And libertarianism degenerates into outright idiocy when confronted with the problem of children, whom it treats like adults, supporting the abolition of compulsory education and all child-specific laws, like those against child labor and child sex. It likewise cannot handle the insane and the senile.
This is incorrect. There are some libertarians who believe that. However, most hold that children, the insane, and senile are not capable of exercising their rights. Therefore, legal protection and limits on them are appropriate.
Yet libertarianism is philosophically incapable of evolving a theory of how to use freedom well because of its root dogma that all free choices are equal, which it cannot abandon except at the cost of admitting that there are other goods than freedom.
This is incorrect. I do not believe that all free choices are equal. What I believe is that the cost of restricting free choice is, more often than not, greater than the cost of allowing an individual to freely make a poor choice.
Considering the author gets the "root dogma" of libertarianism wrong, that calls into question the rest of the piece.
You don't have to be a card-carrying "libertarian" to understand that there is a problem with compulsory education along the lines of the statist monopoly/secular humanism model. An eduational system that leads to enslavement of the mind to lies is a disgrace that hardly advances either "freedom" or the "improvement of mankind" as boasted by its banal propagandists. Intelligent Americans have a moral duty to oppose that kind of statist tyranny.