To be clear, we were specifically discussing engineers. Dunno whether that affects your point, though...
We can make similar critiques within any -ism. So for example, some anarchists openly discuss elitist, conspiracy theorist, and violent streaks within anarchism. In fact, it's probably best to hold those you agree with (and yourself!) to a higher standard of honesty
> Most libertarians do care about others and can make arguments that
> their beliefs can generate safety, peace, and liberty for as many
> people as possible.
Well, they are human beings, which means they have human sympathy for others in personal matters. However, that also holds true for even the worst cases, like supporters of chattel slavery. The sharpest illustration I know comes from Mark Twain describing his mother's attitude:
"She had never heard it assailed in any pulpit, but had heard it
defended and sanctified in a thousand. As far as her experience
went, the wise, the good, and the holy were unanimous in the
belief that slavery was right, righteous, sacred, the peculiar pet
of the Deity, and a condition which the slave himself ought to be
daily and nightly thankful for."
But sure, right-wing libertarians are admirable on a number of issues. Their consistency on negative rights (except maybe when it comes to property) means I agree with them on a range of issues. And they typically don't do loony things like call a fellow US citizen "unamerican." Certainly things to learn from...
> If those arguments are empirically flawed then there's no reason not
> to discuss it with them.
>
> Antiwar causes alone ought to make this worthwhile, since lunatics
> like the Bush admin having power over the world's largest military and
> economy eclipse any threat from libertarians.
Definitely. They're good on the Iraq conflict. (Though I'm not sure about "cold wars" and overthrow of Venezuelan and Cuban govt's...)
I discuss with right-wing libertarians all the time. Not that I'm any sort of expert on them.
Tayssir