Neither of those groups bother me. They are both fundamentally full of crap and don’t really know what they believe. It’s mostly mindless nationalism, sloganeering and jingoism.
What I really dislike are these middle way quasi-libertarians who are as “squishy” (in the words of Gary North) as Hayek. The ones who tell you they are for markets, but we need government. The ones who tell you they are real libertarian, but that a free society is a pipe dream because it either (1) cannot work, (2) has never worked or (3) is actually undesireable since their libertarianism is shallow or a fashion statement. The latter reason is quite honest, and thus the hardest one to get people to own up to.
I am ok with people being pro-state. I don’t agree with it, but they are entitled to that opinion. What they are not entitled to, is to be pro-state, then turn around and claim to be pro-market. You’re either pro-market or not. Mises understood this even if he didn’t take it to the logical end Rothbard did. To be fair, Mises got close, and in many cases, a damn sight closer than a lot of these squishy libertarians who claim to be as Austrian or libertarian as the next guy.
If you’re a statist, be the best statist you can be. If you’re libertarian, be the best libertarian you can be. Whatever you do, don’t be dishonest.