I understand that Hans Hoppe’s Argumentation Ethics as not saying that self-ownership is true, rather, that anyone arguing anything accepts self-ownership as true by their “performance.” To argue against self-ownership is then a performative contradiction, but only for the one doing so. And if you have a desire to “get along” with others and to find a peaceful way to allocate resources in a world of scarcity, then you’ll accept self-ownership, and ultimately individualistic property rights. If you don’t have such a desire, than you become a “technicality”, like a raging tiger, and may be dealt with on the same ethical grounds. If you don’t respect the self-ownership and property rights of others, they have no reason to respect yours (that you clearly don’t believe in). And that’s today’s two cents.