the video claims that being a voluntarist is completely different than constitutionalist but it is wrong. You can be a voluntarist if you emphasize the idea of participation by choice. That does NOT mean you are automatically an anarchist. Putting "ist" at the end of the word volunteer does not mean 100%, across the board, in every situation, no ifs ands or buts. It means advocating increasing a system that allows for more to be done on a volunteer basis than status quo allows.
He described the effectiveness is arguing using constitutional terms versus economic terms. That is not saying he's against the constitution. He was only analyzing argumentative effectiveness. Nothing wrong with that.
He says great if people want to be self governing and left alone. What exactly was he supposed to say? Again does that mean 100% across the board no ifs ands or buts totally left alone no matter what happens. Not necessarily. But a great increase in aspects of life that are voluntary, and for the most part left alone? Sure.
What if the US got invaded. Should such a colony not be included to help with national defense? That's one huge reason we have a constitution, for common defense against foreign enemies.
He says constitution allows the federal gov to do 18 things instead of 1800 or 18000 it does now. Another pro constitution statement. Never does Ron attack those 18 things as wrong or beyond what the proper role of government should be.
He has stated he's for repealing the amendment allowing for taxation. So one amendment allows for it. That does not mean he's against the entire document. Prohibition was once part of the constitution and was later repealed with another amendment.
He often has stated what the proper role of government is. (e.g. mediation, common defense). You won't find anarchists stating any proper role whatsoever.