Hi,
I am really sorry but in the moment I have some very very evil ideas. I am not even sure if this does not hint to a kind of character error of mine but ...
...what is the non-state solution to get rid of Gadafi?
Here is how I would solve the problem ( I am not representative of the libertarian movement):
I would set up an international NGO which collects money to put a bounty on the head of Gadafi – dead or alive. The bounty is set active as soon as an internationally recognized court finds Gadafi guilty of crimes against humanity. If Gadafi is found non-guilty the money is redirected to other predefined charity purposes. If Gadafi renders himself to the court the bounty is equally redirected to general charity purposes.
This sounds cruel but the crucial advantage here is: Instead of binding justice to some kind of opaque political considerations (some dictators are “good” others not) justice is bound directly to a court ruling.
I guess the first problem will be that the organisation will be described as terrorist by our beloved states but is it at least in theory possible?
Thoughts?
Given a single country in the world with truely open borders and an ancap society, over time dictators won't matter because everyone will move to this one country and over time it will expand. If all of the people of Libya had the opportunity to just leave and go somewhere else with no questions asked, over time most of them would. A big problem with the world today is that refugees have no where to go. The only countries where they could move to are usually in worse shape then the country they are coming from. Imagine if the US had open borders. All of the people in the world that didn't like how their country was run could move here.
I personally think this is a big reason why institutions like the OECD exist, to try and stop countries from going down this road and luring away all of the high producers.
Given a single country in the world with truely open borders and an ancap society, over time dictators won't matter because everyone will move to this one country and over time it will expand.
Assuming this single country is not the US, wouldn't the US empire go to great lengths to subvert it?
Yes, they do. OECD is how the EU subverts this kind of thing, the US has similar trade embargos and general propaganda against such countries to try and criminalize them. This is why there are so few tax havens in the world, not because countries don't understand the benefits but because the "big boys" keep criminalizing them and setting up barriers to trade with them.
I should have clarified that this "single country" would need to somehow get support from the "big boys" (EU, US, China, etc.).
So the only hope is liberalizing the empires first?
That is the real question. How do we get a single, even small, ancap society started and not destroyed by the super powers? One option is to try to educate the majority of one of the super powers (assuming they are democratic) and get voted into at least libertarianism (or some other form of live and let live). Another option would be accumulate enough wealth to buy a small country and also buy support from at least one major power (perhaps China would be most open to such a thing).
I completly understand and apreciate the effect of open borders but before you have convinced anyone to sell the libatarians a small country more deads will be counted in Lybia.
So I will rename the problem: what is the QUICK non-state solution for Gadafi?
Is their any moral problem in setting up a bounty fund bound to court rulings?
Thanks in advance,
Nadjeschda
There's no need for a bounty. If he doesn't get out of the country quickly the people of Libya will take care of him. Whatever he'll be given a "fair" trial by a popular tribunal or shot by his own supporters like Ceasescu it matters not.
I would just ignore it, the Libyans are the source of this problem, not Gadafi. He's just taking advantage of their herd-mentality and susceptibility to collectivist rhetoric. As far as I am concerned all these socialists could kill themselves off, they're getting exactly what they asked for when they wanted a revolutionary leftist government; the only downside is that I have to live on the same planet as them.
From my own conversation with people from muslim countrys I know that they are as state-suporting as anyone can be - as long as it is a Sharia-state. Especially they seem to be fan of strong punishments (aka violence) to keep up order. The victimless crimes (adultry, homosexuality) I don^t even want to mention.
However I can not share in your cynism that this is simply a problem of the Lybians. Not all Lybians are the same and we want to get rid of ideologys not of the people who support them.
If you look for a discount area for a libertarian country watch out for greek islands.
'I would just ignore it, the Libyans are the source of this problem, not Gadafi. He's just taking advantage of their herd-mentality and susceptibility to collectivist rhetoric. As far as I am concerned all these socialists could kill themselves off, they're getting exactly what they asked for when they wanted a revolutionary leftist government; the only downside is that I have to live on the same planet as them."
What the heck?... Seriously how could any libertarian side with Gaddafi over the Libyan people. Where is your evidence that this is a socialist revolution? From where I'm standing it looks like a general rebellion against a despot. Sorry but your analysis of the current situation is completely absurd... ಠ_ಠ
"No person is so grand or wise or perfect as to be the master of another person." ~ Karl Hess
"look, property is theft, right? Therefore theft is property. Therefore this ship is mine, OK?" ~Zaphod Beeblebrox
What the heck?... Seriously how could any libertarian side with Gaddafi over the Libyan people.
I'm not siding with Gaddafi, he's a cartoon character and a gangster; but if it wasn't for the bunch of rubes and socialists that Libyans are he'd just be a cartoon character. They wanted a PanArabic Socialist leader; this is what socialism is, and now they're crying because they're getting it good and hard. Unfortunate for the libyans who are not herd animals, but frankly most of them have this coming in some karmic sense. The same goes for most Americans, if they weren't such busy-body welfare queens we wouldn't have a giant empire overseas.
Where is your evidence that this is a socialist revolution?
Gadaffi was a socialist revolution, although I am sure most of the people rebelling against him are socialists, too.
From where I'm standing it looks like a general rebellion against a despot.
Beh, to be replaced by another despot.
Sorry but your analysis of the current situation is completely absurd.
What's absurd is talking abut Gadaffi like he's Superman and singlehandedly oppresses the country; these people feed into their own destruction; they beg for it, and then they cry when it happens.
I won't shed any tears if Gadaffi gets blown into twelve million pieces, but it's not like he bears sole responsibility for it. The mental indolence and herdishness of the Libyan people are all that makes Gadaffi possible.
Who the hell is "they" in "they wanted a socialist panarab revolution"? This countrys have a very scrued age ration where most people are under 25. That means major part of the Lybian population was either not born or toddlers when Gadafi took power.
If they take care of Gadafi theselves this will make heroes of the military, and the next thing you can get is a military dictatorship. I am suprised that you have so much faith into (state) military, I look for a non-state solution, that is a professional company who goes in, round him up, gets out, take the money and does not pretend to be heroes afterwards.
The main questions behind my post like "is such a fund legal" or is it in a moral sense accpetable is not answered by anyone here, the least you.