I certainly favor a society in which rights are respected and citizens are free from coercion. But if I had to choose between that society and one in which children were healthy and well-cared-for, it’s not a clear-cut decision for me. Luckily, these aren’t mutually exclusive, but if they were, I mean… they’re children. They’re dying in the street. It’s a problem. Obviously these are extreme examples – in real life, it’s more likely that these two societies would meet messily somewhere in between (which is, arguably, what we have today). But, yes, in the end, I’m someone who appreciates a practical real-world implementation more than a pure and internally consistent argument. It’s unfortunate that we don’t have better modeling tools; as Vroman stated in his recent post, the system of economic behavior is large and complex, and I understand the temptation to dismiss real-world data and stick with the principles that can be absolutely known. But if I’m honest, I have to admit that political discussions that ignore the reality of how people actually behave are largely uninteresting to me.

This is a bit of a tangent from your original point; I guess I am neither Rothbardian nor utilitarian, but somewhere in the middle. I wouldn’t choose to give up my civil liberties. I don’t want orphans dying in the streets. Whatever society or policy offers the happiest medium is the one I will root for. Based on my current information, it seems to be libertarianism.