With all the talk lately about our so-called “libertarian moment,” I have yet to see a better piece than this one by Conor Friedersdorf of the Atlantic.

[L]ibertarianism is neither dangerous nor doomed, and… people who think otherwise are misled by a double standard… When they write about a “libertarian moment,” they act as if it would mean the immediate embrace of an extreme, ideologically pure version of a philosophy that most actual sympathizers embrace with pragmatic moderation. Yes, if the most radical faction of any ideology that has never before exercised power was suddenly put in charge, that might well end in disaster. But in the real world, libertarian ideas will only ever be implemented partially in a system of checks and balances where modest reforms are difficult to achieve, never mind sweeping, rapid changes. It’s true, but trivially so, that neither a libertarian nor a liberal nor conservative utopia is coming. But liberals and conservatives exercise power regularly, so no one is under the silly illusion that their ascendance would entail a pure ideological program untempered by reality.

Critics of libertarianism have a field day attacking the often radical claims libertarians make about the nature of a free society. But a fully libertarian society is simply not an option on the political table. Not now, and not anytime in the foreseeable future. It might be good. It might be beautiful. But it’s not something that any of us has the power to bring about in our lifetimes. So why argue about it?

What we do have is the power to bring about movements in the direction of liberty. We can’t have a free society. We might not even really know, with certainty, what a free society would look like. But we know what more freedom looks like, and we can do something to make it a reality.

If fewer people are caged for inhaling the smoke of a plant, that’s a libertarian victory. If fewer people’s doors are kicked in late at night by police officers dressed in combat fatigues, that’s a libertarian victory. If more cancer patients can legally obtain a substance that alleviates their suffering, that’s a libertarian victory. If fewer assets are seized by police without proof of guilt, that’s a libertarian victory.

So forget anarchism. Forget the minimal state. That’s fine for academic discussions and, hey, none of us on this blog have anything against those. But at least for the purposes of practical politics and social change, none of that matters. We don’t need to have a society of full libertarians to make our world a much, much better place. What we need it something much more modest. What we need are marginal libertarians – people who want to make the world a little freer than it is today. And if we look to the margin, and not to the Platonic ideal, then it just might be true that a libertarian moment is on the horizon.