Only comments are allowed from sycophants who share the writer's weltanshauung (some kind of sick, utopian fallacy, as far as I can gather). Which is all very well, if you're a humble, unprepossessing scribe, deep in thought on weighty matters, but instead he spends his time throwing dirt at other people and expounding ludicrous economic theorems, which cry out for correction and refutation.
My advice to him, is if he doesn't want libertarian commenters refuting his ad hominem slurs, he shouldn't make them. If he wishes to make them, he should defend them. Sadly he's all cock and no balls. This below is an 'acceptable' comment (slurp slurp):
"This is absolutely fascinating Richard - if the attacks by right-wing “libertarians” (I’m putting that in inverted commas because if their objective is to eliminate dissent from anyone who doesn’t share their POV then they’re anything BUT libertarian) on your blog are part of the same pattern, it explains a lot."Notice how this person equates attacking someone's arguments with trying to eliminate dissent. Typical leftist position: having so little virtue in themselves, they sink into misanthropy, and accuse opponents of being as valueless as they are. They look in the mirror and what they see scares them - and it should! He uses the word 'dissent'. His marxist logic tells him to struggle for hegemonic control of the orthodox, at which point dissenters can be persecuted, therefore he assumes his opponents seek the same thing.
I think it is true that libertarian ideas are growing in popularity, and we should welcome the opportunity this presents, and guard against the dangers that come also, such as those contained in the leftist conflation of 'rightwing' and 'libertarian'. Partly this comes from the leftwing's definition of rightwing as everything that isn't leftwing (similar to Baldrick's definition of a dog: 'Not a cat'), and partly this comes from people who identify themselves as rightwing libertarians, based on the overlap between those two ways of thinking at this juncture, but we must beware libertarianism being used as a flag of convenience by people ready to oppose the big state when run by a leftist faction, but have no intention of dismantling anything once the levers of power are in their hands. For this reason, and others, I believe libertarians should raise the liberal banner alongside the Gadsden Flag.
The word 'liberal' belongs to us. Yes or no?
Of course yes, if we own the works of Hayek, von Mises, Lord Acton, de Tocqueville and all such worthy and insightful thinkers. It is time to take the battle into the liberal heartlands. Our brethren there are labouring under the yoke of socialistic fallacies, but they are liberal in the recent usage, and this is a start.
The meaning of 'liberal' is changing in any case, due to there being a party in power with the name in its title. The left now curses the liberals and is raising a banner of resistance, which all must rally to. Libertarians should step in and occupy as the left retreats.