There have always been two possibilities: The breach between traditionalist (and usually “Rothbardian”) libertarians and those who believe the feedom movement can be “mainstreamed” through compromise would heal, or it would widen … and the period since 2001 has proven full of opportunities for either of those things to happen.

We seem to be moving toward a decision here, as evidenced by the shots the two groups are firing across each others’ bows. The battle didn’t start with these shots, but the tempo of fire certainly increased with a recent Cato Unbound symposium on Brian Doherty’s Radicals for Capitalism, most particularly an article by Virginia Postrel; replies from the Mises Institute’s Karen DeCoster, AntiWar.Com’s Justin Raimondo, and Susan Hogarth of the Libertarian Party Radical Caucus have escalated yet another minor duel into what may be a decisive engagement.

Let’s not sit this one out: Everyone from the most strident Nockian Remnantist to the most softcore “mainstreamer” has a dog in this fight. Unleash yours into the pit and tell us what you think:

Should the freedom movement resign itself to finally and forever fragmenting along these lines, or should it keep trying to heal itself and build a “bigger tent” together, even at the expense of accepting “libertarians for bigger government” into that tent?