This is no prelude to Libertarian political philosophy. I am not that deeply versed in it. From the little that I do know about it, I approve of many of their concepts. A political philosopher likely would admire their consistency, their clear statements of principles and their black and white description of how things work. Are they logically coherent in their reasoning, and factually accurate in their assertions? I don’t know but I dislike their over-consistency and fanatical beliefs. They are mostly right like Ayn Rand is, but, like her, their wrong-thinking, if it becomes popular finally, could be very dangerous.
Let me try be more specific. Libertarians believe that big government deprives the individual of life, liberty and the pursuit of property and happiness. So good so far. They advocate downsizing big government, back to the state level and even farther, to the local level. They are still correct.
They desire to see big government deinstitutionalized, but cartels, monopolies and wealth accumulation by the super-rich does not faze them. Their reluctance here is immoderate and shortsighted.
My political and social vision is one embracing the deinstitutionalizing of big business as well as big government (and all other huge, centralized institutions). This is the moderate, humane approach against all institutions.
Groupism is a biological drive supported by, furthered by and linked to institutionalized society. Individualism is made possible and is linked to a small, decentralized set of social institutions.