Stirner and facism

>"At first sight, Nazi totalitarianism may seem the opposite of Stirner's radical individualism. But fascism was above all an attempt to dissolve the social ties created by history and replace them by artificial bonds among individuals who were expected to render explicit obedience to the state on grounds of absolute egoism. Fascist education combined the tenets of asocial egoism and unquestioning conformism, the latter being the means by which the individual secured his own niche in the system. Stirner's philosophy has nothing to say against conformism, it only objects to the Ego being subordinated to any higher principle: the egoist is free to adjust to the world if it is clear he will better himself by doing so. His 'rebellion' may take the form of utter servility if it will further his interest; what he must not do is to be bound by 'general' values or myths of humanity. The totalitarian ideal of a barrack-like society from which all real, historical ties have been eliminated is perfectly consistent with Stirner's principles: the egoist, by his very nature, must be prepared to fight under any flag that suits his convenience."

Is he right, lads?

No. This is some asshole pushing his own opinion. Stirner disliked the state as it is a spook.

>the stirner was an anarchist meme

Damn, what a refiutation.

>egoist must be prepared to fight under any flag

How the heck is that compatible with fascism? The point is unwavering loyalty to a single flag.

Not a Stirnerian at all but this is just lazy.

>At first sight, Nazi totalitarianism may seem the opposite of Stirner's radical individualism.
>But

This reminds me of the cliche of the racist who says "I'm not racist, but..." It's the classic disclaimer before you say something false.

It's compatible with a fascist society, not necessarily religious belief in it.

nope, the nation state is a spook.
also, you don't use greentext to quote yourself.

Mussolini was a fan of Max in his youth, and used to call things spooks as a young journalist. He also said that fascists were the only true anarchists, because they did exactly what they wanted rather than being caged my moral rules.
Of course, the morons on this board don't know that, but fascism was entirely shaped by Stirnir's philosophy.

The Stirnerian is potentially suited to any kind of society, then.

But the OP's quote suggests there's some sort of natural affinity between Egoism and fascism which is absurd. He refutes himself when he deploys the fight under any flag metaphor precisely because of how hostile that attitude is to the ideology of fascism.

I'm also not sure what he means by "artificial bonds," seeing as historical bonds would be equally artificial unless he was positing some kind of natural progression of humanity, in which case fascism wouldn't have been possible. So on top of misreading Stirner badly, the author of the quote creates a self-refuting definition of fascism.