Log in

View Full Version : Was Somali an example of an Anarchist society?



blackstone
16th October 2007, 22:50
I wanted to pose the question on whether or not Somali is an example of an anarchist society(whether anarcho-capitalist or other). To begin, i will post a few things.

This is what wikipedia has to say about it. Lord knows we love wikipedia.


Somalia, from 1991-present, is cited by academic scholars and in anarchist thought as a real-world example of a stateless society and legal system,[1] primarily from an anarcho-capitalist standpoint. From the fall of Siad Barre's government in January of 1991 until the capture of Mogadishu by the Islamic Courts Union in June of 2006, there was no permanent national government in Somalia, a situation which continues as of 2007.[2] Large areas of the country such as Somaliland, Puntland, Galmudug, Maakhir and Southwestern Somalia are internationally unrecognized autonomous regions while the remaining areas, including the capital Mogadishu, were divided into smaller territories ruled by competing warlords. In many areas there were and still are no formal regulations or licensing requirements for businesses and individuals.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy_in_Somalia


For those that don't love wikipedia, here's an excerpt from an article The Rule of Law without the State...



Were there such a category, Somalia would hold a place in Guinness World Records as the country with the longest absence of a functioning central government. When the Somalis dismantled their government in 1991 and returned to their precolonial political status, the expectation was that chaos would result — and that, of course, would be the politically correct thing to expect.

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.

If the expectation was that Somalia would plunge into an abyss of chaos, what is the reality? A number of recent studies address this question, including one by economist Peter Leeson drawing on statistical data from the United Nations Development Project, World Bank, CIA, and World Health Organization. Comparing the last five years under the central government (1985–1990) with the most recent five years of anarchy (2000–2005), Leeson finds these welfare changes:

* Life expectancy increased from 46 to 48.5 years. This is a poor expectancy as compared with developed countries. But in any measurement of welfare, what is important to observe is not where a population stands at a given time, but what is the trend. Is the trend positive, or is it the reverse?
* Number of one-year-olds fully immunized against measles rose from 30 to 40 percent.
* Number of physicians per 100,000 population rose from 3.4 to 4.
* Number of infants with low birth weight fell from 16 per thousand to 0.3 — almost none.
* Infant mortality per 1,000 births fell from 152 to 114.9.
* Maternal mortality per 100,000 births fell from 1,600 to 1,100.
* Percent of population with access to sanitation rose from 18 to 26.
* Percent of population with access to at least one health facility rose from 28 to 54.8.
* Percent of population in extreme poverty (i.e., less than $1 per day) fell from 60 to 43.2.
* Radios per thousand population rose from 4 to 98.5.
* Telephones per thousand population rose from 1.9 to 14.9.
* TVs per 1,000 population rose from 1.2 to 3.7.
* Fatalities due to measles fell from 8,000 to 5,600.

Another even more comprehensive study published last year by Benjamin Powell of the Independent Institute, concludes: "We find that Somalia's living standards have improved generally … not just in absolute terms, but also relative to other African countries since the collapse of the Somali central government."

Somalia's pastoral economy is now stronger than that of either neighboring Kenya or Ethiopia. It is the largest exporter of livestock of any East African country. Telecommunications have burgeoned in Somalia; a call from a mobile phone is cheaper in Somalia than anywhere else in Africa. A small number of international investors are finding that the level of security of property and contract in Somalia warrants doing business there. Among these companies are Dole, BBC, the courier DHL, British Airways, General Motors, and Coca Cola, which recently opened a large bottling plant in Mogadishu. A 5-star Ambassador Hotel is operating in Hargeisa, and three new universities are fully functional: Amoud University (1997) in Borama, and Mogadishu University (1997), and University of Benadir (2002) in Mogadishu.
http://www.mises.org/story/2701

Here's another link
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1880


I'm not arguing that Somali was a classless society, but whether or not it was a functioning stateless society. Or better yet, an anarchist society.

RGacky3
16th October 2007, 22:53
Society being run by warlords is far far far away from Anarchism, Anarchism is absolute freedom, and Collective Communism. Just because there is no control by a formal state does'nt make it Anarchist.

gilhyle
16th October 2007, 23:53
Who gathers statistics in an anarcho-capitalist society ?

Tatarin
17th October 2007, 04:52
The only thing the second article proves, is that people can survive without some form of centralised state, on the bueraucratic level as in, say, Europe. Does it prove that everything is much better? That is just neoliberal bullshit.

Life expectancy isn't proof of a perfect society. That life expectancy grew by only 2,5 years in about 15 years should terrify rather than open the prospect about a world with free markets and no governments.

Organic Revolution
17th October 2007, 05:16
In simple terms, no. Somalia has a sort of government, in the form of tribal governments, which hold a lot of authoritarian power. Second, Somalia has warlords which are funded by outside forces interested in the religious formation (or military) of Somalia.

Somalia is a country that has not had a central government in terms of western governments, but there has been other players in these theatrics, which capitalist media loves to call anarchism, such as America, Britain, France, etc. which while they are there, set up warlords to be mini-governments, which keep there crooked hands in all goings on in Somalia.

Also, there is a heavy religious rule by Islam.

PS- anarchism is a political theory which aims to create a society within which individuals freely co-operate together as equals.

RainingSkies
17th October 2007, 05:36
It's a very interesting article, and I hate it how normal people can misinterpret the true meaning of "anarchism" when reading about the current situation in Somalia.

What would an anarchist society look like? (http://infoshop.org/faq/secIcon.html)

Kwisatz Haderach
17th October 2007, 06:53
To call Somalia an anarchist society is ridiculous, except perhaps in the deluded "anarcho-capitalist" sense of the term.

To say that Somalia is in any way doing well is even more deluded. It is a country ruled by warlords - in more familiar terms, ruled by the mafia - and one of the most impoverished places in the world. It is also an overwhelmingly agricultural economy, poor even by African standards. It is the only place in the world where pirates still sail around coastal waters, and random gunfights are commonplace (not to mention the occasional war that sweeps across Mogadishu every now and then).

Both of the articles quoted by blackstone are guilty of (a) showing only the very small positive side of things while ignoring the immense human suffering in Somalia, and (b) in the case of the second article, outright lies.

Take for example the claim that "Somalia would hold a place in Guinness World Records as the country with the longest absence of a functioning central government." Anyone who knows anything about history will immediately be able to tell that this claim is fucking stupid. Large portions of the world have existed without a central government for most of human history - indeed, the 20th century was the first time ever that the entire land surface of the Earth was divided between sovereign states. By historical standards, the situation in Somalia is the rule, and the situation in the rest of the world today is the exception.

Another absurd statement is the claim that the tiny increase in life expectancy from 46 to 48.5 years is somehow a great achievement. In fact, life expectancy is growing (and has been growing continuously since World War II) in the vast majority of countries. A growth of 2.5 years over 15 years is pathetically small, not a great achievement.

Guerrilla22
17th October 2007, 18:06
No, it was an example of a nihlist society and a sad example of how years of imperial dominance can reduce a state to what Somalia is now.

blackstone
17th October 2007, 22:25
Originally posted by Edric [email protected] 17, 2007 12:53 am
To call Somalia an anarchist society is ridiculous, except perhaps in the deluded "anarcho-capitalist" sense of the term.

To say that Somalia is in any way doing well is even more deluded. It is a country ruled by warlords - in more familiar terms, ruled by the mafia - and one of the most impoverished places in the world. It is also an overwhelmingly agricultural economy, poor even by African standards. It is the only place in the world where pirates still sail around coastal waters, and random gunfights are commonplace (not to mention the occasional war that sweeps across Mogadishu every now and then).

Both of the articles quoted by blackstone are guilty of (a) showing only the very small positive side of things while ignoring the immense human suffering in Somalia, and (b) in the case of the second article, outright lies.

Take for example the claim that "Somalia would hold a place in Guinness World Records as the country with the longest absence of a functioning central government." Anyone who knows anything about history will immediately be able to tell that this claim is fucking stupid. Large portions of the world have existed without a central government for most of human history - indeed, the 20th century was the first time ever that the entire land surface of the Earth was divided between sovereign states. By historical standards, the situation in Somalia is the rule, and the situation in the rest of the world today is the exception.

Another absurd statement is the claim that the tiny increase in life expectancy from 46 to 48.5 years is somehow a great achievement. In fact, life expectancy is growing (and has been growing continuously since World War II) in the vast majority of countries. A growth of 2.5 years over 15 years is pathetically small, not a great achievement.
Don't shoot the messenger!

To clear up, i'm not in total agreement on whether or not Somali is an anarchist society. I heard it brought up once before, but never again. It was never mentioned on revleft and the few places that i could scrap up information on this outlook, i posted here to discuss. I'm going to do more research on Somali and hopefully present my analysis on the issue before the weekend!

Forward :ph34r:

Dimentio
17th October 2007, 23:07
Here is an anarcho-capitalist article supporting the ideal of chaotic Somalia as an anarchist society.

Mises institute on Somalia (http://www.mises.org/story/2066)

You cannot stop loving 'em!

Forward Union
17th October 2007, 23:25
It had free markets (in the truest sence, even children were bought and sold) and the workers did not have power - capitalists did.

It was in fact an example of pure unregualted capitalism. Here is a better case study.

http://austrianaddiction.rationalmind.net/...studies-in.html (http://austrianaddiction.rationalmind.net/archives/2007/06/case-studies-in.html)

Dimentio
17th October 2007, 23:59
The problems with the Austrians is not that they think the state is a monster - it is - but that they fail to realise that unregulated markets and chaotic distribution of resources is the birth-pool of the state.

RGacky3
18th October 2007, 00:29
Its not even Anarcho-Capitalism its more like Anarcho-I'mgonnashootthemotherfuckerandtakethefoodandselli tandbuymoregunsandshootpeoplethatdon'trecognisetha tIamthegrandlordofSomalia

Dimentio
18th October 2007, 00:39
That is actually called warlordism.