Here is a bit I liked from a document called the "Rancid Honeytrap FAQ"
If You’re Not a Libertarian, How Come You are Always Defending Them?
As I’ve said elsewhere, I do not rule out any tactical alliance. At the moment, it seems that people identifying themselves as libertarians are among the most genuinely principled in opposition to police brutality, the security state, mass incarceration and the Wars on Drugs and Terror. Those are all issues of huge importance and I don’t think an effective politics can rule out a tactical alliance with any faction that is principled on these points, regardless of what else this faction might stand for.
Furthermore, I believe that anti-libertarian fear-mongering is increasingly being deployed as a stratagem of liberals and other statist lefts, in an effort to immunize the Democratic Party from any genuinely leveraged opposition from anti-imperialists and civil libertarians. In other words, the primary aim of stigmatizing libertarians is the fortification of state violence, as well as fortification of the primacy of the state itself. Its leading proponents are careerist idiots acting in the worst possible faith. Hence I reject it with the most extreme contempt.
The fellow who wrote that is a "bilious, sex-obsessed, herbivorous, queer semi-anarchist" and I follow him on Twitter.
This guy obviously is not my clone (I'm not always bilious or sex-obsessed, I'm only part time herbivorous, I'm not queer and I identify as a moderate libertarian who supports a guaranteed income) but I'm totally behind his priorities, and I think most people with a clear political vision (Jesse Walker, Cory Doctorow, etc.) are too. That's why I include peace and civil liberties links under "Resources" and "Sangha."