Anarchy In Somalia

Economist Robert Murphy explains why a state of anarchy is always superior to the existence of a State in this Mises Institute article:

Earlier in the year, the BBC featured a series of articles commemorating the 20th anniversary of the fall of the state in Somalia. Although the articles expressed the typical revulsion at "anarchy," the series was surprisingly balanced for such a mainstream outlet. Somalia is undeniably experiencing progress according to several criteria, despite (or, some would say, because of) its lack of a strong central government.

Economists familiar with the Rothbardian tradition have taken the analysis even further, persuasively arguing that Somalia is much better without a state than it was with one. The standard statist put-down — "If you Rothbardians like anarchy so much, why don't you move to Somalia?" — misses the point. The Rothbardian doesn't claim that the absence of a state is a sufficient condition for bliss. Rather, the Rothbardian says that however prosperous and law-abiding a society is, adding an institution of organized violence and theft will only make things worse.

I sometimes read that website but missed that particular article. Immensely interesting, thanks for sharing. The idea that they "have to pay private security firms to keep their places safe" and the rebuttal that under a Government law-enforcement also has to be financed, namely through forced taxation was particularly interesting. I wonders how a more wealthy country would deal with extremely limited Government. Probably not that bad at all, considering the Somalis managed to grow under this non-system.

I love it.

I remember a time when I would post an article supporting anarchy and get like 1 flag.

Ever.

Now I got 4 in like 10 minutes.

It must mean progress is being made and people are waking up to the violence that is the State.

Is it so crazy to propose that people be allowed to keep the fruits of their own labor?

Is it so crazy to propose that the protection of private property should be voluntarily funded?

Is it so crazy to propose that the use of coercion to fund government is just as much a crime as if a private citizen did it?

NO - I say.

they didnt want our help,let them eat cake....or each other....who cares?

Originally posted by mnemeth1
I love it.

I remember a time when I would post an article supporting anarchy and get like 1 flag.

Ever.

Now I got 4 in like 10 minutes.

Maybe its because some of your threads have examined anarchy from an unrealistic and unviable position. I clearly recall a position of yours proposing legalizing drunk driving for example. Not sure thats a good way to promote Libertarian views.

This one however is brilliant and typically I come back a few hours later and nobody has replied. So here's another bump for this thread.

Philosopher Stefan Molyneux discusses the current state of anarchy in Somalia:

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by mnemeth1
I love it.

I remember a time when I would post an article supporting anarchy and get like 1 flag.

Ever.

Now I got 4 in like 10 minutes.

Maybe its because some of your threads have examined anarchy from an unrealistic and unviable position. I clearly recall a position of yours proposing legalizing drunk driving for example. Not sure thats a good way to promote Libertarian views.

This one however is brilliant and typically I come back a few hours later and nobody has replied. So here's another bump for this thread.

The hard questions have to be addressed.

I'm not going to tip toe around the hard issues and woo people with beautiful speech like:

"Hope"

"Change"

"Yes we can"

Drunk driving is no crime if there is no victim. Hitting people while drunk should be illegal. Damaging property while drunk should be illegal.

Driving from the bar to your house while drunk is not a crime. A crime must have a victim.

Economic growth under anarchy does not surprise me, laissez-faire policy is generaly beneficial for the economy.

How does Somalian growth compare to neighbouring countries with governments? According to my google search, it is not good:

Ethiopia GDP per capita

Kenya GDP per capita

Somalia GDP per capita

Source 2

So the economy seems to be stagnating in the past decade, contrary to neighbouring countries. Telecomunications growth may be similar in other African countries, I believe this has more to do with progress in technology than political systems. I dont think anarchy is bad for the economy, but I dont believe it is good either. And we must keep in mind that there are also other important things when it comes to quality of life than simple economic growth. A country where growth is 3% but everyone has public healthcare or education accessible and there is safety and stability due to monopoly on violence may be superior in quality of life than country where the growth is 6% but these social services are nonexistent, and there are conflicts between factions.

reply to post by Maslo


You have to watch Stefan's presentation in the video I just posted.

The GDP numbers are all State lies, so trying make sense out of Somalia's economic condition by looking at State reported numbers is a lot like using growth numbers that were reported by the Soviet Union under communism.

Stefan uses alternative metrics reported by third parties.

By every standard of living metric, Somalia is better off today.

reply to post by Homedawg

they didnt want our help,let them eat cake....or each other....who cares?

Stupid ignorance.

Somalia is in the state it is because of the West. And the West will taste their own medicine in due time at the hands of China.

Originally posted by Maslo
Economic growth under anarchy does not surprise me, laissez-faire policy is generaly beneficial for the economy.

How does Somalian growth compare to neighbouring countries with governments? According to my google search, it is not good:

Ethiopia GDP per capita

Kenya GDP per capita

Somalia GDP per capita

Source 2

So the economy seems to be stagnating in the past decade, contrary to neighbouring countries. Telecomunications growth may be similar in other African countries, I believe this has more to do with progress in technology than political systems. I dont think anarchy is bad for the economy, but I dont believe it is good either. And we must keep in mind that there are also other important things when it comes to quality of life than simple economic growth. A country where growth is 3% but everyone has public healthcare or education accessible and there is safety and stability due to monopoly on violence may be superior in quality of life than country where the growth is 6% but these social services are nonexistent, and there are conflicts between factions.

edit on 1/7/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

What about foreign investment and natural resources to be traded?

Do they have much of those?

Between Somaliland, Puntland, Islamist militants and various warlords I don't think Somalia (outside of Mogadishu) can really be classed as 'anarchist' in any meaningful way other than the absence of a powerful centralised state.

Here is a good map: upload.wikimedia.org...

reply to post by Zamini


They THREW us out...whomever caused it,as YOU say,makes no diff....they said Leave,we left....I say again....Let them eat cake if they can find any,or each other as they have been doing since Lucy's or Procounsls time......thats a real nice place to stay out of....blacks ruling blacks,without interference from Whites...the african dream,just like they want to do.....good example for all to see who want the same thing

reply to post by Homedawg

They THREW us out...whomever caused it,as YOU say,makes no diff....

Of course it makes a difference who caused it, are you stupid?

they said Leave,we left

Now you're just making stuff up...

....I say again....Let them eat cake if they can find any,or each other as they have been doing since Lucy's or Procounsls time......thats a real nice place to stay out of....

What happened to the fishing industry of Somalia? Ow wait you don't know...you are ignorance ridden up to the point that you can't even be bothered to type out words. Go get a reality check.

reply to post by Zamini


Fishing industry?..fishing for what?ransom form ships?..naw...after Blackhawk Down we saw no benefit to us staying....they sent us a message..."We dont want you"...so now they got ehat they wanted....blacks in charge of blacks with no White interference.....so why now,all of a sudden,Whites have something good for them?...I guess eating each other got old so they decided to ask for rice,flour and wheat?...too bad,so sad,go use all your warlord skills to find you something to eat///maybe fish?

Click here for more information.

When you setup base camp in the paradise of Somalia be sure to keep us up to date on how much better off you are than us idiots in the West.

reply to post by Zamini


"The West" is who?..Everybody White?..and you call me Racist?...By attacking "The West" in such general terms,you sound like husseins father.." The Roots Of Obamas Rage"...so what is it now you want"The West"(whites) to do?..Send money and food and let the warlords troops have it?..Come back and take over?...What American company dumped radioactive waste in the ocean?...Name them...oh,wait,they were European,not American..."The West" Again?Nope...africa has taken the reigns in its teeth and declared independence from Whites(The West) so now they cn roll with what they have...as they wished to do...."The West" can stay out of there.....

Yes, I'm calling you a racist. You want me to prove it? (in case you don't know me, I will).

It is quite clear what you are trying to do here and it won't work. The case around Somalia is not something someone of your intellectual caliber could ever hope to grasp.

And mods, I really appreciate you removing my non-racist rant(it was out of bounds, I admit) but what I appreciate even more is you not removing this guys racist diatribe, just look at his post history.

Have a good one, racist.

reply to post by Youmakemewonder


So dumping nuclear waste off the waters of Somalia is the fault of the people of Somalia?

Forbidding the people of Somalia to fish off their own coasts because the European Union(France is the big perpetrator here) wants to fish there?

Please, you people are as shallow and uninformed as they come. Let me guess, religious?