Is your clarification that you aren't defending the article per se, but rather the right to charge for access to said article? Sure, but it doesn't really chan

Is your clarification that you aren't defending the article per se, but rather the right to charge for access to said article? Sure, but it doesn't really change my point, or my comment. > because believe it or not, even in countries with strong social safety nets people buy and sell things. Your whole condescension here is completely unwarranted. I am well aware that there are a variety of economic systems historically and now. Look, is it juvenile to accuse lefty/progressive publications of hypocrisy for trying to make money? Sure. And if this was all about some thoughtful criticism of capitalism then the juvenile nature of such a remark would be out of place. But the original article was likewise completely juvenile and to be frank doesn't even really make sense. It paints a contradictory picture of Libertarianism without concerning itself with whether those contradictions exist in reality or merely in author's own understanding. I could have responding to the OP with the same sort or "well actually..." type of response as you just did, but it would be like casting pearls before swine. The OP is not a serious intellectual work, and isn't even really that great artistically. It's just an Internet shitpost with fancy letterhead.