Stefan's answers were truly inspiring.
Badnarik on the other hand was like an old record: pushing his Constitituion like a Bible-thumper would push Jesus Christ. He didn't address most counterpoints raised by Stefan, which was somewhat trying to provoke a debate. No such debate took place. It was like Badnarik was deaf to Stefan's arguments. This seemed to also be the sentiment of the people in the chat room during the live stream.
Badnarik's core argument is that people don't want anarchy because they don't want to use violence. Right. So why didn't he rebuke Stefan's counterpoint about DROs and outsourced security? Why? Because he was too busy Constitution-thumping.
Stefan's stabs at Badnarik included: statism is dangerous, foolish, Constitution is just a useless piece of paper... Badnarik didn't even get pissed off?! Nothing. As if Stefan had said nothing.
I don't call this a debate. I call this an affirmation of Stefan oratorical skills and the inability of anyone on statist/minarchist side to hold their ground.
Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure - Robert Lefevre.