Liberty-as-means libertarianism allows restricting freedoms

Paradox of the day: libertarianism, considered as a tool for allowing society the freedom to adapt to new conditions, ought to include the freedom to impose local restrictions on freedom, because sometimes that's a good way to experiment with adaptations to local societal conditions.

Using Sullivan's terms from the linked article: I guess the paradox only really arises when you take a relatively absolute (!) view of how to apply liberty-as-means libertarianism in practice, and when you do that, you're actually closer to liberty-as-goal libertarianism anyway.