Lib artisooreoer

 Similar to Matt Ridley's ideology

I support outsiders who band together in their individualistic struggle against society and in pursuance of their own curiosity, pride, and instinct against society.

After we rightfully remove all forms and structures of material domination, hierarchy and sovereignty, I would want (and I would others to want) to project positive influence (without hierarchy and authority) in a sweeping influential manner

Novatore's "Libertarian Aristocracy" (Anarchist vanguard)

I've been thinking quite a bit recently about Novatore's concept of the "libertarian aristocracy" (by which of course, this being Europe and it being 100 years ago, he meant "anarchistic aristocracy" (you owe us a word capitalists!)), and I'm interested in debating with folks about this concept -- (I'm trying to sharpen my thought on the matter).

Certainly on the surface I can see how the idea of an "anarchistic aristocracy" would seem preposterous. What on earth could an aristocrat or aristocracy have to do with anarchism?

But Novatore makes it clear that he does not have in mind a ruler. Rather, he has in mind those individuals with an uncompromising animosity for the authority of today, and who would continue that animosity onto the inevitable attempts by people in a state of resistance to construct new systems of authority. The aristocrats are those willing to stand apart and remain a rebel, even in opposition to yesterday's rebels. Shevek, the main character of LeGuin's The Dispossessed, always comes to my mind as a neatly drawn example of such a person.

To put it into Novatore's words:

Consequently, anarchy, which is the natural liberty of the individual freed from the odious yoke of spiritual and material rulers, is not the construction of a new and suffocating society.’ It is a decisive fight against all societies — christian, democratic, socialist, communist, etc., etc. Anarchism is the eternal struggle of a small minority of aristocratic outsiders against all societies which follow one another on the stage of history.

So that is Novatore's aristocrat.

Perhaps it is because I came to anarchism from Nietzsche, but I've always been quite charmed by this idea. However, I'd be interested in seeing and debating critiques of this position and/or of the constructiveness of Novatore's aristocrat.

revolution is the fire of our will and a need of our solitary minds; it is an obligation of the libertarian aristocracy. To create new ethical values. To create new aesthetic values. To communalize material wealth. To individualize spiritual wealth." Towards the creative nothing Archived  nd adherents to anarcho-communism (Albert Libertad, illegalism and Renzo Novatore).[86] A

It would undermined the power of non-hereditary plutocrats

Nietzsche spoke about a particular conception of aristocracy. And, as Goldman says, it wasn't based on the old aristocracy (Nietzsche specifically rejects what he calls the aristocracy of "the little von"), nor was it an aristocracy based on money. Nietzsche wanted a new aristocracy that would shatter the current values and create new values.

Goldman, Novatore and other anarchists saw their own anarchistic desires and projects as a possible version of doing exactly that -- of destroying the old order, shattering old values, and creating space for the creation of new values based on an uncompromising love of vitality. In short, Goldman and other anarchists identified their own anarchism as a version of Nietzsche's conception of aristocracy, hence you get Goldman here speaking of true anarchists as aristocrats, or you get Novatore talking about his "libertarian aristocracy".

So, she isn't just playing word games, she is rather being sincere, and demonstrating the way Nietzsche importantly influenced how she conceived of her desire and actions for anarchism.

So with this libertarian, aristocracy, the terms wouldn't be mutually exclusive. It would have maybe some monarch (like in this and this systems used only as a noble and viable alternative to the crude and materialistic mob mentality of republicanism which can govern over this type of libertarian society). It would be similar to the society that Hermann Hoppe made  in his book Democracy: The God That Failed.

This would include systems in place to prevent the majority from exercising their rule over the minority. The tension in the US apparatus is retained via the EC (if correctly applied which it currently is not), the House which is dominated by population centers, and the Senate which gives equal representation to each state regardless of population.