That's a large part of it, though it's not the full story.
I would probably qualify as what Beckerman refers to as a "moderate libertarian" (though personally, I would refer to myself as a "Neo-Ciceronian", and anyone who pages through an archive of my posts would see that I am most definitely unfriendly towards "libertarianism"). My beef with libertarianism is several-fold, and extends far beyond the mongoloid foreign policy views of many libertarians:
1) Hard-core libertarians appear to be totally unable to distinguish "some" government or "a little" government on the one hand, and "statism" on the other. I've met libertarians who honestly seem to think that if you aren't in favour of privatising all roads immediately, then you are a Communist.
2) Hard-core libertarians don't seem to be all that capable of considering the consequences of their policy suggestions. Long-term strategic consideration doesn't seem to be their strong point.
3) Hard-core libertarians, despite trying to glom off the reputations of the Founders (especially Jefferson), have a total lack of understanding of the various shades of "liberty ideology" which motivated the Founders. As a result of this, the "liberty" that libertarians promise is often incompatible with the American Constitutional system, a system which I explicitly support as an ideological dogmatism.
4) Hard-core libertarians don't understand, or are purposefuly obtuse about, the fact that private individuals and corporations, if allowed to have the requisite power, can be just oppressive and dehumanising as any government on earth.
5) Hard-core libertarians have such an absurdly reductionist understanding of the "No Harm" principle that it is essentially meaningless - a whole host of behaviours that one person can engage in which do, in real life, have adverse effects on other people are viewed, somehow, as being completely ethically neutral.
6) Hard-core libertarians tend to be rabidly anti-religious, and often believe their own propaganda that any and all religious belief somehow or another equates with tyranny. They somehow missed the point that religious belief, or at least that which is informed by the Judeo-Christian tradition based upon the Bible, is necessary for true liberty because it more often than not serves as a brake on the unsociable behaviour of individuals with each other.
Excellent post! They just can’t come to grips with the fact that (as just one example) sexual libertinism results in lots of illegitimate babies and absent fathers, and therefore an army of socialist women voters ready to march to the polls to vote for Hillary and socialized medicine. Libertarianism plants the seeds of its own destruction because it’s absolutely impossible to have a low tax, fiscally conservative government after a few years of social liberalism.
I think a lot of hard-core libertarians are young and short on life experience (esp. in things like raising children). They are innately smart enough to realize that liberalism and socialism are crap, but they are handicapped by being raised in a permissive, selfish modern culture and educated by a subversive educational system which doesn't teach the old historical truths about the religious and cultural roots of American freedom. So they get their ideas from economic ideologues, and fiction writers like Ayn Rand or Heinlein. Thus adolescent mental tendencies, like the tendency to oversimplify and obsess, an addiction to fantasy, and the belief that "no one has a right to tell me what to do," dominant their thinking longer than they do in those of most people.