That's right.
Btw, you can't dismiss the truth and in this case, you can't dismiss the failure of the the Libertarian Party platform and the libertarian philosophy in general. The libertarian agenda is of no consequence in modern American politics. Just saying its relevent, while having absolutely no proof to back up such an outlandish remark, is wild eyed rhetoric at best.
I didn't even say it was relevant. In fact, in a social democracy such as the USA, libertarian philosophy can only be a marginal movement given that net tax consumers outnumber and outvote net tax payors--a trend which will continue until the treasury is exhausted. What is popular is not necessarily right, and what is right is not necessarily popular. (Ad populum, RM. Remember?)
But I digress. Let us return to my original question: What is the basis for your statement that the golden rule and the core libertarian philosophy of no initiation of force or fraud are "at the opposite ends of the spectrum?"