Are my self interests a spook?

I'm European and don't know all the intricacies of american slang

you aren't helping your case. Do you know the intricacies of american search engines?

"Shame on the egoist that thinks only of himself." - Max Stirner

Well I tried and it only shows up as spook = black guy or synonym for getting scared.

No, they aren't. your legitimate self interest as an individual is the only meaningful instance in Stirners work.
Social induced morals and education on the other hand are all spooks according to him.

If you read the thread you'd have a name to search with it, but that's apparently beyond you.

go back to where you belong

Stirner was not a psychological or ethical egoist.He rejects even self-interest as a valid motivating factor.

what is a valid motivating factor to Striner?

Stirner wrote in the spirit of Nagarjuna in the sense that he didn't set out a 'positive' philosophy. He only laid out rejections and critiques of positive positions.

so he's a contrarian whose doctrine amounts to refusing to cede the influence of abstract things on human behavior, and posing this as profound?

Whut? Stirner is the classic ethical and psychological egoist! People call him an amoralist because he deconstructed all human morals as a product of culture, social pressure and education. He calls to get rid of this induced morals and pressure and to be reborn as free minded being that takes his own decisions for his own good.

He didn't claim that abstract things had no influence on human beings. That is why he wrote an entire book on the various ways those abstract things indeed influence them. His doctrine amounts to rejecting any moral, ethical, political, humanist, etc injunction as a universal moral imperative.

You are misunderstanding what the those positions actually imply. Ethical egoism says that it is in fact moral to act in your own self-interest. He made no such claim. Psychological egoism says that it is in fact impossible to not act in your own self-interest. Again, he made no such claim. I recommend that you read his book instead of his Wikipedia page.

His time, the German bourgoise revolution, the industrial revolution, modern world in contrast with Monarchic traditions.
Stirner was a deconstructor and polemicists. He met with those other guys at Hippel's, and they had theories about brave new worlds and shit.
And so Max told them that their theories are all bullshit. Why? because everything they know, everything they experience and all their behavior is programmed by a society, a culture and their education. The way the dress, the way they think, the way they fuck, what they see as morals and all else is human made and can be changed or dismissed at all.
He told them to free their minds before they try to build a new world on the mistakes of the past.

Max Stirner was the advocatus diaboli of the Hegelians, and triggering Karl Marx, father of totalitarianism, to an 800 page reply says something.

seems like a pre-psychology sort of guy

>Karl Marx, father of totalitarianism
thats a funny way to spell Plato

Wait, Stirner describes the "Jenseits in Uns" as the major problem and calls for its destruction as a way to reach true self interest and becoming a real egoist who can act. And he does this decades before Psychoanalysis was even a thing.

What does that have to do with the quoted post?

The fact that Stirner recognizes a subconsciousness that drives our morals and thinking decades before psychological egoism even was a thing. And that he at the same time called for for an "Eigner" a conscious and free mind that was the only instance to do real good for himself and others.
While neither makes him either psychological egoist nor an ethical, he asked the questions they tried to answer. Which makes him pretty classic for both.

yes, stop reading this cuck now.