There is no confusion at all. The only legitimate justificaiton for govm't, or govm't action is to protect rights.
That is [ONE aspect of many] libertarian theor[ies] .
I corrected your last line.
Sorry, but imho you have not been appointed as FR's arbiter of libertarian theory. Try to prove me wrong.
The Constitution is irrelevant to libertarian theory.
Not to American libertarians. I've known very few that reject our Constitution as irrelevent. -- Most at FR view it as a very libertarian document, and support it wholeheartedly.
Here's a fairly current libertarian view on our Constitution: - Citing Barnetts "Presumption of Liberty".
That may be a libertarian commenting on original intent. That is not an examinaiton of the Constitution with regard to libertarian theory.
You're simply denying the whole thrust of Barnetts book.
-- Feel free to dream on that you have some sort of a 'special insight' into libertarianism, -- but seems to me you're just trolling the issue.
No, you added junk.
" That is [ONE aspect of many] libertarian theor[ies]"
There aren't many libertarian theories, there is only one. The statement was, "There is no confusion at all. The only legitimate justificaiton for govm't, or govm't action is to protect rights." Provide what you think is another valid purpose of govm't in libertarian theory.
Re: The Constitution is irrelevant to libertarian theory.
"Not to American libertarians.
There are no specific govm't documents in the theory. The theory is general and exists all by itself. The Constitution does not follow libertarian theory, it allows for things the theory holds repugnant. One can examine the Constitution for libertarian provisions and apply libertarian theory in the execution of it's powers. Socialists and authoritarians in general can also apply their arbitrary ideas utilizing the document.
" You're simply denying the whole thrust of Barnetts book."
Your link led to an article regarding original intent.