Plenty of people came to consider themselves conservatives or Republicans because of the arrogance of liberals or Democrats. They weren't experts, but something seemed wrong and insulting in the cockiness and haughtiness of liberal politicians, journalists, and economists, and the liberal conviction that the whole world was moving in their direction. I think we recognized that we didn't have all the answers, and that anyone who pretended they did was probably bluffing or deluded, and not to be trusted.
Libertarians who claim to have all the answers push the same button in people. Confidence that one has all the answers begins to look arrogant after a while. If you remember and were outraged by liberal attempts to portray their opponents as stupid or pathological, you probably wouldn't be so receptive to the same old abuse sent in the opposite directions.
Answer people's arguments. Show them where they're wrong. But try to avoid abusing them unnecessarily or pretending that you've got some master science up yours sleeve that will give you the right answers without having to really puzzle things out for yourself. The audience that matters is the undecided audience, and too much reference to one's opponents as diseased, depraved, or mentally deficient doesn't win converts.
I agree with you here. But I have a little problem understanding what you mean. One of the main attractions to libertarianism is the understanding that no one has all the answers. If I'm correct here, then their are no such libertarians as you claim. Maybe you imagined them.
...too much reference to one's opponents as diseased, depraved, or mentally deficient doesn't win converts.
On this I agree. There are many former democrats who today stand against the Democratic Party. Many of them had been converted. Being wrong does not make one "diseased, depraved, or mentally deficient."