Either Andreesen actually has no idea what he's referring to and is just pretentious name-dropping stuff he thinks is "kinda cool", or he's explicitly endorsing anti-democratic authoritarianism. Either alternative is rather disturbing -- though maybe not surprising.
In any case, it kinda explains some of the dreck they've funded.
When you abdicate all decision making authority to the market, you also suppress the non-market community/social dimension in society, and you end up in a might-makes-right ethical model; and along with it comes a need to suppress the inevitable resistance to that (unions, left wingers, perhaps minorities, etc.)
The classical liberal individual rights stuff ends up being window dressing and justification for a far darker end result. Yes, nobody cares who you have sex with or what drugs you take or what porn you watch -- as long as wealth and control remains unchallenged.