Yes, which is why I think it is a benefit to familiarize oneself with the basic materials before engaging in debates on the topic (or any topic on this forum, for that matter), to avoid misconceptions. I draw upon Rothbard’s The Ethics of Liberty and his article I mentioned, den Uyl and Rasmussen’s Liberty and Nature (this is more advanced reading, but well worth it for its depth and breadth), as well as Kinsella’s How we come to own ourselves (where he summarizes Hoppe’s contributions.) The point is that they help clarify topics in lesser or greater depth, and provide a common framework to work with - it isn’t about appeals to authority.
Well, see, but that ain’t just my problem. If this is correct, I think (maybe I am mistaken) that anarcho-capitalists have a lot more in common with anarcho-socialists than the two sides tend to make it seem. There are some minor “policy” disputes that are probably there, but I think that the break between the two major camps of anarchists is more because of people buying the left-right illusions of the modern day, combined with the influences of different statists (Randians and Marxists, for instance) that infect the vocabulary and persona of each side.