Reactionary circles tend to reserve a lot of venom for the Libertarian crowd, much of it well deserved when one considers the autistic neckbearded insanity of many acolytes of the NAP and Saint Rothbard. You could misspend several hours cataloging Libertarian misadventures on the subject of legal age of consent, child abandonment or who meets the criteria for moral personhood. In general though, the Libertarian position does have a few things going for it compared to the typical American political non-options.
1. At least it’s an ethos
Unlike Liberalism or even Republicanism, Libertarians mostly conform to a sort of exaggerated version of the Golden Rule. This makes their stances fairly predictable and non-controversial as long as you aren’t talking about child abandonment with a Rothbard fanatic. By contrast, Liberalism is just a grab bag of various ad hoc political talking points while Conservatism seems have more less descended into complete senility. While myself and my fellow travelers may look upon the Libertarian obsession with natural rights, moral realism, and ethical prescriptions with a mixture of mild amusement and outright disdain, I believe it to be a grave error to endlessly lampoon The Mises/Rothbard Cult while ignoring the more serious threat posed by those screaming the war cry of “Social justice!” There is conflict raging between individualism and collectivism, and we should always throw in our lot with the individualists for a variety of reasons not related to their misguided NAP fetishism. It’s in our best interests here to pick the team that gives us the most options.
2. The economics are reasonable
Economically Libertarians are fairly sound, at the very least. While their ideal economy might have cycles of lows and highs which could deprive college Marxists of the purchasing power to buy more leather-bound copies of Das Kapital from time to time, Libertarian economic systems are not going to implode themselves or disintegrate into abject entitlement spending bankruptcy the way Socialist systems typically do. The market anarchy of Libertarianism is close enough to natural selection to allow for a supreme level of adaptability, despite the howls of “SOCIAL INJUSTICE!” from liberals. Libertarians are annoyingly correct in their smug appraisal of economic failures by command economies, and you won’t find any commie capable of giving an answer to the Economic Calculation Problem. Say what you want about the other aspects of Libertarianism, in general, their economy is likely to stay above water, even with the presence of slumlords building dangerous apartment hovels on top of hazardous waste disposal sites, unlicensed gynecologists, child molestation water parks, etc.
In more moderate terms libertarians are quite familiar with how economic theory is constructed. I can’t say that about any liberals and quite a few “fascists.” Libertarians will at least consider what my engineer friend refers to as the “cost of failure” before implementing an economic policy, instead of just dumping truckloads of other people’s money at a problem. I would prefer some measure of a functioning economy to the self destructive and willfully ignorant policies advocated by the typical liberal.
3. The other options are infinitely worse
Finally, the consequences of collectivism, both in theory and real world history, are completely abhorrent. The main Libertarian objections to Socialism and Communism are irrefutable fact. Even before Communism got its feet under it, writers like Max Stirner observed the inevitable result of this misguided Man Worshipping would resolve itself as pure, unadulterated totalitarianism. The final conclusion of these systems is always the reduction of the individual to a mere appendage of some nebulous “Common Good,” with no personal freedom considered important enough to stand in the way of “progress.” Make no mistake whatsoever, the ideal Liberal Utopia would be an absolute HELL for any man not already deprived of his testicles, and chemical castration is certainly not off the table for these zealots. Unless you LIKE the idea of being sent off to a “sensitivity clinic” where an imposing bull-dyke will “educate” you on the evils of white male cisgendered patriarchy because you made eye contact with a female coworker for more than two seconds, opposing Liberal progressivism should take precedence over ridiculing Libertarians. We forget the real enemy here too easily, and that enemy won’t even give you the option of deviating from the party line.
Libertarians will at least do you the courtesy of not ramming their humanistic ideology down your throat and give you enough wiggle room to create your own society and culture. The progressive liberals on the other hand feel morally righteous in their crusade to crush your individual preferences under the steam roller of their infallible modernism, and will not relent until their hubris finally drives us all over the cliff.
I think it’s time we all consider the practical options here and place our political support along pragmatic lines. We can argue about who’s edgiest later.