1

The Self-Defeating Premise of Libertarian Fringe Ideologies with

Somalia as a Situational Backdrop
Omar Alansari-Kreger

The situation in Somalia exposes the great danger of libertarian fringe ideologies,
such as objectivism (which is essentially capitalistic pseudo anarchism), that takes hold
of entire communities, societies, and nations by arbitrary force. It isnt coherently
possible to create a unified nation without a centralized authority; those empty headed
ideologues that rant and rave about Tea Party politics retain a rose tinted view of what
civic individuality is and what it ought to be from the standpoint of a sheltered national
standard. That alludes to a symptom that takes convenient refuge behind worldviews
that lack exposure to crucial elements in society in which the same worldview
engenders and attacks simultaneously.
It is for that reason why some of its greatest proponents create a danger onto
themselves. Absolute individuality that is based on the maximization of sovereignty
creates a deep crater of sectarianism to the point where society becomes a sloppy
arena of dog-eat-dog politics. When each individualized entity exploits a persuasive
prompt for power the fabricated interest that is created is out for the maximization of its
own agenda and the aftereffect further marginalizes the whole as opposed to bringing it
together. From a Western standpoint that sentimentality has grown out of the American
political tradition. Those that demand complete separation from any centralized
authority have never resided in such an envisaged society.
The same group of advocates use federally subsidized infrastructure just to live a
normal life and that in itself is sign of complete hypocrisy. Imagine if police/fire
departments, sidewalks, street lighting, libraries, and roadways are all privatized
overnight! That would leave the individual citizen with two dozen billing statements each
month while rival competitors attack each other for control of any given social sector
which degenerates into a fully fledged game of bitter competition. When engaged in that
social scenario it will eventually become quite difficult to know who to pay because one
competitor can outplace the other in as little of a days notice and that will reflect on a
societys qualitative infrastructure.
We cant just assume that people will obey the law just because there is a
constitutional standard that says so considering that the same act in itself can
technically stifle the maximization of individualized interest. Of course there will be
American constitutional exceptionalists that will argue that one of the main reasons why
states fail is simply because they lack a well rooted constitutional tradition. However,
2

doesnt that directly compare to a gesture that implies that a developing nation lacks
any appreciation for civilization whatsoever? Isnt that a response that creates a bigoted
view of the world that exploits those us against them analogies?
It is not like these nations geographically formed overnight combined together
with their own people falling out of the sky at random. Contrary to what we want to
believe about Somalia as a nation, it derives from a very rich history that had
contributed its fair share of footing to the very idea of civilization as we know it. The last
Somali Constitution derived a great deal of its inspiration from representative
democracy, but no sacred document of any manmade stature can save a nation and its
people from the forces of dog-eat-dog anarchy.