PSA for Teabaggers

12 years ago

Previously, previously.

Tags: , , ,

23 Responses:

  1. TJIC says:
    12 years ago at 4:17 am

    Speaking as an anarchocapitalist who thinks that we really SHOULD look to Somalia as evidence that anarchy can function...

    this video was hilarious!
    • libertroll says:
      12 years ago at 9:20 am

      Hey, at least Somalia has the cheapest internet in all of Africa. Every other country has scarce and overpriced bandwidth provided by the state telecom monopoly, while Somalia doesn't have a state telecom monopoly, for lack of a state. And wasn't the cholera thing in Zimbabwe? They do have a state there, it's just run by a senile and crazy leader.
  2. A Country Farmer says:
    12 years ago at 9:41 am

    Somalia has lacked a national government since the fall of Siad Barre’s dictatorship in 1991. Rival factions immediately plunged the country into civil war in failed attempts to install themselves as the new national government. U.S. and UN humanitarian and military intervention from 1993 through 1995 failed to restore peace.

    Although all data from Somalia must be treated with some caution, when looking at these 13 measures of living standards, the overall picture seems clear. Somalia may be very poor, but the loss of its government does not appear to have harmed standards of living. On many measures Somalia compares favorably with the other 42 Sub-Saharan countries. Since losing its central government, we find that Somalia improved measures of well being both in absolute terms and relative to other African states.

    At a minimum, laws that protect person and property, a dispute settlement process, and a currency are needed. People often assume that these are public goods that the government must provide. But the Somalis have managed to provide forms of all of these without a national government… When the Somali state collapsed, much of the population returned to their traditional legal system.

    When a dispute arises between two members of different clans, their clan elders must reach a compromise. If they are unable to do so, they appoint an elder from another clan to settle the dispute. After a verdict is reached, the criminal must compensate his victim the appropriate amount. If he is unable or unwilling, his extended family must pay the compensation. Every Somali is born into an insurance group based on their lineage to a common great-grandfather. Out of their own self-interest these insurance groups help enforce the judgment on wrongdoers.

    Although the interpretation of the law stems from clan elders, the clans are not de facto governments. Upon becoming an adult, individuals are free to choose new insurance groups and elders. In addition, individual clans are not geographic monopolies.

    Far from chaos and economic collapse, we find that Somalia is generally doing better than when it had a state.

    Somalia After State Collapse: Chaos or Improvement?, Benjamin Powell, Ryan Ford, Alex Nowrasteh, The Independent Institute, November 30, 2006
  3. Matt Rose says:
    12 years ago at 11:41 am

    Maybe other posters should actually read a little bit about what life is like in Mogadishu before saying that it's not as badly off as it was. Speaking as somebody who lived there from '85 - '87, and then who had family who worked there from 2001 - 2005, it is far, far worse now than it was back when they had a functional gov't.

    Take one thing: Cell phones. Yes, cell phone rates are cheaper than anywhere else in Africa, because there are no regulations. This is because you can only talk to people who are on the same cell network as you, so most people who have them have three or four different phones to talk to different people.

    Not to mention the massive drought, the fact that the population has declined from 8m people to 5m , because of death and migration. The fact that of those 5m remaining, 1.5m are currently living in refugee camps.

    It did have beautiful beaches tho, and a beautiful culture. It still makes me sad to think of what's happening there
  4. fantasygoat says:
    12 years ago at 12:11 pm

    I have Cholera!
  5. Matt says:
    12 years ago at 2:37 pm

    I was expecting a slightly different hilarious video.
  6. Joe Johnston says:
    12 years ago at 4:36 pm

    You all realize Ayn Rand was a comedian of Andy Kaufman proportions, right? When she realized she couldn't make ends met as a writer, she went on social security for Fnord's sake...
    • James Daniel Ross says:
      12 years ago at 5:29 pm

      Sucks that she would get the benefits of a system she was forced to pay into. Wow, what a closet statist.
      • Breton Plumbroke says:
        12 years ago at 5:48 pm

        I find it utterly fascinating how flexible the objectivist philosophy can be in the face of criticism. If someone finds a problem or a contradiction, it magically changes shape to something else.
        • James Daniel Ross says:
          12 years ago at 6:00 pm

          OK, so she didn't have a right to get that money/economic power back? Because if that's what you are saying, then I ask where your iron hard resolve that the system is just goes to hide when I bring up this point?
          • jwz says:
            12 years ago at 6:08 pm

            BORED NOW
          • Breton Plumbroke says:
            12 years ago at 6:19 pm

            HAHA what universe do you live in? I hope you see a psychologist about your runaway delusions, but I know you won't.
            • James Daniel Ross says:
              12 years ago at 4:46 am

              The universe where arguments actually have points of logic and consistency. Your projections and mockery do not make you right, and do not make you intellectual. In fact they seem to point to the conclusion that you have no idea why you believe what you believe other than someone 'cool' told you to do so.
              • Breton Plumbroke says:
                12 years ago at 5:35 am

                Okay I'm going to break this down:
                1. I have no interest in "arguing" with you, and so made no attempt.
                2. I have nothing in particular to prove, particularly not to you.
                3. I have at no point stated what my beliefs are, and yet you are accusing *me* of projection, and pseudointellectuality. lulz.
                4. There's really no point in arguing with you anyway even if I did want to. You haven't at any point made enough sense for there to be anything to criticise; What on earth would I argue *against* ?, furthermore, your belief system is so fluid and nonsensical that.. once again--- what exactly would I be arguing against?
                Really you're just looking to pick a fight, and I'm just poking you with a stick and pissing you off for my own entertainment. If you want to have a *discussion* this is clearly the wrong forum for such a thing, and you're the wrong participant.
          • gryazi says:
            12 years ago at 7:55 pm

            GOVERNMENT OUT OF MY MEDICARE
  7. James Daniel Ross says:
    12 years ago at 5:28 pm

    Mmm! That's good straw man!

Comments are closed because this post is 12 years old.

  • Previously