A short while ago I posted this below. The trouble we have is that there is no really effective way, to convert our articulated opposition to statism into effective action to remove it, and to thus prevent statism ever troubling mankind again. We did have one or two fleeting opportunities, such as late-Sept 1944 (Arnhem and the aftermath, when we could have got the Ruhr and Berlin in a week), May 1945 (when we could have over-run Moscow) and the Fall of the Wall in 1989 and the few months that ensued. But we did not seize them.
Margaret Thatcher is hated by many libertarians, for merely making the British State more “efficient”. There is some truth in this accusation. But she did want to “abolish socialism for ever” (as I believe that she said once.)
As liberals should (I suppose) say, we allow people to exist and gallivant about in our midst, who profess to want to destroy us and all we stand for. We have no right to be not offended. I actually don’t think, in my advancing old age, that this is a right way to behave about important matters such as liberty. Perhaps it is because I see the Sands of Time running out for me, or perhaps not.
Mu comment below was about the forced insertion of characterisations and life-roles of a certain kind, not generally thought of by most humans as how they themselves would want to behave, into the pedagoguy of unprogrammed young people under the ages of, say, nine or ten (or less.) The only justification of such moves would be to undermine the thoughts and modes of social interaction that they would ordinarily get inside their own family groups – looking at what probabilists would call “the expectation of” some result or other!
We libertarians can argue till we are blue in the face, about typeface colours on posts, or whether so-and-so is right about the aspects of this-that-and-the-other-in such-and-such cases. but until we can know how to DO REGIME CHANGE, really, now, when it matters, we will be of no use at all.