I’ve seen reports about this before.
Anything with the word ‘libertarian’ in it rings alarm bells, like hard right conservatives they believe in a free of all regulation business model that essentially vies for slavery and feudalism.
USA libertarians are linked with extreme right wing rich like Mercers, Koch network and other highly undesirable elements that often feed into extreme Christian fundamentalists such as the dominionists of which the Mercers are followers. They espouse the truly worrying thinkings of one USA right winger James Buchanan and his free market economics. In the U.K. the tories are pushing ‘free ports’ which are enclaves for the rich to avoid customs and tax and to entrench themselves at the expense of normal working civilians, but libertarians especially despise the poor and disadvantaged.
Any further grips on power I treat as extremely concerning.
I would urge anyone to read up on some of the names I’ve mentioned , their thinking is highly unpleasant and goes against any notions of a fair society…..

on one hand it disgusts me that some body thinks they can grant freedom to a port in the first place.

but many of the greatest cities on earth have been built from free ports.

It is not so much the question of ‘free ports’ per se as they have been around for a long time.
It’s the running and operation of them post Brexit which is worrying. The EU has clamped down on theirs due to the massive sums of tax avoidance and allegations of smuggling occurring within them, usually linked to large corps and very rich individuals.
Whereas here in the U.K. the signs are not good with the potential for money laundering and other criminal activities.
Also free ports in other countries have been linked to poor workers rights and conditions.
A situation that would suit conservatives.

https://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2020/02/01/free-ports-a-modern-pirate-tortuga/

I think although this might be well versed, it fails to notice the significant distinction between deontological and consequentialist libertarianism.
That is the crux of the matter full stop as far as the lassez faiyre way goes.
E

interesting, can you expand

Sure. When you think of the Libertarian "rules", you ask whether following the rule is important even if you follow the rule without understanding why the rule is there. Not a wave to anarchy, but an honest approach to understanding the motivation for the rule. And asking whether simply abiding by the libertarian doctrine is more important than being happy?
The deontological libertarian just simply believes in the rules. Do no harm for example. No stray, no asking if or but, or in this circumstance, but just follow the rule.
Contrastingly the consequentialist libertarian believes that what makes people prosperous and happy is what is most important and the rules should be based around that. They are not pacifists, or against force (or harm) per say, but they support strong private property rights because it generally makes people happy and prosperous.
Libertarianism has an innate conflict in deciding on issues like whether to support abortion or not because of this split.

Interesting but is this the innate conflict wrt abortion and liberty?

Seems like its simply the rights of a parent vs the rights of a fetus.

Libertarian in the Rothbard sense is a relatively new thing and American. For hundred years or so prior elsewhere it meant anarchist or agrarianism. It's still very much in use in that vein.

Conservative Libertarians in the US are also linked to dominionists like the Mercer family and the hard right theories of Patrick Buchanan

trying to understand things on their own merit also works ;}

this bigga

Seriously everyone worries about inflation, what about conflation?

Have read a lot about this before. Fantastic idea shame they havnt built more really

They aren't all so hot, post-automobile versions like new delhi make a difficult landscape.