I disagree. That's a caricature used to dismiss what in many cases is legitimate criticism regarding the use of force.
There are many, more moderate, if you will, libertarians who are rather strongly in the hawkish camp when it comes to issues of war and peace, national security, and the like.
Similarly, there are numerous Christian groups who fall distinctly into the pacifist school.
These camps are not monolithic. They both have great respect for this Constitutional Republic which was formed over 2 centuries ago, and want to see it preserved and perfected. And any believer in ideal Liberty should have legitimate criticisms regarding the many specters of arbitrary authoritarianism which have reared their ugly heads throughout US history in a myriad of ways.
Anybody who doesn't have profound respect for the Constitution, and the Republic in general, I am dismissive of, because such people are truly lost.
~The problem with Rand is that she rejected the very idea of Christian charity. The very concept of self-sacrifice was abhorrent to her. The idea of sacrificing one’s life for one’s nation was to her just “collectivism.” This is the very idea that drives the anti-American isolationism of modern libertarianism. Libertarians never find any cause worth America fighting for because everything is “not our problem.” Nothing is their problem because they care only about themselves. So they just shrug and let civilization collapse.~
Look at her background. Where she came from? Rand disliked some aspects of communism such as collectivism but she was a full-blown cultural Marxist on other levels.
I hear that a lot from fellow Christians, but I would challenge them to consider the financial & charitable proverbs of King Solomon. Rand herself abhorred the Christian view of charity, but her financial view of society was actually startlingly Biblical...even if she herself did not realize it.
King Solomon taught us to be charitable with our friends and neighbors. They too were told return those 'charities' and to not be dependent on them, for the person who gave them may need them one day. Rand came from a communist country where self-sacrifice was at the point of a gun. I can see where she would have learned to abhor the idea of giving of oneself in both mind/body and get nothing in return would repulse her. Christians are taught to give for heavenly rewards, but King Solomon taught a different perspective that includes both the giver and recipient.
Which if one applies Christian Charity to say...the border crisis...many here on FR would have to agree with Glenn Beck. Whereas King Solomon would require us to consider the entire matter carefully. The church says ...give, I ask what would King Solomon do? The answer might be more Randian than one would suspect.