Anarchist analysis of Somalia

[KickMcCann]

I was wondering if any Anarchists on the board could offer their analysis of Somalia and its lack of a central government for the last 10 years or so. I know they have a government in exile and of course the warlords, but could it be considered as it is often labeled, Anarchy? Or does Somalia fail because Anarchism is actually a conscious movement that requires conceptual undertanding and intention? Or does Anarchy entail an evolutionary process that the Somalian consciousness has not yet reached?
I hope this isn't taken as a loaded question, just an honest question about a nation without an effective government.

[which doctor]

Internecine warfare between proto-governments has not yet resulted in a single hierarchy that can claim sole governmental power. Some argue the chaos itself acts as a sort of government: polyarchy, oligarchy, or kleptocracy. Others suggest Somalia is an example of "Stateless" or Anarcho- Capitalism", in which, absent a functioning government, production and distribution of all goods and services are allocated by a free market, which extends to include traditional government-supplied services, such as protection and a regime of law.

I would call it anarchy(the chaotic kind), but it's certainly not an Anarchist society.

[Hit The North]

An "Anarchist analysis" of anything would be quite a novel concept.

I mean, it's not their strong point is it? ;)

[Nachie]

The word "anarchy" is bandied about by the capitalist media so as to give it as negative a connotation as possible. The Leninists do this too, talking about the "anarchy of capitalism" that will be replaced by the "logic" of their socialism.

There is indeed chaos in Somalia, not anarchy. Anarchy (or "no archies", no hierarchy) would imply that the resources of society have been redistributed evenly and coordination for the reproduction of culture, food, etc. would be radically decentralized as much to the individual as possible. We know that this will advance at different rates and in different forms according to local custom and material conditions, but we can categorically say that Somalia is definitely not an anarchist country.

What we have in Somalia is not a lack of "archies" but a multiplicity of them. The country has no effective central government because rival warlords are in a perpetual civil war for control, and in the areas where they control there is definitely some kind of "government" - usually a direct dictatorship of the gun, enforced by drug addicted militias. The "everyday people" do not have any say in this process, so what we have is civil and tribal war, not anarchy in the anarchist sense.

In addition we also now know that the United States has been funding these warlords (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4972800.stm) as operatives in its "War On Terror" and what little central government there is in Somalia has been extending its control through the imposition of Sharia (Islamic) Law, I personally can't see any reason to identify Somalia with anarchism.

There are "lawless" areas all over the world. Sudan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, all have "tribal regions" or areas that are in upheaval and without central government, but none of these are anarchist anti-states simply by virtue of not having any elected ministers.

This isn't to say that a situation or revolution has to call itself "anarchist" in order for it to be so. For a better example of evolving anarchy in action, check out the Mexican town of San Salvador Atenco, which is currently involved in a mass insurrection around Mexico City.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by Citizen [email protected] 5 2006, 03:09 PM
An "Anarchist analysis" of anything would be quite a novel concept.

I mean, it's not their strong point is it? ;)
For someone who has the word non-sectarian marxist as their custom title, you certainly do little to honour it.

Your post was spam and you will recieve a warning point for it.

Incidently, if you take the time to use google, I am confident you will be able to find a wide selection of anarchist analysis on varying issues.

[Hit The North]

Originally posted by The Anarchist Tension+May 5 2006, 04:42 PM--> (The Anarchist Tension @ May 5 2006, 04:42 PM)
Citizen [email protected] 5 2006, 03:09 PM
An "Anarchist analysis" of anything would be quite a novel concept.

I mean, it's not their strong point is it? ;)
For someone who has the word non-sectarian marxist as their custom title, you certainly do little to honour it.

Your post was spam and you will recieve a warning point for it.

Incidently, if you take the time to use google, I am confident you will be able to find a wide selection of anarchist analysis on varying issues. [/b]
No room for humour on this thread then? Ho hum. :rolleyes:

[Janus]

Yes, there is no central government in Somalia and it has been this way for over a decade since the Siad Barre regime. Even in Mogadishu, there are different areas controlled by different tribes. There are breakaway republic in the NW and NE. However, the international community recongnizes the Abdullahi Yusuf Yey's government as the government for the entire country even though his control is quite questionable.

Basically, whenever the word anarchy is used to describe Somalia, it furthers the misconception that anarchy is about chaos. <_<

[amanondeathrow]

An "Anarchist analysis" of anything would be quite a novel concept.

I mean, it&#39;s not their strong point is it?

Somalia, Kenya and the instability of some modern African nations (http://struggle.ws/africa/discuss/strong_state_jan01.html)

[Morpheus]

The situation in Somalia is the result of an attempt to create a representative democracy, not an attempt to create anarchy. The US-backed dictatorship was overthrown near the end of the cold war by a pro-democracy revolt. One of the ways the old regime maintained power was by playing different groups against each other, keeping them at each other&#39;s throat. With its overthrow these groups then went to war with each other, each proclaiming itself the true government of Somalia. Civil war broke out and the country collapsed into choas. The notion that Somalia proves anarchy is choas is based on circular logic. If it implies any system is choas, it&#39;s that bourgeois democracy is choas because that&#39;s what was trying to be achieved. Of course there are other examples of bourgeois democracy where things went differently, but the same can be said of anarchy.