I think you’re mostly getting my idea. I think it’s also worth mentioning that in many ways, classical liberals like say Locke and Jefferson, were in their own ways, skeptical of libertarianism (even though they didn’t have a word for it) as a standalone ideological orientation, hence the fact they were social contract theorists — which by definition is trying to mediate individual rights against some conception of the common good. 

I’d go further and suggest that the emergence of state capacity libertarian and liberal nationalist thought are both re-evaluations of these insights by a bunch of former libertarianism and neoliberals who have recognized this very danger and are now trying to cope with it, in a contemporaneous conversation. 

 So the constraint that should be put on libertarianism is the social contract? Without it, you contend, fascists by their very nature would rule the land? 

 Kind of. And I think unconstrained libertarianism, particularly propertarian forms of libertarians are just outright fascist. See: Hans Hermann-Hoppe. 

 Got it. Thanks. Some things to think over. 

 In the west, I think that there has been a loss of trust in the idea that our governments are functioning for the common good. The idea that they have been tilted towards benefiting a few, at the expense of the many, is more believable and a much easier story to tell. And the funniest thing is that people who are directly benefiting from the corruption are elected to stop it. So where do we go from here? How do we reinstate the belief in our liberal institutions and the ideals of classical liberalism? 

 You have the play the political game and push for reform. I don’t know what else to say. Just throwing up your hands and excising yourself is exactly the kind of depoliticization that fascists pray on. 

 I hear ya. I think the exact same thing when someone says, “I don’t vote cause it doesn’t matter.” 

Apathy and nihilism are the fascists’ best tools.