Hard to tell what you're basing your assumptions on about what I'm saying. I never said anything about a straight line - far from it. You're not addressing the points and examples I made about the nonsensical and illogical nature of extremism (like how "love and peace" turns into tyranny). You're example of mountain men may be one branch of right wing extremism. You haven't addressed the question why today's Nazis and Skin Heads ID themselves as another branch of right wing extremists.
It's a interesting subject to me but no big deal. The theory is that at some point the extremes on both the left and right bend around and meet at some crazed point.
A false premise based on the acceptance that the right wants to control people. As for people calling themselves things, there is never an explanation for such things. Finally, "peace and love" turning violent is nothing new and is the fundamental element of every utopian state. The Soviets were all about happiness. They just needed to kill the people who didn't accept how that was going to happen.
There is no logical way that extreme libertarianism ends in state control.
>>”...at some point the extremes on both the left and right bend around and meet at some crazed point. “
That is because the “extremes” are both anarchism, either “socialist” anarchism, or “individual” or “selfish” anarchism. Both of these are imagined to lead, ultimately, to utopia. Inevitably, they do not. Ever. They only lead to an almost identical tyranny.
DG