To begin with, the image that goes with Charles Murray's essay on how wonderful capitalism has been for the human race, is all of white (mostly rich) males and one of an Asian female worker. Once you get over that, you have to read nonsense like this:
Everything else the government does inherently restricts economic freedom to act in pursuit of earned success. I am a libertarian and think that almost none of those restrictions are justified. But accepting the case for capitalism doesn't require you to be a libertarian. You are free to argue that certain government interventions are justified. You just need to acknowledge this truth: Every intervention that erects barriers to starting a business, makes it expensive to hire or fire employees, restricts entry into vocations, prescribes work conditions and facilities, or confiscates profits interferes with economic liberty and usually makes it more difficult for both employers and employees to earn success. You also don't need to be a libertarian to demand that any new intervention meet this burden of proof: It will accomplish something that tort law and enforcement of basic laws against force, fraud and collusion do not accomplish.
But what about, say, the environment? You just can't have people doing stuff that makes money but ruins the commons (air, trees, water). You can't have a world without some kind of governing body that manages and protects the commons against self-interested individuals. What kind of world do libertarians live in?