Self quote from here:

If your boss’s busi­ness has a posi­tion of eco­no­mic domi­nance over a com­mu­nity (which hap­pens a lot at local and regio­nal level, even if on ave­rage there seems to be enough com­pe­ti­tion), it’s not very dif­fi­cult for them to impose a socia­lly con­ser­va­tive agenda on it on the threat of being barred from your best chance at get­ting a job in the area. If you were bla­cklis­ted by your boss, then asso­cia­ting with you would become dan­ge­rous for all your acquain­tan­ces. You would eit­her cave or leave, and, even­tua­lly, the local society would become toxic for a mino­rity still defen­ding per­so­nal freedoms.

If your boss is allo­wed to min­gle eco­nomy and mora­lity, it’s not hard to see how the free­doms part of liber­ta­ria­nism could get easily rele­ga­ted to a ghetto sta­tus anyw­here, even everyw­here. Peo­ple would start voting con­ser­va­tive govern­ments because a strong sho­wing up of any other party would make the boss sus­pi­cious, and sus­pi­cious peo­ple would be fired. Other peo­ple would really buy into it, and become de facto con­ser­va­ti­ves. Seen this way, the end game would be liber­ta­ria­nism being unwin­ded because the man­date to not inter­fere in morals via eco­no­mic aggres­sion was limi­ted only to the public cor­po­ra­tion, while the pri­vate cor­po­ra­tion was fully allo­wed to enforce the eli­mi­na­tion of per­so­nal freedoms.