I think "the protection of individual liberty" in this case includes regulation of corporations which act against liberty. The request is that the government no

I think "the protection of individual liberty" in this case includes regulation of corporations which act against liberty. The request is that the government not grant special privileges to some corporations refers mostly to things like subsidies and special contracts. On the other hand, if a corporation is acting in a way that puts people in danger, for example excessive pollution or selling defective products, there's no basic ideal of classical liberalism or libertarianism that would prevent the government from acting to stop it. The point of this article is that the idea of libertarians opposing all government regulation is false. They tend to want to restrict but not abolish it. That's not to say that it's a flawless philosophy. It's definitely one that's created out of idealism and faith in humanity, which might not always be warranted. In a way, it has become self-defeating in its success because it has empowered individuals to believe they're wiser than they are, leading to people who are more easily manipulated by well-crafted rhetoric that stokes the ego and convinces them that they know something that others don't. Characterizations of different groups as stupid and maybe even a little evil are particularly effective for this kind of manipulation, like the kind that the author here argues against.