Human Action, “The Instinct of Aggression and Destruction”, p. 170ff.
Note how one of the arguments Mises uses is an ad hominem, but he employs a particularly potent version of it: a charge of a performative contradiction, something we have seen on a recent thread on Hoppe’s “argumentation ethics”:
“It is noteworthy that the men who were foremost in extolling the eminence of the savage impulses of our barbarian forefathers were so frail that their bodies would not have come up to the requirements of ‘living dangerously.’ Nietzsche even before his mental breakdown was so sickly that the only climate he could stand was that of the Engadin valley and of some Italian districts. He would not have been in a position to accomplish his work if civilized society had not protected his delicate nerves against the roughness of life. The apostles of violence wrote their books under the sheltering roof of ‘bourgeois security’ which they derided and disparaged. They were free to publish their incendiary sermons because the liberalism which they scorned safeguarded freedom of the press. They would have been desperate if they had had to forego the blessings of the civilization scorned by their philosophy.” Beautiful!