Your perception of my username is correct. I’m quite familiar with the failings of these sorts of social experiments. I followed the Free State Project from it

Your perception of my username is correct. I’m quite familiar with the failings of these sorts of social experiments. I followed the Free State Project from its inception, watched Anarchon happen in real time, etc. I get what you’re saying. I have two points to make in response. The first is that libertarian experiments in the last 20 years or so in the Western world have tended to draw the most extreme and outspoken members of the group. Those people also tend to value what they consider to be ideological purity over effectiveness, and tend to have strong/abrasive personalities. There’s a good deal of selection bias happening here. The second is that I personally believe that the more extreme an idea is, the more consistently educated and motivated the participants must be in order for it to work. As an extreme example: I want to see the US government disappear. That’s a bold statement, but hear me out for a moment. If we all woke up tomorrow morning and government at all levels from municipal to federal were gone, it would be a disaster. The same would be true of any sort of coup. The only way for a stateless society to exist and be functional is if the people no longer need or desire a state. To put it another way - I don’t want a government that we can “drown in a bathtub”, I want us to move toward a world where one day we realize it’s no longer serving a purpose. I’m in no way threatened if you disagree with me here, I’m just compelled to clarify when I see libertarian beliefs being dismissed because a specific problem exists when the same problem exists in the status quo. No political system is perfect. Our current system _certainly_ isn’t. It’s intellectually lazy to oppose a change on the grounds that it doesn’t solve everything.