Final answer:
Libertarianism typically opposes forced redistribution of wealth, favoring just acquisition and voluntary exchange, making Sandel's assertion about supporting radical redistribution false. Socialism endorses redistributive policies for higher equality, justifying taxation as repayment for societal contributors to success.
Step-by-step explanation:
The student's question seems to rest on a misunderstanding of libertarian principles espoused by thinkers like Robert Nozick. Libertarians generally reject coercion and argue that the state should not engage in redistribution of wealth beyond what is necessary to protect the basic rights of individuals. Nozick's entitlement theory, which is a libertarian framework, holds that a distribution of wealth is just if it arises from just acquisition and voluntary exchanges. Therefore, Sandel's argument that libertarian logic could lead to radical redistribution of wealth is false. Socialists, on the other hand, argue for redistributive policies that aim at creating higher rates of equality, and they view high rates of taxation as an appropriate means to transfer wealth from the rich to those in need, which they justify by the societal contribution to individual success.