Its actually on the contrary

>talks about anarcho capitalism being on oxymoron
>has anarcho ethno nationalism in his roles

property norms cannot exist without a state

lol please go read about anarccho capitalism instead of trying to debate an ideology you have no knowledge of

?

capitalist theorists were pretty clear that without property norms you dont have capitalism

because if you had known anything about anarcho capitalism and austrian school fo economics you'd know an answer to that question therefore i just refuse to debate someone as dishonest

so basically you have no argument against the position

Nope

otherwise youd just give it instead of dodging

I ju8st refuse to debate morons who think they know shit but they dont

tell me how you impose property norms without a state

oh youre trying to do that "im going to say that theyre scared to debate me so that they start debating me out of fear for being called scared to debatet me"

mate i just dont want to debate honest people

well ive asked you for an argument that supports a particular claim, right

your just saying "no"

yes

it doesnt matter why

It doesnt matter why thus you are justified into asserting unsupported additional reasoning behind my claim? ok

i said explicitly the reason doesnt matter

if your not giving an argument there is no argument

So then why are you asserting additional meaning then

To try and get me to respond yes?

also its interesting that your willing to argue about you being unwilling to argue but are unwilling to argue for an actual position

you could have rendered the argument by now surely

but hey im the idiot, right

yes because i am pointing out your dishonesty in this issue which indicates your dishonesty in general

how have you identified malign intentions? my position is that capitalism necessitates property norms -> property norms only exist with a state -> anarcho capitalism is stateless

you can say the premises are wrong but idk how you conclude its dishonesty

if you want to reject a premise your gonna have to give an argument though

Have you seriously not read what I said
I specifically said taht what you said after that by adding additional meaning to try and get me to respond is an indicator of your dishonesty
Also i clearly specificalyl also stated that if you had known anything about anarcho capitalism you'd know an answer to that, you're stuck within your circle jerk without even tryint to understand anarcho capitalism

so you wont give an argument because i dont know the argument?

thats interesting

if you dont want to defend your incoherent position thats fine

i cant force you to

No i won't give you an argument because you've said stuff that indicates you are a dishonest close minded person

so now finally fuck off

<:Gulag:575374484685586473>

<:Honkler:552578459516272673>