oof. I had thought that link was going to contain some modicum of insight. But the only thing I could take away is just more hyperdivisive pigeonholing politics

oof. I had thought that link was going to contain some modicum of insight. But the only thing I could take away is just more hyperdivisive pigeonholing politics dressed up as if it's intellectual work. It's not clear why this theory of some unified "neo-Confederacy" has more explanatory power than say "populist demagogues fanning the flames with latent racism", and the concept seems to mainly serve as an inflammatory boogeyman for the author to repeatedly bash to drive points home. The truth is that every lofty ideal attracts opportunistic charlatans and grifters who hold up the ideal and claim to be fighting for it, while being utterly hypocritical when adherence to the ideal would actually cost them. And as a libertarian myself I'd say Libertarians are quite at risk of being drawn in by this, tending to hold views axiomatically rather than qualitatively (ie assuming correctness by construction rather than judging constructive effect). But being a political patsy is most certainly not limited to libertarianism, and the right answer is to call out both those who arbitrage ideals into cynical action and those who cast aspersions on lofty ideals by association.