To be of any use, Libertarian political activity has to confront people with truths, and for the most part (in the immortal words of Jack Nicholson, "A Few Good Men," 1982) they "can't handle the truth."
We have no choice but to tell them compulsion-based tax-funded schooling does more harm than good.
"You'd reduce school funding? We'll admit the schools need some reforms, but you want to breed us a generation of illiterates!"
We must reply: "No, the current system is breeding generations of functional illiterates, unprepared to challenge transparent government propaganda on global warming, species protection, government's 'need for enhanced revenues,' etc. ad infinitum. And, no we don't want to 'reduce funding' or 'help you bring about reforms.' The tax-funded government schools must be eliminated completely."
We have no choice but to tell them drug prohibition is an unenforceable moral evil, giving birth to the complete police state.
"You'd reduce penalties for pot, treating it as a medical rather than a legal problem? You want to rturn all our kids into junkies!"
We must reply: "No, not 'reduce penalties for pot.' We must completelty re-legalize cocaine and the opiates, with no government controls whatever. When alcohol was re-legalized in 1933 violence fell off abruptly, and hard liquor consumption per capita has DROPPED, every decade since. By creating the perverse incentive to smuggle more potent extracts, it's Prohibition that creates 'junkies.' "
But these positions do not "sell," politically. So anyone trying to win public office -- or even raise funds to run for public office -- soon learns to pussy-foot around such issues, using euphemisms that allow the listener to avoid confronting these unpalatable truths.
At which point, Libertarian political acitivism becomes worse than useless, since it diverts energy and money from those who would force the listeners to confront unpalatable truths and admit they've been duped by generations of propaganda.