It’s not uncommon to hear progressives scoff at the notion of a “libertarian paradise” in Somalia, a country where governmental oversight is virtually nonexistent. While it’s undeniably clear that Somalia exemplifies the critical need for a robust state to uphold property rights, the anarchy within its borders has unearthed some surprising silver linings. According to The Economist:
Three decades ago, placing a phone call from Somalia necessitated a trek across borders to the more connected lands of Kenya or Ethiopia. Fast forward to 2004, and this chaotic nation boasted more telephone connections per capita than any other country in East Africa. Today, despite the Somali state remaining fragile with rampant insecurity and scant government services, mobile data is remarkably cheaper than in the UK, Finland, or Japan—and the connectivity is commendable too. . . . So, how has this dysfunctional state managed to cultivate such an impressive telecommunications infrastructure? The answer lies paradoxically in its very lack of governance. Years of turmoil have compelled countless Somalis to seek refuge abroad, while those who remain rely heavily on them: the diaspora sends back around $2 billion annually, roughly double the government’s budget. An extensive phone network was essential to accommodate these massive remittance inflows. In Somalia’s laissez-faire economy, the invisible hand took care of the rest. The beauty of a minimal state is that there’s no need to shell out for licenses or grease the palms of corrupt officials to get things done.
The article also highlights additional unexpected benefits:
Social media steps in where the failing state falters, too. Platforms like WhatsApp have transformed into virtual courts where clan elders, rather than corrupt or distant judges, mediate disputes. These online groups even have revenue-generating capabilities; members contribute monthly dues used for emergency funds or as a form of health insurance when illness strikes.
In matters such as safeguarding property rights, the capacity of the state is undeniably beneficial. However, in many instances, the most effective role the government can play is to simply step aside.
If you’re intrigued by this topic and have 41 minutes to spare, I encourage you to watch a thought-provoking Youtube video that articulates my interpretation of libertarianism. It illustrates how Hong Kong’s government delegated the responsibility for constructing and operating its subway system to the private sector:
In this narrative, who stands as the true hero? Is it the highly competent government, or the private firm that executes the project with remarkable efficiency? Ultimately, does it even matter as long as the system functions effectively?
