For an Aristocracy of the Ego.
Mencken and Christophe Cieters both advocate a Nietzschean approach to libertarianism. Renzo Novatore, Max Stirner, Zo d’Axa, Georges Palante and S. E. Parker are all examples of a profoundly anti-democratic rejection of statism and collectivism. John Beverly Robinson, John Badcock, Benjamin Tucker and others in the individualist anarchist sects have this aristocratic and anti-normie view of society. Yet in spite of claiming the individualist anarchists for themselves, it seems most libertarians completely ignore the social, moral and religious radicalism that the individualist anarchists and egoists almost all shared. They tend to have this normie affirming, conventionalist moral vision that promotes nonviolence, defends status signaling behavior, and is obsessed with proving that anarchism will fill the bellies of the least and the dumbest – basically bourgeoisie and soft.
The same ones who will claim Tucker and even Stirner will, in the same breath, defend the aimless materialism and herd conformity of townies and the middle class. Yet the individual anarchists saw this status climbing, materialist and conventional moral outlook as essentially the source of state power, the bourgeoisie were soft and cowardly and their obsession with security and preservation of order made them only too willing to accept the police man and the social security check. Indeed, if anything the egoists and individualist anarchists saw that this middle class, republican attitude was itself the central problem of mass society and that the state was merely a result of the vulgar and cowardly outlook of the middle class breeder types.
Tom Woods is perhaps the epitome of this in some ways, he does a lot of good work but people with his outlook on life – suburban, religious, child producing careerists – are exactly the kind of people who still never start an insurrection because they care too much what others think and have too much to lose.