I am inclined to agree.

In my view, the non-libertarian philosophy is a grand scientific experiment, testing out systems of all kinds, discarding those which definitely end in mountains of skulls, tweaking and recombining ideas, trying to get the checks and balances just so, creating agencies to monitor agencies, sometimes ending with Sweden and sometimes with Venezuela, confident that if we can get the system right, and get people to love more and hate less, to work together and be fair and good to each other, we can lick all of society's problems.

I won't speak for others, but I advocate that we see reality as it is, and take human nature as it is, a complex mixture of self-interest, kin preference, and occasional random acts of kindness, assume that many people will do evil if they can get away with it, but most just want to get along and prosper, that market incentives are reliable because most people seek opportunities to improve their situation, that social incentives are essential because we are social creatures with herd instincts, that we look for arrangements that result in the best overall outcomes, focusing especially on reducing poverty, seeing that the increase in wealth following trade specialization and market exchange did more to improve worldwide health, peace and happiness than any grand plan, and stop worrying about inequality so much.