>>60
Libertarians believe social contracts should not be forced on people by the state, this doesn't meant they oppose social contracts.
All mathematics is abstract, that's what it is by definition. Game theory merely provides hypothesis to find and explain patterns seen in economics and political science, it's utilisation is a cause not an effect of conclusions by libertarians.
The stigma of Machiavelli being the master of intrigue is not entirely true, if you believe he was a cynic it is only because his works are a reflection of reality and this contrasts with your own perceptions. Thomas Hobbes and many utilitarianists never pretend to know more than what could be told from the facts.
The idea that libertarians worship game theory is absurd, very few libertarians overstep their bounds and claim game theory is anything but a hypothesis for explaining decision making in very controlled circumstances.
Corporations need to think about quarterlies in the next decade as much as the next quarter, they are also well used to funding projects which can last a decade to fulfil the long term investment criteria, old companies tend to do this. Companties calculate whether to follow a venture by multiplying the possible profit by the risks involved, risky ventures become more appealing as opportunities for further growth decrease so under a libertarianism the profitable ventures are done first and the risky ventures done later. It's the 60s and you have $10000 to invest, Apollo program or Microsoft?
I believe any restriction of freedom is an injustice, thus you cannot have freedom without justice and you cannot have justice without freedom. Freedom = justice. You don't achieve democracy by permitting injustices against yourself, you achieve freedom by enforcing justice and you enforce justice through democracy. Pretty deep stuff isn't it, maybe you should read the constitution some time.