To me, this is EXACTLY like when people were turning on him/trying to bash him for receiving social security.
Yes, he is against the policy of having social security as a representative, and in his political life, and for philosophic reasons.
But as a person interacting in this world, it would be a tremendous setback for anyone to not work within the existing framework to accomplish your goals. Not receiving SS because you believe there should be no SS does not get rid of SS, just like not using the mechanisms in place regarding domain names at the UN would not abolish the UN. It's weird to me that not everyone gets that.
I mean for pete's sake, this is the most elementary argument. Think about it.
"Well, if you don't like the government and don't think it should have a role, don't go to the hospital or drive on a road, etc. etc."
Same line of reasoning /\