Well, this quote indicates it fairly strongly:
For there to be tension between the two there must be an implied opposition from your interpretation of what those two actually are.
Rather than, for instance, a philosophy based on personal liberty which applies equitably to everyone. Which, by the way, is why I frequently cite many (though not all) on the libertarian right as being more akin to crypto-fascists since while they love to lay claim to their own liberties, they rarely do so for those who are not like themselves or not like they perceive themselves to being.
A good example of crypto-fascists draping themselves in libertarian regalia would be the Tea Party in the USA (aka teabaggers), whereas a good example of the libertarian right that’s actually libertarian and from the same continent would be the Cato Institute.
My own philosophical journey this way is arguably libertarian left, but with enough crossing back and forth that it’s not always so clearly demarcated and I don’t think it needs to be. There are certainly more … chaotic elements shot through it all and certainly some Erisian influences too. Mind you, this is over the course of well over a quarter of a century, probably closer to three decades or so now, in the formulation and evolution of my personal philosophy and ethics.
Has that in turn influenced the Party? Hell yes! Case in point: I weighed in extensively on this part of the Party platform shortly after joining the Party.
Has it influenced the course of my professional activity? Hell yes! Case in point: my job is basically to help create the tools which anyone can use (for free — can’t get more equitable than that) to ensure their own digital privacy and freedom of communication.
Do I consider both of these consistent with both my interpretation of what libertarian is? Yep.
Do I consider either of them inconsistent with equality or equitable outcomes for anyone? Nope.
Not in and of themselves, at any rate. Is there still inequality in the world? Well, yes, obviously there is, but that is why there is still work to do and that is why the world still needs things like the tools referenced above.
For balance to be achieved the one must offset the other, thus implying that the two are in opposition rather than being in synthesis.
You’re assuming they are inherently oppositional, I disagree. My view of libertarian values not only implicitly infers equity, but requires it.
If you want to find that thing which is inherently oppositional to liberty, it is authority. If you want to find the inherent opposition to libertarian, it is authoritarian.
Have you ever thought to ask why some might react that way? Could it possibly be feeling offended at the presumption that their deeply held beliefs are, in fact, the opposite and being constantly ridiculed and written off is the cause of that antagonism?
Your own assumptions, for instance, have already reached the point where you believe that it is better for people to:
Instead of defining themselves and their own beliefs as they see fit or as is most appropriate for their values. To put it another way, that speech should be free except for some … and then you’re shocked when offence is taken at that concept.
The irony would be funny if it wasn’t so pathetic.