Let ' s just go for the draw lads <| sep |> if nobody else wants to touch the case then maybe there is a good reason for it . leave it to the professionals , don ' t start a witch hunt . <| sep |> Having a single different viewpoint while still adhering to the principles of libertarianism , then sure , you could disagree . But what you said , that food subsidies are pragmatic , is a rejection of most of the economic thinking that libertarians subscribe to . This means that you ' re not just disagreeing on a single point , but many points . This includes the effect of subsidies on the number of producers , effects on costs , effects on availability , efficiency of government , etc . Not to mention the personal liberties that you ' re advocating against to allow for the state to both collect , manage , and distribute said subsidies . Bastiat even refers to subsidies as Legal Plunder in the law . Now , legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways . Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it tariffs , protection , benefits , subsidies , encouragements , progressive taxation , public schools , guaranteed jobs , guaranteed profits , minimum wages , a right to relief , a right to the tools of labor , free credit , and so on , and so on . All these plans as a whole with their common aim of legal plunder constitute socialism . In short , you ' re not just rejecting a single view but multiple principles and views . Hope that clears things up for you .