Libertarians are considered far-right because they go further than mainstream economists in their desire to privatize everything.

Most economists recognize that some government regulation is actually beneficial to the economy, lest organizations become oligarchies and monopolies. A mixed economy, where competition flourishes in tandem with fair regulation, capitalism and socialism if you will, is supposed to be the ideal economy.

They’re also considered far-right because they often believe all rights derived from the individual right to liberty. Personally, it sounds nice philosophically, but practically it just amounts to the rich dictating everything. There was a brief moment I considered myself Libertarian…and then I grew up.

So, between those two, they come together nicely for most social problems. Everybody has the individual right to participate in the economy without state interference. And if workers accept contracts for wages that do not meet their needs, then it’s not the states fault nor the company. If the worker wants a better wage, they should develop skills that demand their desired rate of remuneration.

Similarly, if you live near a polluting power plant, whose fault is that? Just move. If you can’t move because you’re too poor…then, see the previous paragraph. And if you die in the meantime, or otherwise contract some serious illness, it’s not the government’s job to interfere with the administration of private power plants.

These ideas and hypothetical scenarios are behind my appalled reaction to this quote:

The president-elect also announced that public works would be “cut down to zero” and those already in progress would be put out to tender so that “there would be no more state spending”.

As far as I can tell, he’s going to abandon Argentinians to the business class. That’s what makes libertarianism far-right.