It so happens that I am a firm believer in fundamental human rights, but to assert that they have any meaningful existence independent of their recognition by societal authority is just plain silly. The Declaration of Independence does not assert such a condition, nor does the Constitution. As noted in the Declaration
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. � That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed
(Emphasis added.) It is the declaration of such rights that gives them meaning, and they remain meaningful only so long as they are protected by the instruments of social authority. So much for social theory.

Now, I took this entire thread to be intended to address the inability of libertarianism to provide meaningful solutions to real-world problems. Libertarianism is, and always has been, a theoretical proposition. Nothing produced here, or really anywhere else, has ever demonstrated otherwise. Issodhos apparently doesn't like cheese, so let me give another reference that may, perhaps, be more germane to illustrating the relevance of libertarianism to practical political discourse: How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich