Society in a Vacuum

Civilization requires an explicit hierarchy, lest it fester into vacuous society. Liberalism has roots in Masonry, meaning that it was always a ploy for a bunch of Aristocrats to come into power. Aristocracy requires the removal of Monarchy in order to form. Classical liberalism (which is Libertarianism) formed as a way to get the masses against their monarchical chains, which was highly successful thanks to the rise in literacy. Liberals, like the masons have always held on to baggage that contradicted or opposed the divine.

Anarchism itself is an Aristocracy stripped away from the masses in order to form a society within a vacuum. Anarchism can only work once heavily institutionalized with a consensus of literates, it's only become somewhat democratic since the twentieth century. Actually, the turn of the twentieth century has introduced the democratized version of Classical Liberalism known as Neo-Liberalism, thus forming Libertarianism as a natural reaction to the rise of the New Left. Libertarians starting forming "Right-Wing" counterparts, whom would fall into reactionary viewpoints along with the conservatives. Conservatives themselves were always the group that would slow down the cataclysmic advances of standard leftism.

In between the transition of Aristocratic and Democratic liberalism was fascism, communism, nationalism, and a fondness for dictatorships. Marx advocated a dictatorship of the working class, which may sound quite reactionary now, but it was and still is of negative consequence. Giving the masses free reign for an autocratic ruler that represents them isn't a good thing. Marx himself was a manipulative Brahmin, quite similar to the cultural Marxist professors of today. As for the more nationalistically driven aspects of dictatorship fetishes, they're a consequence of the left intellectually deconstructing anything of divine semblance leaving only profanity and meager attempts at restoring cultural providence.

Going back to the subject of anarchy. Anarchism has also become democratized, with the vacuous and institutionalized role of Anarchy reverting back to the masses separated form their master or elites. The result is that modern strains of Anarchy seek to use everything to give the slaves power and separation from any authority. This is mocked by classical Anarchists as being a contradiction to the older, more sophisticated strain of Anarchism; It's very similar to how the libertarians/classical liberals mock the modern, neo-liberals (Likewise the conservatives).

Capitalism is seeing the worse of this, with the rising decline and/or absorption of the Optimates and the rise of Brahmin rule, Capitalism is the cornerstone for globalistic democracy. No longer will private property be the antithetical force against democracy, but now they will join together. As a result Anarcho-Capitalism has claimed so many of my fellow Aspies on the internet, and for that it will pay. Yet the gradual discontentment with Democracy and it's usage of private property has turned many An-Caps into more reactionary positions. This can be expressed in the rise of Anarcho-Monarchism, Anti-Statism, or Moldbuggean viewpoints that become starter points for more sophisticated reactionary-positions, however in order to compete against the monolithic bastardization of all that is holy, we need something with more substance.