This video reminds me of my days as a grad student at George Mason University, except I would use Lebanon as an example when debating with the anarcho-capitalists in the department.
To be sure, Somalia (or Lebanon) isn’t a fair example of libertarian paradise, just like North Korea isn’t a fair example of big government paradise (as noted by someone in the comment section of the video). But I appreciate clever humor.
Lest anyone think I’m a squishy statist, I would like to be convinced that it’s possible to privatize the legal system and national defense. But I’ve never figured out how it could work.
Not that it really matters. Let’s deal with the 80 percent-90 percent of government that can be eliminated/privatized/devolved and then we can argue about what’s left over.
(h/t: Greg Mankiw)
January 7, 2016 Addendum: The original video was removed by YouTube, but I replaced it with a very similar version.
[…] of like the video about Somalia being a libertarian […]
[…] let’s give equal time to some anti-libertarian satire. It’s not as clever as the famous Somalia video, but still worth […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I think it’s based on false premises (such as libertarian breakfast cereal, libertarian Somalia, libertarian lifeguards, and a libertarian ambulance […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I think it’s based on false premises (such as libertarian breakfast cereal, libertarian Somalia, libertarian lifeguards, and a libertarian ambulance […]
[…] I think it’s based on false premises (such as libertarian breakfast cereal, libertarian Somalia, libertarian lifeguards, and a libertarian ambulance […]
[…] when I think it’s based on false premises (such as libertarian breakfast cereal, libertarian Somalia, libertarian lifeguards, and a libertarian ambulance […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] according to this satirical video that I first shared ten years ago, there’s a real libertarian paradise in […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] I appreciate clever humor, even when I’m the target. This video about Somalia being a libertarian paradise, for instance, is an excellent example of political […]
[…] let’s not get hung up on technicalities. I’m for good political satire, even if I don’t agree with the […]
[…] we have another edition of anti-libertarian humor. Nothing funny enough to supplant the “Libertarian Paradise of Somalia,” which still is at the top of my list, but I got a laugh from several […]
[…] as good as the video on Somalia as a libertarian paradise, but still worth […]
[…] Anarcho-capitalism is susceptible to satire, as you can see from this clever video about Somalia and this ad for libertarian breakfast […]
[…] my collection of libertarian humor, my favorite item is probably the video mocking us for reflexive anti-statism. It presumably was put together by a statist, but I’ll […]
[…] video of Somalia as libertarian […]
[…] favorite anti-libertarian video is the one based on the notion that Somalia is a libertarian paradise. Since no libertarian has ever pointed to that country as a role model, the underlying premise is a […]
[…] P.S. Next time leftists want to make a satirical video attacking libertarianism, they should use Somaliland rather than Somalia. […]
[…] P.S. Next time leftists want to make a satirical video attacking libertarianism, they should use Somaliland rather than Somalia. […]
[…] I’ve always thought this left-wing attack against libertarianism is very […]
[…] in 2011, I shared a video that mocked libertarians by claiming that Somalia was their ideal no-government […]
[…] in 2011, I shared a video that mocked libertarians by claiming that Somalia was their ideal no-government […]
[…] in 2011, I shared a video that mocked libertarians by claiming that Somalia was their ideal no-government […]
[…] in 2011, I shared a video that mocked libertarians by claiming that Somalia was their ideal no-government […]
[…] in 2011, I shared a video that mocked libertarians by claiming that Somalia was their ideal no-government […]
But do we know the North Pole has no government???
[…] Though the anarcho-capitalists may want to claim Santa since he’s from a land with no government. […]
The way to “privatize” “national defense” would be universal Constitutional Carry – each and every able-bodied adult armed to the teeth – that way no one could conquer the country, not even the Communists who have takes over Washington DC.
The funny thing is that Somalia use to have a socialist/communist regime. The economy and living standards under “anarchy” actually were an improvement over that system. Wikipedia has a great article on the economy of Somalia which shows this.
[…] A video portraying Somalia as a libertarian paradise. […]
I’ve already had my cholera shot. I should go start peddling cholera shots there!!
[…] A video portraying Somalia as a libertarian paradise. […]
“I would like to be convinced that it’s possible to privatize the legal system and national defense. But I’ve never figured out how it could work”.
Not familiar with Judge Judy and the slew of other private court systems on “reality TV”? And what about the Blackwater contractors in Iraq, Afganistan and everywhere else (there were actually more mercenaries than regular Army at times)?
Seems like we have already privatized the courts and national defense to a certain extent.
[…] And that even means you have self-confidence about your ideas and you can laugh when someone puts together some clever anti-libertarian humor. […]
[…] And that even means you have self-confidence about your ideas and you can laugh when someone puts together some clever anti-libertarian humor. […]
But, the courts and National Defense _are_ Constitutionally Authorized powers of Government, ergo legitimate.
And a map room would be a good idea – sort of a nexus of communication, rather than a center of power over others’ lives.
Its all that other crap that has to go.
[…] very first bit of anti-libertarian humor I ever posted was this clever video about the anarcho-capitalist paradise of […]
[…] very first bit of anti-libertarian humor I ever posted was this clever video about the anarcho-capitalist paradise of […]
Something that regularly frustrates me about libertarians is this: In America, libertarians have a large receptive audience. If you talk about cutting taxes, cutting red tape, and getting the government off people’s backs, many many Americans already agree with you. You don’t need to convince them, you just need to mobilize them. And so, whenever libertarians have a chance to speak to a large audience, it seems they always … talk about drug legalization, gay rights, and privatizing the police force. I think most Americans would agree that 70% of the federal budget is wasted and 70% of the laws are foolish, harmful or even actively immoral. (I just made up the 70% off the top of my head, but I think it’s in the ballpark.) A persuasive speaker with a well-thought-out argument could probably convince them that another 10 or 20% are also wasted or harmful. And so libertarians concentrate on … the remaining 10% where most Americans disagree with them completely. This is a public relations strategy that professionals in the field call by the technical term, “stupid”.
I have a serious question for you Dan: Can you outline any benefits of limited government in Somaliland, now war free for 20 years?
-Kavon Fiennes
[…] 160, but my excuse is that it was really a test of anarcho-capitalism. And as I explained when sharing this amusing video, I’m only in favor of getting rid of 90 percent of […]
[…] measures whether you’re an anarcho-capitalist. And as I confessed back in 2011, when sharing this funny video poking fun at libertarianism, I’ve never been able to rationalize how to get rid of all […]
Also, I’d like to add that I very much agree that all libertarians need to work together to minimize the state as much as possible. Once we start at least getting close to the minarchist state again, we can argue about how much more to privatize. I can see anarcho-capitalism working, but only if the functions of private law and defense are already at work, and thus the state becomes irrelevant because of how obviously inefficient it is in comparison (the way we see this now with other functions).
I wish the minarchists here didn’t say oh that’s just anarchy, not libertarianism. That doesn’t help any of our cause, because people will fire back at you, well wouldn’t chaos still happen in the areas you don’t want the State? etc. Somalia has a bunch of oligarchs constantly fighting for power. Libertarianism is about non-coercion, so it is by no means anarchy in the sense meant by those who take libertarianism to the point of privatizing all law and national defense.
Regardless, I did think it was funny. The problem is how many of us have actually heard that argument thrown at us.
[…] makes a good point here. I’ve already admitted, in this post featuring a funny video mocking libertarianism, that I don’t see how to privatize the justice system and national defense, so I’m not an […]
[…] definition isn’t amusing, like what’s portrayed in this satirical video or shown in this mocking poster featuring the 24 types of libertarians, but it has the advantage of […]
[…] a series of posts making fun of libertarians (here, here, here, here, and here), it’s time to aim some humor at the left. Even if it means a lame […]
[…] a series of posts making fun of libertarians (here, here, here, here, and here), it’s time to aim some humor at the left. Even if it means a lame […]
Somolia is a redistributionist oligarchy, sort of like where we’re heading except without MSNBC
[…] Dan Mitchell, himself a Libertarian. Share this:EmailTwitterFacebookStumbleUponMorePrintDiggRedditLinkedInLike […]
[…] Is it an accurate portrayal of libertarianism? Of course not. But effective humor takes something that is true and applies it in an absurd fashion. Which is why I’ve always enjoyed this video mocking libertarianism. […]
Satire is good. Misrepresentation, not so much. Can’t say I was much amused.
[…] posted this video making fun of libertarians, for instance, because it is genuinely funny. People like me, I will confess, sometimes are so […]
[…] posted this video making fun of libertarians, for instance, because it is genuinely funny. People like me, I will confess, sometimes are so […]
I remember watching this video when it was first posted. Now, Somalia doesn’t have private property and rule of law, so this system is not opposite of socialism or libertarianism. The analogy is not correct.
If they did not like public beach they should have gone to a private beach, not to a place where there is no such thing as private or public property. Nothing was owned by anyone. Libertarianism isn’t just absence of government but enforcement of rule of law and private property rights.
[…] the value of freedom probably shouldn’t be in the White House. Heck, Santorum probably thinks this satirical video is an accurate portrayal of […]
The video fails because it doesn’t seem to understand the difference between a libertarian and an anarchist. Still, the libertarian magic dust line was pretty funny.
[…] list of definitions is not quite as amusing as this video mocking libertarians (we should all learn to laugh at ourselves), but it’s still worth […]
Somalia is a libertarian utopia? So there’s no coercion in Somalia?
Funny, most of what I read about Somalia has to do with Somalian pirates–people who coercively redistribute wealth. Seems like it’s probably a “liberal”* utopia.
*i.e, State-humper.
“I would like to be convinced that it’s possible to privatize the legal system and national defense. But I’ve never figured out how it could work.”
Someone who has worked on these questions for decades is David Friedman (who is also referenced in a post above). An interesting document posted by Friedman that discusses some of these issues is found at:
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Order_without_the_state/Order_Without_the_State.htm
I’d like to see the civil courts privatized. Imagine the number of frivolous laws suits that would fall if you had to pay for the court’s time.
BTW, funny video.
The anarchism vs minarchism debate is a red herring. What matters is not the number of legal service providers the market might bear, but whether or not people have freedom of jurisdiction, so to speak. Who knows, you may be right that network effects would limit the number of large legal service enterprises; after all, federalism has pretty much failed in the US resulting in highly centralized government. Let’s not ever forget though “it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
My argument against anarcho-capitalism has always been that it will likely evolve into some sort of government, the best case for which is basically a minarchist/libertarian one (the worst case, well…). In that case, I’d rather just start with the best case.
In an anarcho-capitalist society, I think it’s likely that people would contract with physical security and dispute resolution services. In security, there’s a definite economy of scale to geographic contiguity: if I agree to pay a guy x for patrolling the boundaries of my property (say 1 mile x 1 mile) on an ATV, his cost per customer is reduced if he contracts with a neighbor of mine (he can patrol the boundary between our properties less often), which gives him an incentive to offer the both of us a good deal. Repeat the process and you’re likely to end up with definable geographic territories for physical security territories (sound familiar?)
For dispute resolution, there’s a network effect: I’d much prefer to do business with someone who’s also a client of a service (because they are more likely to abide by the decisions handed down) I use, therefore, ceteris paribus, I get more value from choosing a service that has more other clients… it’s quite likely that the value function is O(n^2) as many network value functions are: Dispute Resolution Service A is worth four times as much as Dispute Resolution Service B if A has only twice the clients and I will tend to choose A (the entrenched provider). This tends to guarantee that there will not be many resolution services and one of them will probably predominate (the others will probably find specialized niches of expertise).
The combination of these trends results in, at best, minarchy.
I agree it’s not a fair critique, especially since it’s actually a critique of anarchy (no government) as opposed to libertarian minimal government.
I’ve also not seen a way to privatize the police function and legal system. I’ve seen this presented in fiction (e.g. L. Neil Smith, Michael Z. Williamson) but it’s pretty easy to see they describe a utopian system based on the concept that every individual citizen will defend their liberty to the death (preventing a “government” from moving in). I don’t think that matches any society in history.
I love this video. It’s hilarious and I don’t mind laughing at myself. I do think private legal systems could work quite well actually. In essence, it’s just the logical conclusion of federalism, where different geographical entities have different legal systems. Just now imagine instead of having geographical monopoly power, where my only recourse as a law consumer is to move my residence, I could simply change my service provider without moving. For more worked out explanations and historical precedents I especially recommend David Friedman’s book, The Machinery of Freedom. For a another terrific treatment check out Tom Bell’s paper, The Jurisprudence of Polycentric Law.
Wow, never seen THAT strawman before. *groan*