Liberalismo radical y moderado

Antony Gregory dice que la división en el liberalismo (libertarianism) no es tanto entre un "liberalismo de izquierda" y un "liberalismo de derecha"; derecha e izquierda, tanto fuera como dentro del liberalismo son términos muy ambiguos. Dice que, en su lugar, hay un "liberalismo radical" y un "liberalismo moderado". No es que los moderados sean conservadores (eso pertenece más a la confusa división izquierda/derecha), ni sean acríticos del estado, sino que no asimilan el origen estatal de nuestros problemas, y que no precisamente por ese medio van a corregirse.
A un moderado no le gustó la propuesta. A esto Gregory responde:

After calling for a fair tax, he asks, "If we got rid of police and courts, what’s to stop me and my gang of 50 from killing the author, raping his wife, enslaving his children, and stealing his property?"

Well, what's to stop that from happening now -- aside from my not having a wife or children? Certainly not the government police and courts. If he and 50 people were determined to kill someone, they most probably could. The question is, is this more likely, and are the victims of crime better off, in a government legal system or a free market one? I believe in the market, not socialism, and so I would think the market solution would work much better. At any rate, it's funny that any libertarians think government is the way to prevent massive gang violence and thuggery, when the most massive gangs of violent thugs — the ones that have been most known to kill, rape, enslave and steal everything from people – are governments.

What's to stop the government from killing or falsly imprisoning you? The libertarian law-enforcement socialist answer is, bizarrely, the government.