Agree with posts below the 'debate' was an embarrassment.
Of all of the pure free market he was clearing a path for, Rothbard was clearly most troubled by IP. As a purveyor of ideas this is natural, but considering how much he ever gained pecuniarily from it..
Even so, while I would like to hear Wenzel develop his thoughts, the suggestion that Rothbard would have ever supported a state sponsored IP law system is preposterous beyond the pale. He clearly supposed some free market contractual arrangement.
Invoking Rothbard sadly ended Wenzel's credibility in the argument and didn't explain Wenzel's own ideas. Also obviously whatever Rothard may or may not have thought isn't germane to the validity of Kinsella's position.
As Kinsella.. he almost seemed to provoke Wenzel to be irrational. While prevailing on the logical debate he needlessly wheedled Wenzel which in turn undermined his position.
It was like a boxing match where the victor kicked the loser in the face once he was down.
No honor to be had at all here.
Kinsella, don't be a dick. People love a good winner but poor winners look like losers.
Wenzel, brush up on your formal logic. I think you may have something to say about scarcity.. develop it, but your attacks on Kinsella's tertiary arguments were weak at best. Have your own position and clarify how it differs, and why those differences matter.
I love reading both you guys. This was just sad to see. If you have another debate like this.. and it turns out like this.. leave it in the vault.