I expect it - it always happens in public discussion of extreme ideas. I either ignore it or use it as an opportunity to clarify my own thoughts on the subject and to share them with others who are reading the thread.

If I’m correct, my conviction is that my ideas will win in the end. That will require them to be spread to a public as a whole, and “cheap/petty jabs” draw eyes. This discussion honestly rather unlikely to change any minds, but if it does, I doubt it it will happen through throwing insults.

The fact that you yourself call it an extreme idea should be a dead giveaway that it probably isn't tenable. When designing a system always be sure to design from the perspective of the losers as well as the winners. Being a loser in an ancap world would be one of the shittiest lives one could imagine.

“Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.”

“Extreme” only means that it’s outside what is currently in place and what is generally accepted. I’ve arrived at an extreme political position because that’s where logic has lead me, not because it is extreme. It gives me pause, but my position has been only reinforced by introspection and discussion with others.

> When designing a system always be sure to design from the perspective of the losers as well as the winners. Being a loser in an ancap world would be one of the shittiest lives one could imagine

I don’t disagree - but I would also point out that being a loser in our current system is no walk in the park, and that being poor isn’t the only way to lose. At least in the system I envision, there’s recourse against the dominant powers in more cases than there is today. If you have a serious dispute with the state... you’re pretty much out of luck.

You’re not wrong in your second paragraph. We should be doing a lot better than we are on so many fronts.