1. Vangel says

    Aren’t you missing something Edward? The choice is not between living in the US with its big but stable government and living in Somalia, where the corrupt military government collapsed. What you have to ask is if the Somali people were better off today or before their corrupt government fell. If you look at the data there is no question that the fall of the government has increased the standard of living, overall health, education and security. Unlike before, when free expression was forbidden and punishable by death, there are private newspapers and magazines. Infant mortality has declined by 24%. Access to sanitation and health care has improved. Somalia has improved more than its neighbours, who still have functioning governments.

    I have to say that I am disappointed because I expected something more than a clever appeal to statist sentiments.

    1. Edward Harrison says

      This is a parody, if you hadn’t noticed. Get a sense of humour. Somalia is an example of anarchy, not freedom, my friend.

      1. Vangel says

        I know that it is supposed to be a parody. But it is the type that is used by statists to argue for more government.

        And you are still missing the point. The data shows that Somalis are better off now, under the ‘anarchy’ that you frown upon, than they were under the government that was overthrown. That makes the current condition preferable to the previous one. I think that you need to really examine your belief system. For a guy who claims some libertarian leanings at time you seem to cheerlead statism much more often than not.

Comments are closed.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More