor. Rich in gifts, poor in gifts. Rich in love, poor in love.

Danilov accepts the futility of an egalitarian utopia at a fundamental level of human relations, but the concept of such a utopia interests me the way it interests parties who would have something to gain from it, ie Danilov and the poor in gifts and love. I have some sympathy for the idea of universal love - a world where everyone is loved by all equally, though my libertarian instincts object to the coercive nature of socialism in affections. Aldous Huxley imagines such a society in Brave New World, where ‘everyone belongs to everyone else’. According to Huxley, it is a society where no one belongs to anyone. Perhaps our concept of romantic love, eros, is inherently possessive-exclusive. Even spiritual love, agape, seems universal but unequal.

And like Danilov, we must accept that the world is an unequal place, that God has blessed us all - some are blessed more than others in different ways. Yet the markets in hearts are diverse and dynamic. Just as social mobility allows the have-nots to have more, so does a different sort of mobility - and the individual effort it demands - allow those poor in love to become rich.

The question is whether men are as upwardly mobile in affections as they are in class. I remain somewhat unconvinced of my individual capacity to move up the value chain here, and I am not content to let markets clear as they will in my social life.

My good friend and old classmate Chris writes of ‘outsourcing marriage’ as a public policy solution to Singapore’s fertility problems.

Our government’s task, therefore, is to actively promote marital outsourcing. We must encourage a tolerant society where it is socially acceptable for people to find spouses overseas. As long as these couples love each other (and find each other attractive), there is no reason why we shouldn’t encourage them to marry.

Chris is under the impression that it is the business of state to interfere with private lives and private loves. Chris is also under the impression that what he terms ‘marital outsourcing’ is not yet happening - it already is. In the past month I have met countless men and women with long-distance, cross-cultural relationships. Free markets in marriage exist, labor mobility in love exists, and we move ever closer towards the unity of races. Singaporeans in particular, with their language aptitude, are best suited to break through barriers to entry in limited markets. We can better match buyers to sellers and the market as a whole becomes more efficient. Even I feel more optimistic about my chances.

What about sectoral protectionism? Who are the losers in free trade in love? One answer is black women and Asian men, as Steve Sailer writes, where he explains that these parties have the most to lose from interracial marriage liberalization. I disagree with Sailer’s hypothesis (perhaps instinctively?) because the market dynamics are much more complicated than that, and I would have thought Sailer of all people would understand that an analysis that focuses purely on static conceptions of ethnicity is bound to fail. Without having to go into a utilitarian model of transactionary relationships, I think we can appreciate the complex, less-quantifiable nature of hooking up.

Back to Chris. Chris posits that this is a matter of public policy ie language training, subsidizing marriage agencies in dealing with cultural barriers to trade. My position is that this is not the business of government, and that attempts by the state to correct perceived ‘market failures’ tend to distort the market even more. Policies like these are in spirit not too far from the ‘one-child policy’ or ’stop-at-two’ - and we all know what happened with those.

It is most reassuring to read of a fellow countryman in both land and liberty.

Now, how about the third option of reviewing the policy of gasoline subsidies? This is not very popular politically as the last time the government reduced gasoline subsidies in March 2005, it sparked wide spread rioting in Jakarta and the police and military had to be mobilized to take control of the capital city. In fact, when the President announced that he would have to consider further reducing gasoline subsidies recently, angry protesters flooded the streets of Jakarta. It will take a very courageous government to tempt its faith again this way, especially when the Yudhoyono government has only been in power less than a year.

Don’t worry so much. Market distortions correct themselves in the long run, even those with political origins. (The key for rational self-interested individuals is knowing how to leverage on this misvaluation and when to exit the market) While Leong mainly addresses the political reasons for fuel subsidies in Indonesia, what makes the article glow is his subtle comparison with fuel tariffs (and other tariffs) in Singapore.

And for those of us who believe that “government is best which governs the least” and that government interventions in the economy often lead to chaos in the marketplace, the choice between a state with a US$13.2 billion gasoline subsidy problem, and its peaceful neighbor with a myriad scheme of direct and indirect expropriations, is really no choice at all.

Smooth pointing out the false dichotomy between taking with the left hand and giving with the right. I wonder why I haven’t heard of this guy before.

I look forward to more of Mr. Leong’s work, but wish that he would bother to proofread better. Firstly, there are significant calculation errors on his part, which would lead most people to doubt his data and his conclusions. Not good. Also, the spelling and grammar. It reflects poorly on the Mises blog and the author to not hit spellcheck before posting. Also, posting that on the Mises blog is like preaching to the choir - he might have a much better impact in the Straits Times commentary/analysis section.

I find this highly amusing. It’s like Zork in a Shakespearean universe. Fortunately I’ve read enough of the bard to appreciate it.

Update: Having finished the game, I can safely say that having read most of the plays it pokes fun at has marginal impact on solving the game puzzles, but makes gameplay much more enjoyable.

Front page news in Singapore. While I have no sympathy for racists and bigots, I believe that they should be free to hold their opinions as I am free to criticize them.

Two bloggers charged under Sedition Act over racist remarks
SINGAPORE : Two bloggers have been charged with sedition for posting racist comments online.

Twenty-five-year-old Nicholas Lim Yew and 27-year-old Benjamin Koh Song Huat are being accused of posting racist comments on an online forum and on their blog site.

They are both being charged with committing a seditious act, by promoting feelings of ill-will and hostility between races in Singapore.

Perhaps one day they will declare me a ‘racist’ for being objective about differentiated cultural norms, behavior and value systems. Or it will be my condemnation of ethnicity-based redistribution systems (and redistribution systems in general). Perhaps then I will be a victim of political correctness and ‘cultural sensitivity’. Who, then, are the real racists - those who coerce or the champions of freedom?

Good news for weight-watchers: Seth Roberts from Berkeley has discovered a new, mostly painless method to lose weight. Check out his paper on self-experimentation for the full details, but if you just want the executive summary, Dubner and Levitt do a pretty good job. Kudos to Marginal Revolution, as usual.

Something to keep in mind as I don’t quite need to reduce intake as much as increase activity. My sedentary lifestyle must cease at once.

My latest obsession is the korean dramedy series in the title of this post. At the risk of oversimplifying its charm, its the korean version of bridget jones’ diary: its eponymous heroine is a single working-class 30-year-old (29 by western count) patissier who’s a little on the chubby side. Well, at least by their standards. Here in Singapore she’d be modelling for Marie France, but you get the idea. After getting her heart broken by her squeeze of three years, she meets Jin-Heon, hotel chain heir and ice prince (with a prince syndrome, no less). They sign a contract to pretend to be lovers - hilarity ensues.

KSS wallpapers now adorn my office workstation (replacing 김태희), its OST is on shuffle/repeat, and anime has been put aside (temporarily).

I suppose what sold me on KSS are its moments of unexpected honesty that somehow segue the comedy and drama aspects almost seamlessly. This one’s a tissue sink, people. Despite having several staples of the genre (love polygons, public transportation chases, stretch-of-the-imagination contrivances and coincidences, mistaken identities etc) it’s somehow very original. Well written and well paced, this one ought to be on the syllabus for the next screenwriter workshop. If I could ever bring myself to pay for one.

Kudos to Steve Sailer for the pointer.

The Gods of the Copybook Headings
Rudyard Kipling

AS I PASS through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.

We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.

We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.

With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.

When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “Stick to the Devil you know.”

On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “The Wages of Sin is Death.”

In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “If you don’t work you die.”

Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.

As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will bum,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return.

As a screenwriter I’m very aware of the limitations of media and how that influences plot presentation. One particular media form is the hour-length episode for a tv series. If you look at say, Lost, you see that what makes it very fast-paced is its tight construction per episode - Lost doesn’t even have an opening credit sequence. It maximizes plot development on air within its allotted time. Typically, an episode runs for forty minutes. The hour-length slot is one third advertising, possibly due to heavy competition.

I’ve recently become more interested in korean dramas (KH, Daniel and I watched Love Story in Harvard earlier this year) and am fascinated by 내 이름은 김삼순 / My Name is Kim Sam-soon. One thing I noticed immediately was that each episode runs for a full hour. Unfortunately, I didn’t watch enough SBS drama while in Korea to see if they had a similar hour-length slot system. If they do, then there is much less time for advertising.

My hypothesis (and this is completely off the cuff) is that a) the Korean television industry is relatively small and b) the target audience demographic is more or less captured ie Korean dramas are not easily substitutable for say, Battlestar Galactica S2, therefore c) the market is less competitive, less advertising income is necessary, screenwriters have a larger episode length to work with, d) episodes are less tightly constructed and have a slower pace. This would have a significant impact on story structure and presentation.

Of course I could be completely wrong since I’ve done zero research and this is only the 2nd korean drama I’ve seen.