The taxi industry has a choice. It can become a legitimate, competitive, indispensable transport sector, or it can continue behaving like a cartel with commuters.
That industry must just die at this stage. But there are other mafias. For bulk transport, construction, security etc. The existence of mafias seems to correlate with state weakness more than anything else. This seriously challenges my anarcho-capitalist views. Then you consider the history of the formation of Kingdoms in England and you can see that these started out as corporations that owned land, the ones that were peaceful were taken over by the violent ones, and this seems to be a common pattern (the history of clans in Africa suggests a similar history). Government may be something that is impossible to escape, at least in this imperfect world, my Christian faith also tells me that people are inclined to evil and won't just be good because it's the best thing for everyone.
Keep government small but understand that when some threat rises up, it must have the ability to respond with overwhelming force against that threat. The challenge is to control that force so it can never be used against peaceful people, I don't think there's a perfect solution here either. It's just a matter of choosing which compromise is least bad, and a night watchman state is least bad.
Nicholas, one further potential issue — but a VERY dangerous one — is the taxi industry's potential disruptive power on mass scale when "politically" mobilised. They have shown the power to really bring cities to a standstill, or crucial routes for industry, commerce and tourism. Gauteng to KZN is one example; the Maputu Corridor another. The problem is that the sector's mafia bosses know this, and so do all the other kinds of questionable operators who know they can instigate without being seen as the actual perpetrators. That is very scary in our context of very weak law enforcement...
That industry must just die at this stage. But there are other mafias. For bulk transport, construction, security etc. The existence of mafias seems to correlate with state weakness more than anything else. This seriously challenges my anarcho-capitalist views. Then you consider the history of the formation of Kingdoms in England and you can see that these started out as corporations that owned land, the ones that were peaceful were taken over by the violent ones, and this seems to be a common pattern (the history of clans in Africa suggests a similar history). Government may be something that is impossible to escape, at least in this imperfect world, my Christian faith also tells me that people are inclined to evil and won't just be good because it's the best thing for everyone.
Keep government small but understand that when some threat rises up, it must have the ability to respond with overwhelming force against that threat. The challenge is to control that force so it can never be used against peaceful people, I don't think there's a perfect solution here either. It's just a matter of choosing which compromise is least bad, and a night watchman state is least bad.
How about putting Government on a (private) Business footing? Profit/loss/accountability?
Nicholas, one further potential issue — but a VERY dangerous one — is the taxi industry's potential disruptive power on mass scale when "politically" mobilised. They have shown the power to really bring cities to a standstill, or crucial routes for industry, commerce and tourism. Gauteng to KZN is one example; the Maputu Corridor another. The problem is that the sector's mafia bosses know this, and so do all the other kinds of questionable operators who know they can instigate without being seen as the actual perpetrators. That is very scary in our context of very weak law enforcement...