Category: Society

Categories
Books, essays and others Economics History & heritage Science & technology Society

[2477] Diamond, consumer choice theory, marginal revolution, Marxian economics and the paradox of value

From those precursors of food production already practiced by hunter-gatherers, it developed stepwise. Not all the necessary techniques were developed within a short time, and not all the wild plants and animals that were eventually domesticated in a given area were domesticated simultaneously. Even in the cases of most rapid independent development of food production from a hunting-gathering lifestyle, it took thousands of years to shift from complete dependence on wild foods to a diet with very few wild foods. In early stages of food production, people simultaneously collected wild foods and raised cultivated ones, and diverse types of collecting activities diminished in importance at different times as reliance on crops increased.

The underlying reason why this transition was piecemeal is that food production systems evolved as a result of the accumulation of many separate decisions about allocation time and effort. Foraging humans, like foraging animals, have only finite time and energy, which they can spend in various ways. We can picture an incipient farmer waking up and asking: Shall I spend today hoeing my garden (predictably yielding a lot of vegetables several months from now), gathering shellfish (predictably yielding a little meat today)? or hunting deer (yielding possibly a lot of meat today, but more likely nothing)? Human and animal foragers are constantly prioritizing and making effort-allocation decisions, even if only unconsciously. The concentrate first on favorite foods, or ones that yield the highest payoff. If these are unavailable, they shift to less and less preferred foods. [Guns, Germs, and Steel. Chapter 6: To Farm or Not to Farm. Page 107. Jared Diamond. 1999]

A lot of words.

Luckily, any economics student who has his or her bases covered will understand this as [latex]\frac{dy}{dx} = \frac{P_x}{P_y}[/latex] in one way or the other. Simple! We can thank the marginal revolution that began in the late 19th century for that. Marginal revolution also solved the paradox of value. Indeed, marginalism is the foundation of modern microeconomics, regardless of your cup of tea.

And oh, did you know that the marginal revolution also made Marxian economics in its original interpretation completely obsolete?

Categories
Conflict & disaster Society

[2473] A world without Iraq

I was almost late for my morning history class. I ran as fast as I could while trying to keep my balance on ice and snow. By the time I entered the classroom, I was gasping for air. For the not very athletic me, it was not easy to breathe hard during a cruel Michigan winter. As I settled in my seat thinking my heart was about to explode and my lungs collapsing, the instructor said, “Today will be about what ifs. What if you were early?”

The class burst into laughter at my expense.

After several minutes of friendly pokes, the instructor began to share his plan for the day. “But seriously, today will be about what ifs.” What if Venice and other cities had not monopolized the spice trade? What if old European powers were unsuccessful at colonizing Asia? What if Dien Bien Phu did not happen? What if the United States had not entered the Second World War? There were many more what ifs.

We were discussing colonialism in Asia and we were exploring the importance of certain events by trying to imagine an alternative history where those events did not occur. It required a broad understanding of history.

It also required all of us in the class to do our voluminous readings. A lot of us, being freshmen and still patting ourselves on our backs for getting into a storied school, did not finish our reading. We gave it a stab anyway. We had enough imagination to run wild.

That old memory reran in my mind as President Barack Obama finally, for better or for worse, fulfilled one of his election promises. The US is officially withdrawing from Iraq after more than eight years since the invasion that toppled the former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

The withdrawal ceremony was being telecast ”live” on CNN. As I sat in my chair listening to Leon Panetta making his speech, my mind wandered to Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and the rest of the Arab world. Remembering my freshman lesson, I asked myself, ”What if the US had not invaded Iraq back in 2003?” Would Saddam Hussein’s regime have become a victim of the Arab Spring?

We will never know but nobody can say that would have been impossible. Whether a person is supportive of the war or vehemently rejects the invasion, he or she cannot deny that Saddam Hussein was a ruthless dictator.

That makes his removal desirable to some extent. If the 2003 invasion was legitimate in some ways, many in the anti-war camp would support or at least not reject the invasion. If Saddam Hussein was toppled organically by Iraqis just like how Hosni Mubarak, Muammar Gaddafi and Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali were toppled, many more would support the regime change.

An Arab Spring for Iraq would have been ideal. It would have removed a dictator without causing bad blood among various sides. Yes, it would be eight years later but in a time of terrorism and religious extremism, a world without the 2003 invasion of Iraq could have spurred deeper co-operation between the US and those that mattered.

A world without the war would have the US possibly swamped with goodwill of the kind it received in the aftermath of the September 11 attack but soon after squandered in the run-up to the 2003 war.

It could be the case, or it could not. Just as Japan in the Second World War made the colonized natives realize that colonial European powers were not invincible, the US invasion also reminded the Arabs that their dictators were not gods.

Sure, the United States of the 2000s was not Japan of the 1900s that was seriously underestimated first by the Russians and then later all the colonial powers in South-east Asia. Still, what is possible is not always evident until somebody makes it a reality. The US with its unmatched military might removed Saddam Hussein. The US made possible a regime change.

Or — this might sound repulsive, especially for those in the anti-war camp but consider this — the Arab Spring might not have happened without the 2003 invasion.

An alternative reality without the war would have taken away the realization of the possibility, and possibly affected the psyche of the Arabs. What was possible would have remained only one of the possibilities deep in the minds of ordinary men, never to surface to the real world.

A world without the war also would have taken away the anger against the US. The US in many parts of the Middle East and Northern Africa had close relationships with many Arab dictators. The relations were maintained in the name of stability and much to the detriment to the freedom agenda.

The ordinary man in the streets of the Arab world, already with a low opinion of the US, saw the relationship as a constant reminder of how much they disliked their own autocrats. This only added to local frustrations that had nothing to do with the US directly. All that anger and frustration, along with the cumulative effect of all those issues, created a momentum to push history to converge to a point that sparked the Arab Spring.

Without the war, part of the momentum would not have existed. The cumulative anger without the invasion might not have been enough to start the Arab Spring. That sans-Iraq anger might have been just a weak undercurrent, never to surface and threaten the dictators’ expensive boats, rocked gently by the pleasant waves.

There are a lot of other considerations as well. Maybe without the war, the US would have enough money to bail out Europe. Maybe, Obama would not have been elected as the president. Maybe, we would be still swimming in cheap oil. Maybe. Maybe. Who knows, really?

At least we know one part of history is ending. At least we know the next chapter is a whole new world, for whatever it is worth.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved
First published in The Malaysian Insider on December 18 2011.

Categories
Society

[2472] Douthat on Hitchens

Whereas they feel entirely authentic when they’re couched as “aux armes, citoyens” rallying cries in the struggle against tyranny. Hitchens is never more himself (for better or worse) than when he’s railing against the supposed cruelties of Benedict XVI, or comparing God to Kim Jong-Il. In this sense, he’s really less of an atheist than an anti-theist: Whereas Dawkins and co. are appalled by the belief in God, Hitchens is far more appalled by the idea that anyone would want to obey Him. Every true romantic needs a great foe, a worthy adversary, a villain to whose destruction he can consecrate himself. Never one for half measures, Hitchens just decided to go all the way to the top. [Evaluations. God and the Political Romantic. Ross Douthat. June 17 2010]

Categories
Society

[2456] There is a silver lining behind the Seksualiti Merdeka ban

The Annexe Gallery is Bohemian. It is a world of its own, very different from the rest of banal Malaysian life. It attracts anything but the conservative. Its taste in art is different. Its taste in politics is different. It is young, urban, middle-class and it challenges mainstream culture. It is a special spot in Kuala Lumpur.

All kinds of festivals are held there. Farish Noor is always there to share his alternative understanding of history to challenge the official narrative. In many ways, the larger Central Market Annexe is a center of subversive politics. Hishamuddin Rais used to run a small eatery there, patronized by so many Malaysian lefties, and sometimes, yours truly too. I was there not so much of my support for his mostly left politics. I was there just because I was hungry.

And then, Pang Khee Teik is always there to make anything happen. From what I understand and observe, Pang is the pillar for anything at the Annexe. He made the Annexe what it is today. Fringe but fun. Small but popular.

Pang or really the Annexe Gallery has been organizing Seksualiti Merdeka for a number of years now without any controversy. I took that rather nonchalantly but in retrospect, it was an impressive feat. After all, to organize a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender festival in a jumpily religious Malaysia is not something advisable to do. But those festivals went on anyway, and because it was nationally politically uneventful, I thought nothing much of it. The failure to note what was supposed to be an outlier in a conservative society is perhaps a mental lapse of mine.

But I was not really interested in the fair, despite being aware of it. It is not a Mardi Gras as celebrated in Sydney. The Seksualiti Merdeka festival typically occupies merely a floor of a restored colonial shophouse. It is not big at all, size-wise. It is just some people with booths, forums and maybe performance in a privately-owned premise.

The thought of the festival’s outrageous success to go on without any repercussions within conservative context struck me only after when the Malaysian authority suddenly decided to ban the festival. Some conservatives finally took notice. It is apparent that the festival succeeded previously because the authority or the wider society did not know about the festival.

Now they know of it and decide to ban it.

The ban is a timely reminder for all of us that the LGBT community suffers from extreme prejudice and discrimination by both the state and by the wider society.

That is the silver lining. It raises the profile of the LGBT community in Malaysia and their challenges. Whereas previously the term LGBT would not appear at all in mainstream media, the past several days signaled a change.

That change is both for the better and for the worse. It is for the better because it pushes the boundary of acceptability. It is for the worse for some LGBT community members perhaps, if they want to live a quiet life.

I am not a member of the LGBT community and so, maybe I do not appreciate too much of the preference to stay in the closet. I am not at risk when I see the need for them to come out of the closet. But they need to know that for all the condemnation they receive, there are those whom will put up a thumb-up for the courage they garner.

In any fight against societal discrimination, there will always be a relatively challenging time. That is when the society first becomes aware.  That awareness is an important first stage of any anti-discrimination fight. Without awareness, there can be no fight for equality.

So fight the ban. But take heart if the first fight is lost. It is merely the first step towards a better future.

Categories
Personal Society

[2448] That fucking two ringgit

She claimed she is a student from Nepal. She approached me, asking if I am one? Many thought that I am still in my teen years, and so that question is legitimate. Those far older than me said I have a young face that does not age. Legitimate or not, I was on guard for deception. Why would a stranger ask me that?

Several exchanges of questions and answers later, it became apparent. She was soliciting for donation. A school in Nepal was building a library. No, it was not a physical library. It was an e-library.

My mind went to work. Why would a poor country like Nepal want an e-library? Why not just have a plain old library? Something did not seem right and I did not really want to entertain her. And if she was being truthful, it would be a stupid project.

I quickly said no to her. Politely of course. No reason for rudeness. She was kind enough to say have a good day to me despite the disappointment. I did not care of her disappointment. I suspected she was lying.

I have had many such encounters and I have mastered the art of saying no firmly. The train of thought ran cleanly to reach a rehearsed conclusion. Suspecting the solicitor was lying made it easier.

Later in the day, I found myself pumping gas into a car that I drove. It was just another day at the gas station until an old Malay man with some white hair probably in his 50s or 60s came up to me. I was listening to my iPod, trying to pass the time as quickly as possible and so, I did not really hear what he said when he came up to me. But he held up his two fingers and then made a gesture toward his mouth and stomach. I understood.

I automatically raised my hand to refuse. It was a reflex honed so well, that I did not think of what just happened. I felt nothing. It was a unthinking reflex.

Now, hours later, a pang of guilt is all over me. My conscience is rebelling, asking what if that was you?

I understand what it means to be hungry. I do not mean voluntary hunger or fasting. Despite what Muslims say of Ramadan, how fasting is meant to empathize the suffering of the less well off, the voluntary (in the sense you choose to adhere to the religious duty; it is a matter of whether you want it or not, not can or cannot) nature of it prepares one’s mind for the hunger.

Real hunger comes not out of volition. Real hunger comes due to circumstances that are out of your control. That happened while I was at Michigan. I was constantly hungry for one reason or another. Sometimes it was the cash, being too thrifty and all. Sometimes, it was the restrictive Muslim diet.

The worst was when I went on without eating for more than 24 hours while hiking deep within the Tuolumne Canyon, in the middle of nowhere. The circumstances were one out of stupidity, but it did not matter how it happened. It happened and that is all that matters.

The pain from hunger along with the exhaustion was unbelievable. I had not felt anything worse before, nor anything worse since. The stomach growled endlessly. The hands would shake in a way that shocked me. It was pain that reduced me to tears, I foolishly hoped those tears would make things better. It did not. Pure will and effort did it instead.

As I emerged from the other side of the canyon, a couple saw the state I was in. They took pity of me and drove me to the nearest food place.

It would be preposterously insulting to compare my experience to that of starvation elsewhere. My hunger then is not comparable to the more serious cases of starvation. Still, what matters is that I remember it.

I had forgotten of that experience until today. That experience replayed in my mind as I drove away from that gas station. He asked for a mere two ringgit to relieve his hunger. I said no.

In the rear-mirror, I saw a dejected face. His hunger looked genuine. Maybe out of the hunger, he decided to sit by the pump, trying not to think of it. My heart cracked, but I did not turn around. I did not notice it cracked.

I drove off and on my way home, I played various scenarios in my head. Was it real? Was he being lazy? Was he just lost? If I had given him the money, would he endeavor to prevent the same misfortune to happen again?

I understand the value of second chance. I had mine, multiple of times even, never mind a second chance happening multiple of times is oxymoronic. But it did happen and I cherished all those chances. I could have given his.

If I had given the money, would he ask for more? Justification after justification ran through my head, trying to calm my conscience down. I told myself, I do it all the time and I hate people monetizing pity. Many beggars purposefully display their pitiful state for many others instead of just investing a little effort to actually work. Real honest work. Observe the pity merchants in Bangsar or in the old part of Kuala Lumpur. The lies of it all.

It is all over the world. I have seen it to not naïvely buy whatever goods the pity merchant is selling. Pity is their business and that business is distastefully despicable.

I used that to starve off the noisy troublesome conscience of mine but it just does not want to keep quiet. It does not because the old man appeared genuinely dejected when I said no. He was not professional beggar. He was genuinely in trouble, hungry. I know he was not a pity merchant. He was real.

With that knowledge, my conscience is using my experience to punish me. The unbearable nagging continues. It is angering that it is continuing on so loudly and consistently.

To hell if the old man would beg again tomorrow till eternity. I do not care how perverse an incentive two ringgit can be to the man. I do not want to think rationally of the consequences. Two ringgit is cheap for a clear conscience. I could have bought a clear conscience. Why did I not buy it? I could buy it with my own.

A lot of others shamefully buy it with others’ money. Yes, they buy it.

I wish I had just given the damn two ringgit of mine to the old man. It is my money and no one else’s. It is my conscience and no one else’s. Fucking two ringgit for a whole lot of trouble is not worth it.

But it is too late now.