I feel like your position is a common one, especially among people my age (millennials). If this issue were resolved, I think a lot more people would get on board with classical liberalism.
I think you perfectly illustrated a problem with capitalism - I think it's great, it has unquestionably bettered the lives of the majority of the population, but some things just shouldn't be commercialized. I know I'm not alone in feeling this.
Really great questions, and great discussion. The issue I take with lamenting that "some things shouldn't be commercialized" is the egoism involved in thinking one ideology should be able to make that decision.
It is possible that property rights may solve some of the problems, and it is possible that your concerns aren't shared by everyone... but the assumption that because [you] feel something should be done to preserve or protect a certain species or landmark specifically doesn't mean that is how is necessarily should be.
As someone who is environmentally conscious, I have always hoped that consensus and action / education paired with robust protection of property rights would resolve most environmental slights.
Almost everyone is a libertarian... until they are not, and that is really the test of deciding the role of government: Should government be limited, even if limiting it jeopardizes something you care about?
One would hope that a society that has innovated in the ways that we have could come up with a solution to most problems that doesn't involve encroachment on one person [or ideology] at the behest of another.
Before I address any of your points, I feel I don't understand what you're saying here:
So I want to paraphrase it to see if I understand it.
"It is egotistical to think that one ideology (the one I ascribe to) should make a (any) decision that might affect others."
If this is not what you are saying, please correct me!
(This comes from a "How to" article about how to argue with someone. As in, how to logically, coherently, respectfully argue with someone, not the kind of internet arguing that is so ubiquitous today. Their first bullet point was that you have to paraphrase what the other person is saying before you present a rebuttal, to make sure you understand their point. I really like this, because I think a lot of ugly internet arguing arises from simple misunderstandings of meaning.)