Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Brief Somalia Explanation

Been asked about this a little recently. Already put my thoughts about Somalia on someone else's blog, so figured I'd post it here too: short and sweet.

Somalia, despite its poor state of being, is actually a highly-convincing case for anarcho-capitalism-- especially as related to other forms of predicted anarchy (anarcho-communism/syndicalism). Quite simply, it's an anarchy- applied on a nation-wide scale- and it turned out to be capitalist, as opposed to literal chaos or some different form of order.
Not only did it turn out capitalist, but many of the institutions ancap theory predicts have manifested-- granted, sometimes in crude forms. Arbitration is managed by various mutually-agreeable professionals with regard to disputes (incentivized to rule justly so as to be picked again) who operate under privately-constructed civil and tort law, and private defense is provided by very large security agencies.
This, incidentally, is where the real problem lies-- "very large security agencies." It's widely acknowledged that ancapism functions properly when the industry of private defense is managed by a large number of smaller entities, and currently the number stands at about 4 or 6 major players for Somalia. The problem with so few and so large is that they each have the potential to become government, and so they wage war for that when the goal is in sight.
This issue is heavily exacerbated by UN funding to various what-have-now-been-deemed-warlords, since it makes the possibility gleam a little brighter each time it happens. As result, it's a power politics game king-of-the-hill style, where each time one guy's too high up the hill, the rest have to bring him down- by force.
Despite all of this, which is the major flaw- likely caused as result of the defense agencies being various pieces of the pre-existing government military still loyal to specific generals- Somalia's conditions have improved dramatically since the government's removal, including improvements to life expectancy, literacy rate and vast GDP growth.
They're doing better than they have ever done with a government by a very wide margin-- and that's given the unfortunate, at-least-partially-'artifical' scenario of large defense agencies and the flaws associated.

4 comments:

  1. Interesting, I think that initially the thought of Somalia being a positive model for anything is unbelievable, but I can see you a country in crisis might find capitalism its only possible solution beyond another country stepping in and taking over.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And obviously, Somalia is a giant train wreck. Nobody wants to live there if they could live in, say, the United States.

      But Somalia under government has, historically, been even worse- and by a very wide margin.

      Somalia, therefore, is proof of two things:
      1. No government does not mean no order.
      2. In at least some cases, Government is worse than no government.

      Both of these are strong points in favor of anarcho-capitalism.

      Delete
  2. If I did not care so much for your safety, I would honestly suggest that you visit Somalia and see first-hand if you think the anarcho-capitalist model is working there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The claim for anarcho-capitalism is not that it's initiation solves all problems instantaneously and produces a satisfactory society. Simply that any society will be better off under its implementation than they would be under government. In the case of Somalia, that seems to be so. Every single government tried there, including the one the United Nations is currently attempting to initiate by force, has resulted in far worse living conditions.

      Obviously my current living environment is far superior. The United States is a better place to live, and no one who lives here would ever- in their right mind- move there.

      Delete