Libertarians know things the rest of us don't. Here, for example, is the Libertarian take on how things are progressing in Somalia these days, from the web site of the Mises Institute (as in Ludwig von):
Somalia is in the news again. Rival gangs are shooting each other, and why? The reason is always the same: the prospect that the weak-to-invisible transitional government in Mogadishu will become a real government with actual power.
The media invariably describe this prospect as a "hope." But it's a strange hope that is accompanied by violence and dread throughout the country. Somalia has done very well for itself in the 15 years since its government was eliminated. The future of peace and prosperity there depends in part on keeping one from forming.
The article, by one Yumi Kim, but based on the work of a Michael van Notten, goes on to explain that a functioning central government is, from the true Somali perspective, undesirable. Somalia operates according to "customary law," which is more local. And so all these problems started when you, my British friends (along with the Italians), withdrew in 1960 and international pressure existed for the Somalis to break with age-old custom and form a state.
But since that state's disintegration, certain things have been progressing along rather nicely. The telecommunications sector, evidently, is thriving.
Over at Freedom House, a rights-monitoring US outfit with historical conservative ties, they seem not to know that indicators are pointing up. FH rates countries free or not free. Somalia gets a "not free" designation and scores, on FH's scale, a seven -- the same as North Korea.
The folks over at the State Department seem not to have read their van Notten either. Their 2008 assessment of the Somali situation says in part:
The country's poor human rights situation deteriorated further during the year, exacerbated by the absence of effective governance institutions and rule of law, the widespread availability of small arms and light weapons, and ongoing conflicts. As a consequence citizens were unable to change their government. Human rights abuses included unlawful and politically motivated killings; kidnapping, torture, rape, and beatings; official impunity; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; and arbitrary arrest and detention.
In part due to the absence of functioning institutions, the perpetrators of human rights abuses were rarely punished. Denial of fair trial and limited privacy rights were problems, and there were restrictions on freedoms of speech, press, assembly, association, religion, and movement. Discrimination and violence against women, including rape; female genital mutilation (FGM); child abuse; recruitment of child soldiers; trafficking in persons; abuse and discrimination against clan and religious minorities; restrictions on workers' rights; forced labor, including by children; and child labor were also problems.
What a tiresome and predictable way of seeing things. A little bit of unpunished torture and rape is simply the price of freedom. When will these statist meddlers get this through their heads?
