Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo
The funny thing about political extremists is that they don’t think they’re extreme. It is absolutely sensible
to starve millions of Ukranian peasants. It’s a duty
to ban private property. We must abolish government
if we want to be truly ‘free.’
I think it’s good that we live in societies where it’s OK to advocate and even campaign for this sort of toxic, selfish and inhuman bullshit, but I’ve been to Nigeria and I’ve been to Chad and those places sort of suck.
So when I say It’s lucky that most people grow out of this student nonsense when they graduate from university, I'm speaking from the position of actually having seen what societies are like when everyone can be as selfish as they please.
Interesting examples that you've chosen there. Nigeria ("Like in many other African societies, prebendalism and extremely excessive corruption continue to constitute major challenges to Nigeria, as vote rigging and other means of coercion are practised by all major parties in order to remain competitive.") and Chad ("Corruption is rife at all levels; Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index for 2005 named Chad the most corrupt country in the world, and it has fared only slightly better in the following years."). Both of which are textbook examples of corrupt and oppressive African governments. Both of which rank very low on indexes that rate and rank freedom (using multiple factors).
What Wikipedia has to say about Chad's government is interesting and telling: "Chad's constitution provides for a strong executive branch headed by a president who dominates the political system."
Chad ranks 159th (out of 183 countries) on the Index of Economic Freedom: http://www.heritage.org/index/Country/Chad
Nigeria is better but still in the "mostly un-free" area at 106th: http://www.heritage.org/index/Country/Nigeria
Curiously, you've missed a quiet little country in Africa called Mauritius: http://www.heritage.org/index/Country/Mauritius
Ranked 1st in the African region and 12th overall, just below the UK and rising in freedom (in fact the U.S. is going the opposite direction and may soon be ranked below Mauritius if trends continue along their current trends).
Here's a country that has systemically introduced more freedom and liberalization (though it still has a way to go) and has reaped the benefits of greater prosperity for its people:
Since independence in 1968, Mauritius has developed from a low-income, agriculturally based economy to a middle income diversified economy with growing industrial, financial, and tourist sectors. For most of the period, annual growth has been of the order of 5% to 6%. This has been reflected in increased life expectancy, lowered infant mortality and improved infrastructure.
With a well-developed legal and commercial infrastructure and a tradition of entrepreneurship and representative government, Mauritius is one of the developing world’s most successful democracies. economy has shown a considerable degree of resilience, and an environment already conducive to dynamic entrepreneurial activity has moved further toward economic freedom.
Though it still suffers from corruption issues, it is significantly better than Nigeria or Chad and is steadily improving.
The problem in Nigeria and Chad (among others in Africa and elsewhere) is not, as you seem to imply, a lack of government but, in fact, too much government control, corruption and oppression. Countries that have systematically reduced and limited the role of government have experienced great material benefits for all of their people (not just the rich), especially the poor. This is a matter of historical fact and record.
P.S. And let's not even talk about Somalia which is a text book example of warring factions, tribes, etc. (some funded and supported by the U.S.) trying to take control and establish yet another corrupt African government in order to control the country. These are all examples of countries with corrupt governments run amok.