Two news stories caught my eye today.
Firstly B.B.C. Radio 4’s Today show reported that the authorities in the People’s Republic of Scotland have noticed that sport is unfair – there are winners and losers and sometimes the winners win big.
To deal with this problem the local authority in Edinburgh has declared that if a team in a children’s football match are winning by 5 to 0 (or more) at half time the ref should be allowed and encouraged to declare the score to be 0 – 0.
In this way the losing children can have another chance – and their self esteem will be protected.
Soon the careful minds of the Scottish authorities will work out that a better way of ensuring equality would be to declare that all matches end in the score 0 – 0.
Oh well, whilst the English taxpayers continue to fund the Scottish government (latest example – a 400 milion plus Paliament building that was supposed to cost “a maximum of 40 million”) such sillyness will continue.
Also today I got to see this week’s Economist… and I spotted a report on Somalia that I think will be of interest.
As is well known most of the nation of Somalia does not have a formal government. Now opponents of anarchism (or perhaps “anarchocapitalism” as “anarchism” is a word that is sometimes used to refer to some forms of collectivism) have pointed at Somalia and said “see anarchy – it really is vile, bloodsoaked chaos” and defenders of anarchy have claimed “no – Somalia does have a government (indeed it has multiple governments), the Warlords are all statists acting as warring governments”.
The Economist report does not settle the dispute between anarchists and non-anarchists, but it does provide some information.
Firstly that paying the Warlords money to protect oneself and property does not work very well as (unlike the “protection agencies” of anarchist or anarcho-capitalist theory) the Warlords will take the money – but their men will tend to rob and murder you anyway. However, hireing and organising one’s own troops seems to work better (as does owning, and learning how to use, weapons oneself).
Also, as there are now about two dozen warlords and none of them (up until recently anyway) has a very well equiped force, a troop of even ten men can give one security against most road blocks and other such (the Warlord gangs just see it as just two many armed people to fight – and the armed guards tend to be fairly trustworthy).
This is clearly not much good for very small business enterprises or (POOR) private individuals. But some large companies are actually prospering in Somalia.
For example the largest mobile phone company may employ 300 armed guards on top of its 500 working staff, but neither the company or its employees have to pay taxes to anyone or obey any regualtions. They just have to respect the property of other people and keep their agreements with them (otherwise the reputation, and therefore the profits, of the company would go down the drain).
Although many of the working (or perhaps “non security workers” would be more polite – after all the armed guards are doing a job) staff consider it wise to own weapons themselves and to know how to use them (which is a cost – in both money and time), for added security.
And, the Economist (no friend of corrupt business folk)reports, the company provides charitable gifts to the local people (schools, hospials, roads and so on).
Sadly neither the American government or the “International Community” are interested in this.
The Americans are supplying favoured Warlords with money and weapons (in return for help in hunting terrorists) and the International Community is obsessed with a “peace process” in which the various crimial gang bosses, or proto governments (or whatever you want to call the Warlords) are gathered together in the hopes they will form a formal government for the area of Somalia that does not have one. In which case (of course) the Warlords would be strong enough to rob and murder as much as they liked.
Almost needless to say, the private companies are not invited to these talks. Perhaps if the private companies robbed and murdered people they would be invited.
From the Simpsons “Tango de la Muerte” episode
Tappa-tappa-tappa: Infatuated with the “Tango de la Muerte” movie, Lisa wants to learn how to dance. Next stop, Li’l Vicki Valentine’s School of Dance — after all, Li’l Vicky’s perky smile and dancing brought America out of the depression. Lisa enrolls in tap dancing, but she’s terrible and isn’t allowed to dance in the recital — which is the opposite of nearly every youth-participation activity known to man.
Lisa: But my parents are counting on seeing me dance! And I’ve worked ever so hard.
Vicki: I’m sorry, Lisa, but giving everyone an equal part when they’re clearly not equal is called what, again, class?
Class: Communism!
Vicki: That’s right. And I didn’t tap all those Morse code messages to the Allies ’til my shoes filled with blood to just roll out the welcome mat for the Reds.
The new rules for kiddie football in Edinburgh strike me as an excellent way to prepare children for their future position as adult taxpayers: there’s no point in working hard, because any gains you make will inevitably be taken away by those in power. Conversely, by not working hard you will gain free benefits!
Boys play football….men play rugby….and ANIMALS play hockey.
Wherein, btw, telephone number scores are just enjoyed for what they are.
Football is best played when you’re getting slaughtered and you no longer care about the score.
the no-win football policy was actually pioneered here in the u.s. by brain dead do gooders who wanted NO scoring in the game. likewise they wanted to do away with spelling bees because not everyone could win. scotland go blah
While the policy sounds just silly, it may very well have unexpected side effects.
As someone pointed out, what does it say to the side that is winning 5-0, only to get its gains wiped out at half time? It tells them no matter the effort, dedication and skill put into their endeavors, it’s all for nothing. Life is a zero-sum game, and all your hard work will be for zip. So settle for less than what you’re capable of.
But what of the team who’s being hammered 5-0 at half time, who take the field after the interval only to again get hammered 5-0 (or some worse score)? It packs two defeats into one game. ‘Oh, and don’t bother trying to improve your team either, or we’ll simply reset the scores at half time’. If that’s not damaging to their delicate “self esteem”, I don’t know what is.
Will they simply blank the score and call it a draw only if one team dares to show itself as the far better of the two on the day? Or will they start drawing tighter victories also, like 1-0 perhaps? ‘Well, you only scored one goal, so you’re basically pretty even, so we’ll reset the score to nil all. Now, isn’t that nice and fair? Ok, everyone hold hands, and all together, “I love you, you love me……”‘
Then again, this is the country that brought us the Scottish National football squad (no offense to any Scots out there!)
I’m sorry, but as an American, I was under the impression that all soccer games ended with a score of 0-0 anyway. 😉
this was a well written article but although Somalis a freedom loving people they are also very egalitarian, this is why Somalis and their fellow Arabs are always at odds while arabs believe that somalis are the product of arabs and the african slaves, somalis being warlike have never been enslaved they despise the arabs for being very humble, somalis do not like behaving in that humble way, this extreme individualistic egalitarianisms mixed with clans and collectivism is what actually causes somalis anarchic and contradictory world.