his arguments are largely orthogonal to marx and are mostly responding to classical pol-econ or marginalists but every time he says something about marx it's just wrong
i also think its interesting that when he was establishing some central points of marx early on, he exclusively cited things written 10-20 years prior to vol1, lol
"Under capitalism, distinguished as a system of privilege from a genuine free market, ..."
its embarrassing to even critique, but its astounding the extent to which lwmas rely on the shriveled philosophical notion of "privilege" as a central pillar
the worst of praxeological philosophy combined with defunct assumptions of neoclassical econ combined with moralism and lack of reading comprehension. genuinely i'm disappointed and somehow expected more.