So the post-left just hand waves it off as "j-just a joke!". This is pathetic.
How about you just accept that this author isn't infallible and not worth purging all of anarchist theory to center it on? The post-left situation within the anarchist movement is the biggest fucking joke I can think of. A milleu in the bourgiest parts of the primary world-power, the source of anarcho-primitivism, anarcho-pedoism, police informants as chief theorists and the list goes on. If this isn't what intelligence agencies sabotage of anarchist theory would look like I don't know what would. And then of course you have, at the same time, western academia trying to do the same thing, but from within the theory of "post-anarchism", which again removes all anarchist theorists as "not pure enough lol" to re-center anarchism around Stirner's asshole and a bunch of PoMo pseudo-Marxists.
And don't get me wrong, I appreciate Stirner's insurrectionary and union-of-egoist conceptions, McQuinn (post-left) seems genuine, May (post-anarchism) too, but from a generalized perspective, with aspects like OP is pointing out, it's hard not to get the impression that what is happening is a shift away from 'anarcho-leftism' and toward anarcho-fascism. Abandonment of internationalism, emphasis on might makes right (which allows Hakim Bey to think of himself of an "anarchist" and not a pedophile rapist), ideological racism (OP); a topic previously only touched upon in passing (Proudhoun, Bakunin), not fucking ingrained dialectically within their fucking works. B-but it was juss a joke, anon! Well too bad it was so non-obvious that neo-fascists like Evola couldn't tell the difference and used Stirner for refreshing fascist theory.