On the other hand I'm not sure how this essay's viewpoint would help in this regard. From my vantage point, Thiel doesn't seem to have much respect for the opinion of other voters who don't share his philosophy, with two groups ("women" and "welfare recipients") called out specifically. It seems like there is little attempt to figure out why not every person is enthralled with Thiel's brand of libertarianism, and much of the essay is devoted to dreams of tribal utopian colonies (which historically often end in disaster). The impression I get is that he views himself as better than almost everyone else, to be honest... that's not a very likable trait if so...

Oddly enough, I personally find that Thiel's support and stances in relation to Gawker vs. Hogan a bit contradictory to this dream. This is less a commentary on the lawsuit (I found Gawker detestable personally) but more how Thiel's Gawker vs. Hogan lawsuit embrace is a dip into the very same complex American legal system that usually is harshly criticized by libertarians.

The Economist's description of him as a "corporate Nietzschean" (https://www.economist.com/news/business/21699954-tech-billio...) to me seems more on the mark these days.