This article is fairly inane, but just to comment on this one minor point: >Even extreme libertarians will probably say (2) is in a better place, but might cha

This article is fairly inane, but just to comment on this one minor point: >Even extreme libertarians will probably say (2) is in a better place, but might chalk things up to (1) needing to have more discipline and they'll make up some just-so story as for why unambiguously bad drugs, or pornography, or dangerous things should be allowed anyway. No, an (informed) extreme libertarian would try to dissolve this as a false dichotomy. They'd perhaps talk about various insurance schemes and contracts, which an individual is free to enter or leave (in the same way that they're free to choose between a countries with more or less harsh drug regulations), but which can still constrain an individual's actions/impulses in the short term for their own benefit. Similarly, a modern liberal might defend the freedom to choose which country you live in, on similar grounds. I felt the urge to respond to this just because such arguments are much more interesting than the author's attack on straw-liberals/libertarians