God, I do hate Libertarians. Well, perhaps not the Libertarians themselves, but certainly their unctuous posturing, moralizing, and sheer obliviousness to reality.
Case in point: I despise the right-wing fomented "cult of personality" meme of Obama as the "messiah", which of course couldn't be more divorced from the reality of how democrats/progressives/liberals view the President. Most of the legitimate criticism of the President comes from his very supporters. Not exactly what you see from the cult of Kim Jong-Il, et al.
I double-dog despise it as many far-right republicans cloaked as Libertarians will thus dismiss Obama supporters only to prostrate themselves before the idol of their Savior, Ron Paul.
Libertarians are poseurs. They hide behind pseudo-intellectual arguments that suggest the possibility of a utopian existence, free of Government which amounts to little more than anarchy. Anarchy in which you protect your own rights, free from oversight and regulation, usually by implied force. You see? Republicans on steroids (which, of course, would also be legal in Libertarian America).
As I understand it, at its core, Libertarianism is the notion that everybody can be free to do whatever they like, as long as it doesn't impinge on the ability of anybody else to do whatever they like, or in the trite Libertarian mantra "Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins".
There can be no doubt that Libertarianism would result in a failed society. On any scale. The proof can be found on any day, virtually anywhere in the country. At almost any moment there can be found a living embodiment of just how such a utopia exists only in the minds of the selfish and self-absorbed.
Where is that proof, you ask? Let me ask you... have you ever been a member of a Home Owner's Association? A PTA? A fraternal organization? Shit, a church even? Honestly? Seen Congress lately?
The fact is that two people can rarely agree on much, although two people have a better chance of agreement than three, or five, or several thousand. Libertarianism as the basis for a society is discredited with every instance of feuding neighbors. I've said it before, everybody wants to be a Libertarian until the guy next door wants to create a Cyanide leach mine on his property, just over the fence from your child's sandbox.
And in that seemingly improbable, but actually all too likely, scenario can be found the fundamental problem with the "end of my nose" philosophy: our noses are shared and their ends overlap in complex ways that simply cannot be addressed with the purely selfish concepts of Libertarian personal property rights with its lack of external accountability or responsibility.
I'll grant you, I haven't really spent all that much time studying Libertarianism. I really can't see the point. I find that essentially every Libertarian policy suggestion is fundamentally flawed; the obvious outcome renders the underlying philosophy irrelevant.
The policies are fantastical really, in their uniformly hewing to selfish personal property goals while ignoring the inescapable impact on the larger population, which would result in grotesque pressures on society as a whole -- and consequently, each Libertarian's nose, thus ensuring the seemingly desired violent defense thereof.
Ron Paul is an anachronism. He's dangerously stuck in Woodrow Wilson's time. A time of isolationism and small national economies. His plan to revert to a gold standard is as foolish as it is impossible in a global economy. The damage to the American economy caused by such an event would make the Great Depression seem like the booming 1990s under Clinton.
But that doesn't worry Libertarians. They have their guns, just like the ultra-right wing republicans they actually happen to be, and they'll be happy to defend their own little patch without the aid of government. Until, someone with more or bigger guns comes along.