In a great post about Sheldon Richman and left-libertarianism, the Bionic Mosquito boils it down to a simple question, and a simple conclusion, that goes to the essence of the disagreement between “thin” and “thick” libertarianism (those that regard libertarianism as no more than the respect of private property rights and the non-aggression principle on one hand, and those who believe there is more to it than that.)
…left-libertarians have no answer to the question: when my property and your social cause butt heads, who wins? For left-libertarian theory to hold any water requires the initiation of force (aka “government” as it is commonly known today).
But then this would expose left-libertarian theory as not holding any water.
This, however, does not merely go for what can be recognized as ‘left-libertarianism’, but for any and all definitions of libertarianism that try to go beyond private property rights and the non-aggression principle, including certain rightwing ‘schools’ of libertarianism.
Libertarians’ overall current problem is their lack of respect for basic logic, as evidenced when people who call themselves libertarian see no problem in holding two or more contradictory ideas in their heads.