I could easily make the argument that the left/right dichotomy is entirely immaterial compared to the authoritarian/libertarian one. As >>4497
basically says, the real issue is with those who feel the need to play the moral arbitration game. Personally, I don't especially care if someone wants to be what I consider a degenerate; all I care about, is whether or not I retain the ability to disassociate from them if I so choose, and if I retain the ability to disagree vocally and openly with them.
>Inb4 leftists will always choose to coerce those with whom they disagree
Yes, and so will those on the authoritarian Right. Saying that leftists tend to coerce dissenters into doing what they want is quite true, but that misses the forest for the trees: the reason why
they do that, is because the only way they can even attempt
to implement their retarded concept of equality of outcome, is by means of coercively kneecapping the naturally more-talented and -stronger.
Appropriately, this means they are applying anti-competitive monopoly not only to economics, but also to the social sphere, as well; they break down competition because, to the leftist, such is an injustice rather than a cause for self-improvement.
Thus, what we need is not rightist unity, but rather, libertarian unity. Never forget that SEK3 himself is considered a left-libertarian, yet he was able and willing to work with ancaps on both sides of the fence. Hell, so was Rothbard, to the extent that he founded an entire fucking political journal for that sole express purpose.