Libertarianism = Somalia

[Essence]

Q: Why is Somalia called the end result of libertarianism? I know it's a wartorn lawless shithole, but what specifically makes it keep popping up as an example?

A: Libertarians explicitly believe that removing all activities of the government except enforcement is somehow a good idea. The Libertarian "government" is simply an occupying army. It does not test food purity, water safety, or air quality. It does not build roads or hire teachers. It does not sponsor art or science. All of that is done by private enterprise or not at all.

 And that is called Somalia. Libertarians may try to sugar coat their BS by saying that they don't want to keep government from doing things altogether, they just want to move responsibilities from the federal government to the states for now. But the same arguments they make about limiting federal powers also apply to state powers. And county powers. And city powers. They actually are advocating the removal of the entire government as an entity that improves people's lives.

 And you know what? Those are the moderate Libertarians. The "Minarchists". The ones who "advocate a state which is limited to protecting its citizens from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud." The extreme Libertarians don't even want a state that does that.

Under Libertarian "rule" the government can't send experts to deal with a disaster. They don't employ any experts and are not empowered to even determine whether disasters exist. All they do is have police prowling around to arrest and/or shoot people who appear to be endangering others or violating property rights. And provide a court system so that people can sue each other over property ownership and contract disputes.

Source (http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=247523&bypass=247523#247523)


Thoughts?

[mesaprotector]

Somalia shows us how anarchism (well, almost) doesn't work. The thing is, most libertarians are not anarchists or even minarchists. The most prominent current example, Ron Paul, would cut government drastically, yes, but he's never advocated eliminating the treasury or even the FDA.

There seems to be this popular perception that libertarians are "extreme". Well, they're a bit unusual, but basically their philosophy is just liberal socially and conservative fiscally. They aren't anarchists by any means.

[Essence]

Depends entirely on whether you're talking about mainstream US politics or anything else in the world.

Libertarian schools of thought differ over the degree to which the state should be reduced. Anarchists advocate complete elimination of the state. Minarchists advocate a state which is limited to protecting its citizens from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud. Some libertarians go further, such as by supporting minimal public assistance for the poor.

Additionally, some schools are supportive of private property rights in the ownership of unappropriated land and natural resources while others reject such private ownership and often support common ownership instead. Another distinction can be made among libertarians who support private ownership and those that support common ownership of the means of production; the former generally supporting a capitalist economy, the latter a libertarian socialist economic system. In some parts of the world, the term "libertarianism" is synonymous with Left anarchism.

Libertarians can broadly be characterized as holding four ethical views: consequentialism, deontological theories, contractarianism, and class-struggle normative beliefs. The main divide is between consequentialist libertarianism—which is support for a large degree of "liberty" because it leads to favorable consequences, such as prosperity or efficiency—and deontological libertarianism (also known as "rights-theorist libertarianism," "natural rights libertarianism," or "libertarian moralism"), which is a philosophy based on belief in moral self-ownership and opposition to "initiation of force" and fraud. Others combine a hybrid of consequentialist and deontologist thinking.

Another view, contractarian libertarianism, holds that any legitimate authority of government derives not from the consent of the governed, but from contract or mutual agreement, though this can be seen as reducible to consequentialism or deontologism depending on what grounds contracts are justified. Some Libertarian Socialists with backgrounds influenced by Marxism reject deontological and consequential approaches and use normative class-struggle methodologies rooted in Hegelian thought to justify direct action in pursuit of liberty.

In the United States, the term libertarian is commonly associated with those who have conservative positions on economic issues and liberal positions on social issues.

Seems like, by and large, you got your anarchists, a few different flavors of minarchist, and then you have the weak-sauce American version of libertarianism that would probably just piss most Libertarians off.

[OldTrees]

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12285365

Primary detail

Index	1991	2011 (or latest)	+/-
Life expectancy	46 years	50 years	+
Birth rate	46	44	+
Death rate	19	16	+
GDP per capita	$210	$600	+
Infant mortality	116 deaths <1yr, per thousand births	109 deaths <1yr, per thousand births	+
Access to safe water	35%	29%	-
Adult literacy	24%	38%	+

This might be an indication that Anarchy was better than the previous Government. Libertarians tend to fall in between Anarchists and Statists trying to take the optimal mix.

However it all falls down to this: Is stealing from your neighbor to help your other neighbor morally permissible? If so at what cost/benefit is it no longer morally permissible? (I assume we all agree there is a limit. Few would advocate stealing from billionaires to give to millionaires.)