There were a few points I felt that could have been brought up by Adam that i would have liked to see Richard respond to.

The first I guess would be, what is the ideal size of a state to protect it's livestock? America began as the ideal to be the smallest nation state yet it has expanded today to be the largest (arguably) state with the most firepower and yet the geopolitical landscape is so divided that both major running candidates in the last election (Trump/Hillary) are both seen as literal devils by half the country. Vast amounts of people don't feel safe, they feel (and perhaps correct) like they are one election away from being destroyed, economically, militarily, politically, socially, etc. America has the largest nation state, so shouldn't the people feel the most happy/secure here, yet in these smaller state Scandinavian countries people 'feel' more secure, and many of them are beginning to embrace secessionist independence movements to break away from the EU which are compromising the individuals of these countries. How terrified would Richard be if Hillary Clinton had won the last election, or Bernie Sanders had gained control of the massive Leviathan States of America? It's really hard to move away from an entire country, there are vast expenses and it means having to fragment further from your family and local social groups. If Hillary only had power over a State, yes it would still be terrifying, but to a smaller scale and easier to move away from and much easier to visit.
The size of the Government is always expanding, all the laws that got passed from the guy you might like while he's president for a very brief period, will be and has always been historically used back against the individual as soon as the next person takes office. The size of the state will always expand until it collapses as everyone fights for control of the Ring to dominate others.

Richard says our ability to dominate is morality, his enemies are also saying this, and there's almost nothing stopping them from gaining control of a state to eliminate all who disagree... So to his enemies, gaining control of the violent power of the state to kill all the Richard Spencers would be moral by his logic because they must have dominance to be moral.

The second on immigration. Spencer continuously infers that in smaller nation states there would be almost nothing that could limit migration, which is contrary to everything that is happening today. The massive state Governments are using their livestock as collateral to bribe immigrants who wouldn't normally come into the country to do so as voting tools, the immigrants are being bribed right now with free healthcare, welfare, and preferential affirmative action legislation to migrate. Low IQ people do not perform well in high IQ societies unless they Government assistance, low IQ immigrants won't move to an individualist nation state because they wouldn't have the safety net to protect them from bad decisions.

The third on war. There is this argument that is thrown around that really really pisses me off. And the argument goes like this. Oh you're an individual nation state/ community whatever you want to call yourself, well I'm Genghis Khan(China, russia, whatever) and I'm just going to kill you and there's nothing you can do about it because I'm to big, so either you have to grow bigger more terrifying and fearsome to the point of dominating me, or I will murder everybody you know.

Whenever somebody brings this up, you need to really challenge them on this, and how they would actually do it. If America separates into 50 states, the population of the overall region does not instantly vanish. The spending power of the citizens does not vanish, the connections of the all the people who live within the region of America (even if there are divided nations in it) does not vanish.

So how I like to handle this conversation coming back to the "how" is, ok so i live in Ancapistan somewhere in the region of old America, how and why are you going to invade me if you are Genghis Khan or whatever dictator is in charge of your fantasy tyranny? How are you going to raise the money, funds, and justification to do so?
If you threaten to extort me or my state with your power there are 49+ other states around me that have have seceded, they value individual liberty because they seceded and they will unite because if I fall and am murdered by you they know they are next, our overall spending power has not changed, we have the ability to lobby the entire spending power of all of old America and whoever else wants to help to fight back, and it's much easier for us to fight back as we don't need to send armies to fight you, we just simply fire all 50 of our nukes on your centralized house with you in it, in order to defeat us, you have to defeat 50 states, we simply need to defeat 1. For every state of ours that you destroy, it's land and citizens for whatever reason, you are lowering your economic ability to profit... if you attack us, you going to murder all of your racial demographic who've chosen to reside here, and there are societal implications now back at your home to deal with the fact that you are murdering your citizens families who are living and doing business abroad.

If you, Richard Spenser tried to be Genghis Khan and invade us in this day and age, you, and your entire family will be murdered by us or your own people and you will have gained nothing.

This kind of turned into a long rant, but it's bullshit like this that the Spencers of the world spew and try to get away with.