Yeah, I'm not a libertarian. The definition can only stretch so far before breaking under the stress. I'm more on the collectivist side of the scale, though I'm not by any stretch a strict collectivist. We're all shades of gray, unless you're an ideologue and those people are generally both useless and boring at a party.

If I may, as the world is more complex a simple answer—sticking to one ideology—seems less and less reasonable. For some things we need individualism and for other things we need collectivism.

This thread, for me, is more about understanding the other side of the coin.

This is a great illustration of one of my primary problems with libertarianism (at least, in so much as it can be defined).

Beyond that, I'd love to hear a libertarian response to Will's smallpox example.

To me, libertarianism and communism are more similar than their adherents would like to think. They both sound good in theory, and fail miserably in practice. Has anyone ever come up with a successful political theory based upon reason alone? I think any pure ideology has to either fall apart or get messy when it intersects with the real world.