Somalia a rousing success, acording to free-market anarcho-capitalists
-
Imagine if it were otherwise. Imagine any part of the globe not being dominated by a central government and the people there surviving, even prospering. If such were to happen and the idea spread to other parts of Africa or other parts of the world, the mystique of the necessity of the state might be irreparably damaged, and many politicians and bureaucrats might find themselves walking about looking for work.
And here I have been pointing to Somalia as an example of the failure of the unfettered free market! Apparently it is now a capitalist paradise. Read for yourself!
-
Imagine if it were otherwise. Imagine any part of the globe not being dominated by a central government and the people there surviving, even prospering. If such were to happen and the idea spread to other parts of Africa or other parts of the world, the mystique of the necessity of the state might be irreparably damaged, and many politicians and bureaucrats might find themselves walking about looking for work.
And here I have been pointing to Somalia as an example of the failure of the unfettered free market! Apparently it is now a capitalist paradise. Read for yourself!
And?
-
Imagine if it were otherwise. Imagine any part of the globe not being dominated by a central government and the people there surviving, even prospering. If such were to happen and the idea spread to other parts of Africa or other parts of the world, the mystique of the necessity of the state might be irreparably damaged, and many politicians and bureaucrats might find themselves walking about looking for work.
And here I have been pointing to Somalia as an example of the failure of the unfettered free market! Apparently it is now a capitalist paradise. Read for yourself!
Hmmm...failure of free market... capitalist paradise.... should the focus really be such? How about imposing a societal construct that is truly foreign to a pastoral peoples? Reading the article its more about the imposition of a central government at the insistence of the United Nations and less about which market economy that's subscribed to. So what's your beef with it? Sounds like they are much better off without a central government. Maybe other countries should stay out of their business.
This statement was never false.
-
And?
And it's a joke. The average Somalian lives to be 48 years old. The place is a miserable shithole. Yet, somehow, business interests are thriving there. It's the prime example of the unfettered free market in action, so economists are thrilled.
-
Hmmm...failure of free market... capitalist paradise.... should the focus really be such? How about imposing a societal construct that is truly foreign to a pastoral peoples? Reading the article its more about the imposition of a central government at the insistence of the United Nations and less about which market economy that's subscribed to. So what's your beef with it? Sounds like they are much better off without a central government. Maybe other countries should stay out of their business.
This statement was never false.
Chris-Kaiser wrote:
Hmmm...failure of free market... capitalist paradise.... should the focus really be such?
It's the focus of the article. Why would an article about an AIDS-ravaged human rights disaster mention the price of a mobile phone call?
-
And it's a joke. The average Somalian lives to be 48 years old. The place is a miserable shithole. Yet, somehow, business interests are thriving there. It's the prime example of the unfettered free market in action, so economists are thrilled.
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
And it's a joke. The average Somalian lives to be 48 years old. The place is a miserable shithole. Yet, somehow, business interests are thriving there.
All of Africa is a dump. According to your link, the general quality of life has improved among the population as a whole (not "business interests"). I'm unfamiliar and generally apathetic about Somalia, but apparently their rate of improvement exceeds that of Africa in general. So I'm failing to see your point that progress in the absence of government is somehow bad.
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
It's the prime example of the unfettered free market in action, so economists are thrilled.
Economists have been well aware of the benefits of the free-market for some time and America is the penultimate example of its achievements. There is no need to look towards the undeveloped economies of backwards nations for evidence. However, you're incorrectly applying the concept of anarcho-capitalism (which is the absence of government entirely) with free-market capitalism (which requires a legal construct, but opposes government economic intervention). The vast majority of sound-minded capitalists oppose anarcho-capitalism thanks to the lessons learned from our own economy in the 1920's.
-
Imagine if it were otherwise. Imagine any part of the globe not being dominated by a central government and the people there surviving, even prospering. If such were to happen and the idea spread to other parts of Africa or other parts of the world, the mystique of the necessity of the state might be irreparably damaged, and many politicians and bureaucrats might find themselves walking about looking for work.
And here I have been pointing to Somalia as an example of the failure of the unfettered free market! Apparently it is now a capitalist paradise. Read for yourself!
Could you explain why you got so worked up over a book review of a book about the indigenous legal system of Somalia ( the stuff you quoted is peripheral at best to the topic of the piece)? And where did the "free market anarcho-capitalists" business come from? is that because of the site where it is posted ( the Mises Institute)? if so perhaps you should read their "about" page - they aren't exactly that either. A brief quote: "The Ludwig von Mises Institute is the research and educational center of classical liberalism, libertarian political theory, and the Austrian School of economics." Oh I'm sorry, it was just a troll. I should have realized...
-
Chris-Kaiser wrote:
Hmmm...failure of free market... capitalist paradise.... should the focus really be such?
It's the focus of the article. Why would an article about an AIDS-ravaged human rights disaster mention the price of a mobile phone call?
Sounds more like you are trying to fit the data to your model.
This statement was never false.
-
Could you explain why you got so worked up over a book review of a book about the indigenous legal system of Somalia ( the stuff you quoted is peripheral at best to the topic of the piece)? And where did the "free market anarcho-capitalists" business come from? is that because of the site where it is posted ( the Mises Institute)? if so perhaps you should read their "about" page - they aren't exactly that either. A brief quote: "The Ludwig von Mises Institute is the research and educational center of classical liberalism, libertarian political theory, and the Austrian School of economics." Oh I'm sorry, it was just a troll. I should have realized...
Rob Graham wrote:
classical liberalism, libertarian political theory
Google those terms. Did you read the article and have something critical to say or are you just coming in to call me a troll? I was outraged when I read this. Somalia is an embarrassment to the world and the only thing that will fix it is intervention. This is obvious to anyone who isn't a greedy moron. Then this article comes out to say it is doing just fine. Laughable.
-
Rob Graham wrote:
classical liberalism, libertarian political theory
Google those terms. Did you read the article and have something critical to say or are you just coming in to call me a troll? I was outraged when I read this. Somalia is an embarrassment to the world and the only thing that will fix it is intervention. This is obvious to anyone who isn't a greedy moron. Then this article comes out to say it is doing just fine. Laughable.
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
Google those terms.
Neither of those terms equate to anarcho-capitalism. Anarcho-capitalism is essentially libertarianism taken to its extremes wherein the legal constructs in ecomonic systems are deemed unnecessary and government is removed altogether. Classical liberalism yielded the US Constitution which (obviously) defined a government. In general, libertarians don't oppose the existence of government (as anarcho-capitalists do), but do prefer its strict limitations.
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
Then this article comes out to say it is doing just fine. Laughable.
Where does he say that? It seems that he pointed out that their progress is superior in the absence of government than with it...Not that they're doing "just fine". The former relates to a rate of change and the latter to the current state.