Larger concrete vessels that are to carry passengers are apparently supposed to undergo constant inspection during construction. A ferrocement schooner, the Rachel and Ebenezer, was built in Maine around 1975 and was put into the tourist trade. I had the opportunity to sail on her with Capt. Williams. Williams explained to us that a Coast Guard inspector had to supervise throughout the continuous night-and-day pouring of the hull. Must not have voids in the concrete. The inspectors were very good: "I didn't see that section go in. Rip it out and do it over!"

So the libertarian concrete boat would need Coast Guard inspection. True libertarians apparently feel they don't need no help from no government. The boat was put together by true amateurs, in the worst sense of the word. Apparently there were voids in the concrete hull. Their plan was to sail from port to port, avoiding all nasty authorities. They didn't account for King Neptune's tax collectors.

Rachel and Ebenezer: https://oceannavigator.com/november-d...

Hudson derelicts: https://www.riverkeeper.org/blogs/boa...

Interesting. Engineering schools all over build concrete canoes every year since the 1960s, and they work just fine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concret...

Ayn Rand's position regarding Libertarians was that of a spiteful diva to a charismatic supporting actor.

The correctness of Rand's position regarding libertarians has been demonstrated in practice. See this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republi...

The same (?) folks tried to build a concrete boat. It sank in the Hudson River.

Agreed, The use of force over another is always wrong.

In any arrangement of human society, it is impossible to avoid the use of force over another.
That is what Ayn Rand discovered by analysis, and why she was not a Libertarian but instead invented Objectivism.

The bully will attack, you give in or resist with force. Then the bully gets allies, attacks are continuous, you must destroy the bully to survive.
In the past these groupings were called tribes with rulers being chiefs or barons, it started small then with success they called themselves governments. To stop attacks you need countervailing power.

Every individual is responsible for their own actions. The use of force over another is always wrong. When you give one person rights that another person doesn't have, you will have an unjust society.

If you condone a government to rule over a population, who watches the watchers?

The Atlas Shrugged story tells about the Gulch-
There is government, just not much of it.

For human societies of more than about three people, government is essential. Not because it enables aims/ideals, but because it will arise by itself, inevitably from human nature of ambition and aggression.

You may deeply believe in voluntarist principles and in not having rulers, but your beliefs will not stop others from ruling/exploiting you if your power is weak. However attractive libertarianism may appear, it will always fail, quickly.

The proper role of government is to prevent that as well as to provide the mechanisms that prevent it from exceeding its proper role.