Talk:Hans-Hermann Hoppe/@comment-117.196.100.61-20200807054730

>While simultaneously setting up punching you in the face as a valid rebuttal

Actually, no. An argumentation is, by definition, based on an agreement that a peaceable solutions must be reached via talking, and physical assault is not an argumentation, but rather an act of coercion.

In other words, there is absolutely no valid rebuttal to libertarianism in a plane of argumentation. Once you act violently and coercively in an argumentation, it ceases to be an argumentation.

My own interpretation of this, that Hoppe probably would not agree with, is that if you punch me, then you agree that that is a valid argumentation, and therefore, only for you, the NAP is altered. When in a dealing with you, a punch is a valid form of argumentation and is acceptable conduct. Thus, when you next want to go buy ice cream, and you want to talk price? Have a complementary punch for your troubles.