Oh I have read about it, I just fundamentally disagree with both MMT and Keynes.
What I was trying to ask there is what does it mean for debt to exist when there is no relative risk?
When a third party extends debt in good faith, it says something about their estimation of risk.
When a government extends debt to itself it literally means nothing, if one party fails they both do. More importantly, there's no recourse if the debtor defaults. The debt there exists purely as smoke and mirrors, it is created only so they can claim money wasn't made out of thin air.