The libertarian response to "libertarianism is an alt-right pipeline" has been terribly unpersuasive, largely because eminent libertarians are dodging the central question.
If I weren't a libertarian, I'd feel like we're hiding something. Well we are. We're hiding some of the most prominent, influential voices in our movement because they embarrass our argument.
If we want to indignantly scoff at the idea that libertarianism welcomes white nationalists and alt-righters, and insist that libertarianism demands open borders, equal protection, free trade, and an open global marketplace, then we must quit stamping our feet and answer this simple question: are Ron Paul, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, and Lew Rockwell libertarians?
It's easy to dispense with the alt-right if we just ignore all the loud and prolific libertarian voices endlessly dog whistling to the right-wing fringe. But any non-libertarian can pick up Hoppe and read what he says about immigrants, about culture, about race. Any of them can go on Rockwell's website and look around. Any of them can look up Gary North and see what he thinks should happen to children who talk back.
Is that an unfair "gotcha" game? I don't think so.
If we're unwilling to say that Hoppe isn't a libertarian, then we have no right to claim that people are mischaracterising us. We can't insist that the rest of the world promote a definition of libertarianism that we refuse to apply to ourselves.
So save the indignation at the allegation, and answer: are Ron Paul, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, and Lew Rockwell libertarians?
If the answer is "yes," then we have to stop saying libertarianism is inherently pro-immigrant, pro-LGBT, pro-trade, and pro-market, because it's not true.
If the answer is "no," then we should say it, and stop ducking the implications of our own argument. How are non-libertarians supposed to know if we won't tell them?
Lastly, if the answer is "no," but for political, professional, or social reasons we're too afraid to say it, then damn us. That is political correctness and moral cowardice to a magnitude that is wholly unacceptable in a movement that incessantly congratulates itself for its commitment to reason and principle.