Monday, April 04, 2005

Fantastic Bit Of Analysis

Although I am not a libertarian, primarily due to the faulty metaphysical and anthropological assumptions of most libertarians, I have always had a great admiration for libertarian economic and social incentive analysis. This lengthy but superb blog essay looks at the dangers of tinkering with the institution of marriage by looking at examples of vast unintended consequences that ensued when other instituions were tinkered with in the past. The whole essay really needs to be read, but here's a neat little insight:
What's more, easy divorce didn't only change the divorce rate; it made drastic changes to the institution of marriage itself. David Brooks makes an argument I find convincing: that the proliferation of the kind of extravagent weddings that used to only be the province of high society (rented venue, extravagent flowers and food, hundreds of guests, a band with dancing, dresses that cost the same as a good used car) is because the event itself doesn't mean nearly as much as it used to, so we have to turn it into a three-ring circus to feel like we're really doing something.

A couple in 1940 (and even more so in 1910) could go to a minister's parlor, or a justice of the peace, and in five minutes totally change their lives. Unless you are a member of certain highly religious subcultures, this is simply no longer true. That is, of course, partly because of the sexual revolution and the emancipation of women; but it is also because you aren't really making a lifetime committment; you're making a lifetime committment unless you find something better to do. There is no way, psychologically, to make the latter as big an event as the former, and when you lost that committment, you lose, on the margin, some willingness to make the marriage work. Again, this doesn't mean I think divorce law should be toughened up; only that changes in law that affect marriage affect the cultural institution, not just the legal practice.

Three laws. Three well-meaning reformers who were genuinely, sincerely incapable of imagining that their changes would wreak such institutional havoc. Three sets of utterly logical and convincing, and wrong arguments about how people would behave after a major change.

1 comment:

Frances said...

"vast unintended consequences" V.U.C.

I say we get T-shirts made that say,"Marriage: Don't V.U.C. with it".

;D