If it's pretty clear to you, then maybe you could make it more clear to us, too, by telling us what you have in mind by "right wing" when you say "right wing libertarianism." If, instead of writing "the legislative, adjudicative, and protective functions unjustly and inefficiently monopolised by the coercive State should be entirely turned over to the voluntary, consensual forces of market society," Long had written that he favors "the dissolution of government into the economic organism," would that strike you as "falling within the realm of right wing libertarianism in general"? Because as I see it, that's basically just a Frenchier way of writing what he wrote there. Or, if not, then what's the specific right-wing difference that places the former phrasing "within the realm of right wing libertarianism" and the latter phrasing outside of it?

uppercrust, I've been involved in the Anarchist social movement for 9 years now and attended my share of meetings. I've been a decided market Anarchist for about 7 of those years. (The latter 7. I settled on the free-market individualist and mutualist economic ideas *because* of my increasing commitment to social Anarchism, not in spite of it.) Has it occurred to you that if folks like me or Gillis are at "these meetings," perhaps it's because we've thought about it and decided that it's not actually "the opposite of what [we] market anarchists want in society"? Perhaps we have a clearer notion of what we want in society than you do? Maybe it's true that everything *you've* been involved with has been anti-markets. But perhaps also you might notice that however involved you may have been, "Everything I've been involved in" is not coextensive with the Anarchist social movement as a whole?

... Do you really think that the neoconservative agenda is particularly hidden? Virtually all of the prominent neoconservatives are professional writers