I hate making categories like this. I judge people as individuals, as believe that people should be judged & individuals but not everyone is like that.
There are people are, on one side of the spectrum, see Jews as nothing but victims who are pure, innocent angels who can do absolutely nothing wrong, & on the other side of the spectrum, see Jews as being pure evil.
This is a complete false dichotomy, which I blame on the media, & to a far lesser degree, academia.
Rafi Farber.
As a bonus, I'll mention Video of Jewish Gun-Rights Activist Banned in 40 Countries.
He is to circumcision as John Taylor Gatto is to education & schooling or Ryan Dawson is to geopolitics & Israel's influence.
One can say that, from an optics point of view, he was less-than-professional towards the end of his presentation. Then again, if you can't get emotional & swear about the mutilation of children's genitals, then what can you get emotional & swear about, since swear words are for emphasis?
I know that people don't like him meeting with certain politicians such as Ronald Regan, Margaret Thatcher, & especially, Augusto Pinochet. I still support Freeman talking to Pinochet & other nefarious figures, because I am far more concerned about people's welfare & ability to prosper than avoiding guilt by association. Talking to someone doesn't mean that you support or agree with them or their actions or policies. What really matters is how people's standard of living can be improved & how much freer people can be to do as they please.
He might be milquetoast, & I have disagreed with him on drunk driving, BlackWater & have mixed feelings about the United States Military. But he helped introduce a lot of people to libertarianism, & is pretty reasonable, & not a neckbearditarian (a libertarian neckbeard).
(David D. Friedman)
Gene Epstein.
(Episode 176: Gene Epstein – ‘Mommy Was a Commie, How I Rose from Stalinism to Libertarianism’)
Murray Newton Rothbard.
Love his philosophy. That being said, I do see him as being very much a philosopher who purely uses moral reasoning & grandstands on said moral reasoning, not a pragmatist who tries to bring realistic, real-world change like Milton Friedman.
My problem with him is that he is a purist. This is perhaps why many anarcho-capitalists are principled to a fault, & why so many libertarians (especially voluntarists/anarcho-capitalists) are not bringing real-world change by engaging in the political system, voting, running for office, etc.
I would not say that Murray Rothbard is dumb, but rather, overly principled to a fault. In other words, as opinionated as he is intelligent.
Hence, why I call him my favorite philosophizer, & my favorite neckbeard.