There is a fundamental flaw in Libertarianism: subjectivism. This leads to other errors, about which I expound upon below.

First, non-Aggression is NOT equal to Non-Initiation-of-Force. Non-aggression implies that political structures (i.e. governments) are the cause of force. Libertarianism assumes human beings, left to their own devices, inevitably seek peace and prosperity and not violence, turmoil, or theft. In fact, the Libertarian ideal goes so far as to equate violence with politics. That is anarchism.

Second, non-Aggression does not work because it cannot work. It is the affirmation of might makes right, not the other way around. A simple thought experiment where we remove or reduce the military shows that foreign powers would have easy access to the homeland.

Third, competing governments do not work due to competing police forces. I would go so far as to say that if competition in a particular aspect of government (e.g. roads, education, postal service), then most likely it is not a legitimate form of government!

For each of these reasons, Libertarianism is not compatible with Objectivism. As a side note, most people on the fence about Rand’s atheism tend to defect to the Libertarian view. I am not sure about why that would be.