alt.politics.economics

Video61@ wrote:

> in somalia, the ultimate libertarian fantasy land, the markets are
> regulated, yet there is no government. the elders set the rules. if
> you violate the rules set forth by the elders, they simply have you
> murdered.

Somalia is in an interesting situation, to be sure, but who besides you
claims that it's the "ultimate libertarian fantasy land"? And if some
people are setting the rules and using coercion to enforce them, you
claim that that's not a government??


> its not democracy and government that has failed, it is the voter who
> has failed democracy and government. so if that same voter was to be
> completely free with the liberty to do as they can see the
> scenario that that mess would be.
>

So the voters are supposed to serve government instead of the other way
around? Besides, we don't really have much in the way of actual
democracy in the . We have democratically-elected representatives,
and then the representatives do the voting on the actual issues.
Occasionally, the "people" get to vote on a state or local issue, but
even at those levels, there's not too much democracy going on.

And your lack of faith in your fellow man is showing. It's not so much
a matter of human nature as a matter of what circumstances and
incentives that human nature is put into. If people are free to do as
they please, *short of* initiating force or fraud against their fellow
man, then the incentives for being responsible for one's own actions are
in place. I suppose you're imagining some kind of "absolute liberty"
which includes initiating force or fraud against others--that would
indeed be a mess--but that's not what I'm advocating.