Individualist Anarchist (Left-Rothbardian variety ala Lysander Spooner, Roderick Long, etc.)

Extreme libertarian for the most part. Including a moderate welfare state though.

Beyond police, military, courts, the governments responsibility should be to make sure everyone has enough resources to get educated, avoid starvation, and basic cover for healthcare. As much as possible of that should be done through the free market though. The government should just be responsible for giving people the funds when they're desperate.

Green

WTF? What the hell is Left-Rothbardianism? How is that even possible?

https://c4ss.org/content/12938 (A left market anarchist site, and the article is written by a mutualist, so that you don't think it is some "ancap conspiracy.")

"In “Libertarianism: What’s Going Right,” I mentioned Left-Rothbardianism as one possible basis for finding areas of agreement between market libertarians and the Left. I’d like to go into that in more depth now."

The perfect example of a left-Rothbardian is Roderick Long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roderick_T._Long

Because of company greed.

Why hire a coal worker, that ll mine, when you can automate it with a machine and robots, that work for a faction of the cost.

Being "less" eviroment friendly, isnt going to magically get any jobs back, its just going to pollute more for no reason.

Those saveings will just go towards the rich that run the company's and not ever trickle down to the coal mine worker, who isnt getting his job back.

also:

Global warming isnt exaggerated.

It seems no one takes it seriously, because they dont care what happends down the line.

Trump is 70 years old... he doesnt care what the planet looks like in 40years, he wont be around then.

I've read it, and they seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the left really is. Leftists aren't just opposed to corporatism/state capitalism/crony capitalism, they are opposed to capitalism at its core.  Also, in the second link you gave me, the author says "The central difference is that we classical individualist anarchists still view our  free market libertarianism as a form of socialism". That makes no sense at all, suporting free market capitalism is not socialism at all.

Capitalism has two features: the means of production is privately owned AND usury (wage labor, rents, etc) exist. Free-market socialists are a thing, and in fact the biggest proponents of free-markets in the 19th century were not capitalists, but socialists like Benjamin Tucker, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, etc. They believed that free markets would make P = MC and therefore profits would be impossible and exploitation would end. Socialist thought is more diverse than communism.

I recommend you read up on

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_(economic_theory)

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon

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

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

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

I'm a liberal (in the classical meaning of the word, not the left-wing one that you americans use now-a-days) for the most part. Freedom is the most important thing in life. Equality (economic field) is BS for me. I believe in free trade, in private property, in meritocracy and in the right to self-defense. I'm a little conservative about some stuff, like some hard and soft drugs (that should be regulated because of the harm that junkies do to the society, you are not free anymore when you don't even know what you're doing) and abortion (even though I'm catholic, the reason for me to going against abortion is not religious, but the fact that you have to respect the right of the baby to be free, to live, even if you don't intend to take care of him, there are other ways). I also believe in death penalty for extreme cases (like some cases of murder) and voluntary chemical castration (for rape crimes). Gay marriage, like heterossexual marriage, isn't none of the government's business.

Although democracy relies on centrism (balance of left and right, autoritarism and libertarism), I think it's not good at all that people declare themselves "centrists". That impoverishes the political discussion and make easier for one side (left-right) to overcome the other totally.