Thursday, November 30, 2017

The Latest News From Libya and Decentralization: Migrants ‘Cooked Like Kebabs’

Decentralization may be a positive, but not always so.

Case in point the removal of strongman Muammar Gaddafi as ruler of Libya.

As with revolutions, coups and other forms of government change, it must always be asked: What will replace the old regime? Is it a move toward liberty or away from liberty?

Consider this report from Daily Caller on Libya which is certainly more decentralized than it was under Gaddafi:
A former Nigerian government official has come forward to tell the story of how Libyan slave traders captured African migrants, and cooked them “like kebabs.”

Former minister of culture for Nigeria Femi Fani-Kayode said many
migrants from Africa traveled to the Mediterranean to improve their lives but ended up being enslaved instead, International Business Times reported Wednesday.

Three out of four people captured by these gangs hail from southern Nigeria, Fani-Kayode said. Nigeria has the largest Christian population in Africa, according to Pew Research Center.

“75% of those sold into slavery in Libya who have their organs harvested, bodies mutilated and who are roasted like suya [a kebab] are from southern Nigeria,” Fani-Kayode wrote. “Roasted alive! This is what Libyans do to sub-saharan Africans who are looking for a transit point to Europe.”

Fani-Kayode attributed part of the carnage to the overthrow of former Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi. He argued removing Gaddafi created a power vacuum, that Libyan criminals were eager to fill.

“The greatest calamity that befell Africa in the last 20 years was the murder of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya,” he concluded.
Like revolutions and coups, decentralized government (as opposed to a move away from government) is a tool that can be used toward or away from liberty.

The libertarian must understand how a tool will be used and not blindly cheer on the use of a tool, what is going on in Libya is not a decentralized move in the direction of the NAP.



  1. Call me a doubting Thomas but the newborns-ripped-from-their-incubators like stories deserve some scrutiny.

  2. The State is booby-trapped to discourage tampering.

  3. The culture in this part of the world is not conducive to freedom. That's why we see the likes of Uncle Muammar. Libya being a gateway to Europe compounds the problem.

    It is almost impossible to analogize Libya with countries in the "western world" but there would be a lot less roasting people like suya, organ harvesting and slavery if a state in the USA or a country in Europe were to suddenly be in a state of anarchy.

    North America and Western Europe are a long way from the societies we NAP types want to see but, wow, Africa and the Middle East are scary far away.

  4. But I'm sure open borders libertarians and leftist would like these guys to come on over since all immigration is good and I'm sure they understand crap like NAP and private property. Where is Franco Torres to defend these people? Besides, are not all cultures equal? I'm sure these people are just deep down libertarians just stuck in a bad environment. Should we not invite them over?

    1. Once they cross that imaginary line on a map the magic dirt will turn them all into Rothbardian ancaps who will work in high tech jobs that white people can't do.

  5. Libertarians who argue for an a priori preference for decentralization are usually supporting voluntary secessionist movements within a given society. In the case of Libya, the breakup of their central government came due to an outside imperialist power overthrowing a fairly popular regime.

    Different societies need to have the right to self determination. If they are not beset by a foreign imperialist force, then they can decide if or when they want to break apart. I think there should be a general preference for decentralization among libertarians, but only in the event that minorities within a society choose to secede from their central government.