Is The Kālāma Sutta Really Libertarian?

The Kālāma Sutta is often cited with approval by Modernist Buddhists as affirming a Libertarian ideology in which one need not take cognisance of anyone else's opinions or group norms, but one can simply decide for oneself what is important and meaningful. > "Libertarianism (Latin: liber, "free") is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association and the primacy of individual judgement." (As good a definition as any) The part of the text so often cited is the negative criteria for decision making: > “Here Kālāmas: don't use revelation, don't use lineage, don't use quotations, don't use tradition; don't use speculation, don't use inference, don't use signs, don't use understanding based on views, don't uncritically accept what seems likely; don't use respect for a *sāmaṇa*. When you know for yourselves "these things are unskilful, offensive (sāvajja), criticised by the wise, these things undertaken and accomplished result in harm and misery‟ then you should abandon them.” My translation The negative criteria are phrased in Pāḷi as, for example *mā anussavena*, i.e. the prohibitive particle (*mā*) with an noun in the instrumental case and no verb. So in fact it is difficult to tell what the prohibition refers to except from the context. Buddhaghosa supplies the verb *gaṇhittha*, the past participle of *gaṇhati* "to grasp". So his view seems to be that the first criteria is "don't be gripped by revelation". The context shows that these are various means for making decisions about how to behave. They are not used for testing the validity of beliefs. - Does the Kālāma Sutta really encourage libertarianism? - Why do people read the negative criteria as referring to test beliefs? - Do the Kālāmas themselves embody Libertarianism in their own lives, in this or any other sutra?