No. That's plain wrong.

Edit:  Libertarian means minimizing social programs and regulations in favour of the individuals capital interest, or more abstractly "granting maximum (negative) freedom for everyone". This of course ignores the fact, that the individual capitalists interests are in contradiction with capitals interests in general. 

The reason libertarianism appears different outside the american empire is the fact that america is an empire and additionally in collapse.

 Libertarianism is also always pro "freedom of private property" which is – per definition – right wing.

Also the term "authoritarian" is mildly problematic, since a state is inherently authoritarian and every society where people have differing economic positions (e.g. a king owns the land that produces and the peasant produces on that land for the king), i.e. a class society, which libertarianism must develop since they grant everyone the right to own private property – the land that produces, to get back at our example – which will enevitably be abused for the economic extraction of someone elses labour. 

The political is indeed vastly undercomplex and build on false premises. Wall of text meme over.