Truth Is Harder to Govern Than Fantasy

There’s a window in life between coming of age and servicing a mortgage during which many make some time for social justice. The Iraq War stirred my lot. Previous generations were spoilt for choice. But it’s hard not to feel that we’ve reached a point where demand for causes outpaces supply.

This is an age in which a single mother on a social housing estate in Manchester can secure £1m of NHS funding for cutting edge gene therapy for an infant child. The military industrial complex and university campuses are in harmonious agreement over a land war in Europe. Both agree that the only public figure determined to end it is as villainous as the war’s belligerent. Student views on climate change are mostly indistinguishable from those of investment banks and private equity firms.

This has driven activism into the marshlands in search of discord with established norms. The assault on those relating to sex and gender extended all the way to the Supreme Court last week.

Draw a circle without a pair of compasses, and you won’t have drawn a circle. But we’ll know what you meant. The idea of a perfect circle survives a messier reality. And so it’s been with sex and gender, night and day, and even life and death (thanks to zombie movies and crack heads).

Under sufficient scrutiny, all meaning slides. Categories leak. In a search for something other than the machine to rage against, activists hit upon the soft underbelly of our civilisation: the fragile axioms that we struggle to justify.

The assault is faltering on a point of coherence, torn between dismantling the gender binary and demanding a chosen place within it. This, more than ideology, led the Supreme Court to defend a stable fiction over an unstable reality. But a more cerebral strategy might not fail indefinitely. Let’s hope those railing for a messier world have a formula for governing the complex truth that’s as functional as that which governs the simple fantasy.

On Death, Birth, and the Blooming of Foxgloves

You’d be hard-pressed to convince an alien observer that anything demonstrates the success of our species more powerfully than the number of us that are here to represent it.

It took around 300,000 years to populate the planet with 4bn humans — and only 50 years to add another. That 50 years was closely preceded by WWII, the most morbid war in human history, itself barely two decades after an earlier festival of death.

If humanity’s utility function is to maximise total human life, war, it seems, doesn’t get in the way.

Japan lost 3m between 1940 to 1945, to total war, including two nuclear bombs. Yet, from 1940 to 1950, it added 10m to its population. At the height of the longest period of peace in the Pacific, it lost 5m — between 2008 to 2024 — and is predicted to lose a further 20m by 2050.

I recall in early life the forest floor blooming to life with foxgloves after a ravaging fire — its first breath of sunlight after decades in shadow. It seems appropriate, on Good Friday, to ponder the peculiar possibility that we need death to survive. And that those peaceable folks like me that don’t seem to be having babies, might be the ones to fulfil Eliot’s prophecy about the way the world ends.

Snow White and the Seven Algorithms

The story of Snow White’s performance at the Box Office was writing itself before ticket sales.

The Times said of Disney today, ‘The studio has been widely criticised by conservatives for the diversity of the casting and for including LGBT characters into films and television shows, with accusations it had attempted to spread a left-wing political agenda.’

But ‘polarised politics’ is what the commentary about the commentary gets wrong. It isn’t the criticism from conservatives that matters. And the criticism that does isn’t over including diversity characters in storylines, or about ‘a left-wing agenda.’

What you’ve got is a majority audience that can see straight through the naked cynicism of Instagram ethics. Stochastic algorithms have made certain ideas more prominent in the population of posts than they are among the populations posting. Disney, like others, have conflated a prevalence among the former with one among the latter. And optimised for it.

Some people are truly ecumenical; some aren’t; and some just shuffle around the criteria for high-status group membership. But most have a nose for virtue being marshalled for self-interest, and they don’t like the smell of it.

Neo-Nazis, Nationalism, and NATO — But Let’s Not Mention That

The gears are finally moving on peace in Ukraine. But why? Ministers and editors warned against a 1930s appeasement. Kiev today, Paris tomorrow. Only troll farms claimed this was about Nato membership and security guarantees. With Putin’s prized asset Trump restored to power, his ambitions will know no bounds, surely.

Well… Britain and the US have been investing in Ukrainian nationalism — exfiltrating its leaders to work throughout the western world, funding nationalist parties, investing in Ukrainian media, promoting the Ukrainian language, and arming nationalist paramilitary groups — for 70 years (Google ‘Operation Aerodynamic’ for a teaser). Even the Kievan Rus are now the Kyivan Rus. It’s enough to make someone in the North Korean Ministry of Information blush.

Here’s what Vance’s parodied speech in Munich got right: enough of the diversion and deception for the stated aims of preserving a free and open society.

Voters don’t have a right to know the performance envelope of the latest military aerospace technology. Governments need secrets. And there might be good reasons for us giving guns and money to neo-Nazi Ukrainian nationalists on and off for decades. But when a hot war with Russia breaks out, that we’ve been doing so warrants a mention.

Lynch, departed

I was never a devotee, but a central feature of Lynch’s work long resonated with me: that folk are either overtly strange, or secretly strange. I don’t think the conceit is as true as it is funny, but I don’t think it’s entirely false either.

Both truer and funnier, though, is its corollary that the macabre is most at home in the mundane. The pristine geometry of clipped front lawns and fluttering apron strings drying in the breeze… Where’s the body?

Smoking Costs — But So Does Living Longer

Extending the smoking ban to more public spaces is rather nice for those like me that don’t smoke. But is seems an odd policy priority.

Strained NHS budgets are naturally foregrounded. And polls show it’s popular; the public sees smoking as a huge financial burden. So, we’re set for another inconclusive dispute over the simple equation, A (tax revenues) minus B (healthcare costs), for which data is sufficiently muddled to be confoundingly difficult to evaluate.

But is it really that simple, anyway? Non-smokers live ten non-productive, post-retirement years longer than their smoking peers. They draw ten more years of public pensions, require ten more years of late-life care, including costly nursing homes, and are more likely to suffer from dementia. Eventually, they land the same burden on the NHS for heart disease and cancer as smokers. Not even smoking compares to old age on morbidity outcomes.

If banning smoking in pub gardens were really about public finances, we’d see this analysis. It’s not, so we don’t. Individual freedom must necessarily be limited when it opposes the public good, but there must be a test — and that test must be passed.

What We Ask of the State, What We Need from Each Other

The Harehills riot reveals cultural divisions, but how significant are these divides for a nation?

In South Korea — arguably the most culturally homogeneous and ethnocentric nation in the OECD — grievance and suspicion between Gyeongseong-do in the east and Jeolla-do in the west are sufficiently deep and enduring to make you wonder whether the nation might have split on both latitude and longitude.

Humans swarm, they don’t ‘integrate’. It’s too soon to say whether Celtic Britons will make their peace with Anglo-Saxon arrivals. That’s been one and a half millennia now. As interest in league tables for ethnicity and religion has declined, new leagues have taken their place, for ideology and social codes. The demand for team membership often seems to outpace supply.

A nation can survive all this. It’s our division of rights and responsibilities between culture and state that has lost coherence. In Britain, culture and state ask the wrong things of each other. We need education, health, and law from the state, but morality, welfare, and order from culture.

I suspect more of a consensus on this among Britain’s cultural islands than pessimists have accounted for. Middle-aged Reform voters would find the cultural values of many recent arrivals to be more familiar than those on their own children’s university campus — a fact both parent and child might take a moment to digest.

We can live with vast differences, and little integration. What we must agree on is the terms of the social contract.

Selective Outrage: Who Do We Grieve For, and Why?

Why do we choose sides in conflicts like Israel-Gaza? Let’s consider child mortality figures in neighbouring conflicts:

• Syrian Civil War: 20,000 children

• Yemen Conflict: 11,000 children

• Libyan Civil War: 5,000 children

• Gaza Conflict: 4,000 children

If you’ve found yourself to be more vocal about Gaza than you’ve been on Syria, Yemen, or Libya, is it really about child mortality or something else?

For supporters of Israel’s self-defense stance, Jan 2008 – Sep 2023 saw 6,407 Palestinian vs. 308 Israeli deaths. Pleading self-defence after inflicting 20x the fatalities also suggests this is about something other than the numbers. 

Then there are other conflicts that receive almost no comment at all. Why has the Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict in the Nagorno-Karabakh region failed to contribute flags to Instagram bios?

If we’re selective in the conflicts over which we choose sides, and pay little regard to comparative fatality counts, our real solidarity is more likely to others at home than to victims abroad — and a less fitting tribute to them than they deserve. 

There is a city that doesn’t sleep, but it’s not NYC

Here’s the thing about the round-the-clock city immortalised by Frank Sinatra: it’s dead by 2am.

Tell me what time you wake up in the morning, and I’ll tell you how much this bothers you. But if the absence of life after 2am doesn’t irk, the claims to it ought to.

Those eager to correct me by citing a few drinking venues with late closing times are looking for something less from a city than a true urban nighthawk. I’m not undervaluing the hour of live jazz that I’m staggering to Smalls for, an hour or two later than I’ll need to arrive at a jazz venue in London or Paris. And I’m sure there’s something going on over the weekend in a warehouse in Bushwick.

But a clutch of venues awake does not a city make. These pockets of life are defined by a background of perfect slumber that’s un-roused by some trains rumbling underground, or by the odd taxi flitting from bar to club. By 11pm, the night’s on life support. The vibe at Bemelmans Bar involves the absence of one in any street between there and your next venue, when you leave at midnight.

Which brings me to the subject of this article. I’m given to believe that Seoul has never slept. Nightlife venues, a necessary but insufficient condition of this claim, make a worthy contribution to it. Not only can you find clubs, bars, and singing rooms open until your hotel breakfast’s being served, but you can find several entire districts brimming with them. You can shout to each other over beers and soju in a crowded pub at 5am, or drink a fine whisky over a cerebral discussion in a cocktail bar, with hard bop playing on an audiophile’s hifi rig, until at least 6am. (I know what you’re thinking, but others come, too.)

More tellingly, you can find a retail shopping mall open till 2am. You can go for a meal, or a coffee — reasonable ones, I mean — at every hour between midnight and office opening times. You can access parcel dispatch services. When you search for a 24-hour study room to sit and work in church-silence, it’s nearby, open, and it really won’t close. You’ll never be more than five minutes away from somewhere to buy a toothbrush, or replace a lost charger, at any time of the day or night. That I’ve had a large legal document printed, bound, and dispatched at 4am doesn’t speak to the lack of effort required to do so.

I’ve had samples made, labels printed, trims transported, branded steel signs laser-cut, and production meetings — at a few hours’ notice — at every hour of the day and night.

So exhilarating is the mere possibility of doing anything at any hour that I’ve spent more time indulging in it than I have accounting for it. There’s some evidence of a self-perpetuating economic ecosystem: sprawling wholesale night markets in the east district of Seoul, selling all manner of consumer goods, open for shops to source inventory after their own closing times. An economy for food and fun for the cascade of wholesalers finishing their shifts extends into the morning, beyond the window that services partying office workers on Northeast Asian hours.

But mostly this all just feels part of something, well, Korean. Until recently the least-known among the community of rich nations, South Korea is home to a culture of efficiency, with work ethics that live up to the regional stereotype. Tempers run high, and society sometimes feels like it’s respirating more frustration than oxygen, but there’s an atmosphere of capability: that solutions are not merely possible, but inevitable.

During the pandemic, the British government and press hotly debated Sweden’s health policy decisions, while South Korea — a densely populated country of over 50 million people that neither imposed a national lockdown, nor mandated working from home — was reporting a fraction of both deaths and GDP regression. By the end of 2022, the nation had endured 32,000 Covid deaths against the UK’s 215,000; GDP declined by less than 1% YOY in 2020, against the UK’s double-digit negative growth for the same period at the pandemic’s nadir. Those sceptical of Korea’s Covid reporting can review all-cause mortality data for the past five years, revealing no noticeable signs of a pandemic. This is a nation with form on ensuring the show goes on.

Doubtless there’s a human cost to keeping this sleepless urban machine whirring; a nation known for its violent labour movements, and for protests that attract seven-figure attendances, might go to increasing efforts to count it. Until then, though, here’s a real city that never sleeps, where inspiration from the most exotic and mysterious hours of the day would leave today’s Edward Hopper spoiled for choice.

Jobs in the ‘gig economy’ are more in need of respect than sympathy

Often unseen among those itching to serve a cause is the social hierarchy created by one. Claiming yourself a champion claims another a villain, and a third your charge. There’s only one guaranteed winner, here. Trendy graduates on Fleet Street celebrating the emerging challenges faced by Silicon Valley’s ‘servant economy’ are pitying entire tribes of workers into class relegation; it’s much less clear whether they’re improving lives any more than the jobs that offend them.

Like all groups, those staffing on-demand driving services are a more diverse bunch than even the best-intentioned stereotypes account for. I’ve been Uber-ed around by the privately educated son of a Mayfair art dealer, a full-stack software developer, a Nigerian revolutionary, and an ex-fighter pilot. Another, nearing the end of both his shift and his career, was looking forward to retiring back in Sierra Leone, leaving behind his younger daughter as an accident and emergency registrar at St Thomas’ Hospital, and his elder daughter a fully qualified anaesthetist.

Becoming party to such insights should have been unlikely in the context of the reportedly nameless and faceless servility of these roles. Except such upstairs-downstairs parallels (👉 Sarah O’Connor, Financial Times) are reported suspiciously more often by those that seem to think they’re upstairs. The now-defunct but widely cited Doteveryone think-tank, for all its laudable stated intentions, did less to certify the dehumanising properties of the job than to inadvertently advance bigoted notions about its inability to convey status.

None of which is to say we shouldn’t pay attention to creeping societal changes to work. If we’re to see more of tech startups that demand a looser covenant between business and workers, it’s right to discuss what it means for the social contract — seriously, I mean, rather than with voguish outrage. Given that Uber, together with several on-demand delivery brands, now employs its UK staff — unlike most of its traditional analogue antecedents — one presumes focus will turn to more nuanced grievances. But in the meantime, incautious remarks about an Uber shift turning a human into some other primate denigrate the driver more than their role, and are guilty of a greater injustice than that they’re intending to speak to.

A little humility might better equip one to realise that those who’ve survived civil war, piloted a MiG-21, navigated the UK asylum system, or had both children enrolled with the Royal Society of Medicine, probably aren’t pawns in anyone’s game. And deserve, from anyone given to either, less sympathy than they do respect.