Worth pointing out that all the "perverse incentives, unintended consequences, limitations on knowledge available to planners, and so forth" which apply to economics and war-making also apply in the areas of "abortion, drugs, pornography, and sexuality in general."
While many libertarians are, from a postliberal point of view, awful on social issues – abortion, drugs, pornography and sexuality in general – they often produce penetrating critiques of economic and war-making policy that identify perverse incentives, unintended consequences, limitations on knowledge available to planners, and so forth. Yes, these arguments are often deployed in the service of an excessively rigid attachment to the market and excessive hostility to state power. Absolutely true. But it would be foolish to throw the baby out with the bathwater and neglect the real problems they raise – just as (as postliberals have long rightly emphasized) it is foolish dogmatically to refuse to acknowledge that there are insights in some left-wing criticisms of capitalism. (As always, Thomists have the advantage of following Aquinas’s wise example of being willing to acknowledge and incorporate insights from any quarter.) In my opinion, one of the insights of postliberalism – certainly of postliberalism informed by Thomism and Catholic social theory – is that we need to be less ideological about public policy, and acknowledge how much of the details depend on prudential judgment under contingent circumstances and cannot be deduced a priori from first principles (whether libertarian, neoliberal, Rawlsian egalitarian liberal, or socialist first principles).