Thoughts on Max Stirner and egoist anarchism?

Thoughts on Max Stirner and egoist anarchism?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_German_Ideology
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01a.htm
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

An absolute lad.

GOD...ahem, SPOOK TIER

Today I met with my undergraduate advisor to discuss my major, or lackthereof. I still haven't declared anything. For the past two and a half years I've taken six courses per semester across a wide variety of fields. Mathematics, thermodynamics, film analysis, fiction writing, philosophy, middle eastern history, native american history, linguistics, german language, cognitive psychology. Whatever seemed interesting I'd take it. I aced every class that I didn't drop, always for being too boring.

My professor said, "What the hell do you want to do, though?"

I said, "I don't know. Go to the woods. Write stories and paint. I like animals. Maybe I'll adopt a raccoon or something."

"But realistically," he said, "What do you see yourself doing five years from now?"

"I don't know. Why would I care about that? If there were something I wanted to do five years from now, why don't I just start doing it now?"

"That's exactly my point. You need to find something to focus on, and start focusing on it now. With a job market like this, you need at least a year's worth of internship to get hired at any decent company."

"I refuse to work for any company."

"What?"

"I will not work any job where a manager dictates what I may do and how I may do it, and I refuse to take any managerial position. I work alone, on my own terms, at my own pace."

"The real world doesn't work like that."

"Fine. I have no interest in the real world anyways. I think I'll go into the woods after all."

Dumb spook could barely even speak. Not that I would have cared what he had to say. I was already writing my manuscript in my head while filling out the forms to drop out of that spookhouse.

I liked this manuscript better when you called everyone 'a phony' instead of 'a spook'.

proud of you! xx

I think Max Stirner is an absolutely fantastic philosopher. I think trying to make a political system out of his work is stupid, and the choice of colour for his flag even dumber (should have just went with flat black, since a truly Stirnerian ideal wouldn't be committed to anything, not even itself).

>flat black
that's general anarchism

Indeed, and Stirnerian anarchism wouldn't be particularly committed to any form of anarchism, and trying to maintain "Stirnerian anarchism" as a strict ideology would defeat the Stirnerian component of it. So flat black would symbolize both the same thing it does normally (lack of nationality) as well as a general lack of cohesive ideology, such a movement (as much as it would be called a movement) would be in a state of ideological dissolution and constantly amorphous.

Literally nobody on Veeky Forums understands Stirner. His whole thing about "spooks" is a thought experiment, not an ethical command

Irrelevant young hegelian with no depth whatsoever that only became famous because there are no portraits of him except two bad drawings

Marx absolutely rekt him with the german ideology

Literally no one in your post has anything to back that up. Considering Engels referred to him as "the enemy of all constraint" I'd be willing to bet he was sincere about recognizing the things that enslave you and taking steps to free yourself from them.

>Marx absolutely rekt him with the german ideology

Really? And what was the damning point that refuted Stirner?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_German_Ideology

He wrote about 200 pages about how he was wrong. Did you read the book?

Can somebody tell me why is Max Stirner so popular on Veeky Forums? I see a lot of people posting the drawing of him and typing "spook" or something similar. Is it a meme just like how people on /pol/ post Stefan Molyneux along with the phrase "not an argument"? Or is it something deeper than that?

I am interested. Summarize it for us, at least what you felt #rekt Stirner, since you feel so strongly about it.

I've read the German ideology. It was mostly Marx engaging in namecalling and sperging out about the fact Stirner could have used a better editor, and then him entirely missing the point of Stirner's work (yes, it ignores material conditions, because it's focused entirely on changing the way you view your circumstances, because a prisoner who thinks he deserves to be a prisoner is different from one who doesn't).

Because he's a meme

Because calling things a spook is a way to call down things you don't like. It's basically perfect for Veeky Forums.

He's a legit philosopher with some interesting ideas, but not very well known, so hipsters and contrarians can get into him.
With a cariacture being the only image of him, he's also pretty memetic, alongside being able to call things spooks.

Marx did not wreck Stirner. First of all, during the time period, it was normal to critique and have pissing contests with other philosophers. Stirner rekt Marx at the time, making him abandon Feuerbach socialism for his "scientific" socialism which focused less on spooks and more on exploitation. Although these distinctions are lost on most non-socialists, especially since Marx could not fully give up on his utopian communism. Stirner rekt early Marx, and caused him to become later Marx.

Because he's a spook*

>He wrote about 200 pages about how he was wrong

Yeah and the only thing he said was:

>b-but m-muh economic conditions cause oppression

>decide to read about stirner's life
>father before he's a year old
>mother in a asylum
>ends up in debt prisons all the time and moves around to avoid rent
>dies in his 40s in poverty
the feels...

Reboasting from another thread

>The entire body of German philosophical criticism from Strauss to Stirner is confined to criticism of religious conceptions. [The following passage is crossed out in the manuscript:] claiming to be the absolute redeemer of the world from all evil. Religion was continually regarded and treated as the arch-enemy, as the ultimate cause of all relations repugnant to these philosophers. The critics started from real religion and actual theology. What religious consciousness and a religious conception really meant was determined variously as they went along. Their advance consisted in subsuming the allegedly dominant metaphysical, political, juridical, moral and other conceptions under the class of religious or theological conceptions; and similarly in pronouncing political, juridical, moral consciousness as religious or theological, and the political, juridical, moral man – “man” in the last resort – as religious. The dominance of religion was taken for granted. Gradually every dominant relationship was pronounced a religious relationship and transformed into a cult, a cult of law, a cult of the State, etc. On all sides it was only a question of dogmas and belief in dogmas. The world was sanctified to an ever-increasing extent till at last our venerable Saint Max was able to canonise it en bloc and thus dispose of it once for all.

This seems to be the central criticism. You don't need to read it all.

marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01a.htm

Only 6-7 thousand words. If you've got time to spare posting on Four Chan, then you can knock this out in like, 20 minutes.

*father died

You forgot the time he cried over spilt milk

>ends up in debt prisons
Sincerely, what was the logic. What a friend/family supposed to cough up the money? Were you able to work off your debt?

If not, how did you pay off the debt? Wouldn't it have been better to first set up some sort of payment plan taking your skills/finances into consideration, then garnishing those wages and putting a penalty for trying to skip town on top of that?

Something about his logic being entirely correct and thus his ideas are rather scary