Whos Stirner anyways

ITT: No one who has read Stirner discusses him.

Just read the guy yourself, for your own sake.

He WAS a communist. Not just by virtue of his wanting to abolish private property, he thought of himself as one, it is known by his followers and friends that he considered himself a communist.

For example, read Young Hegelian Karl Schmidt, a Stirner follower.

Reading is a spook :^^^^)

But for real, yeah, there's even an audiobook version if you're too busy to sit down and read.

This.

The spook is one of the many weapons of the highness. The egoist is in complete opposition to the highness. So Stirner is in opposition to spooks.

The word "communism" had not yet crystallized in its current acceptation. He certainly wasn't a communist the way Marx and later communists meant the word.

He is the one

also what is the macimum size a webm must be in order to be accepted here?

Read him to meme him, study him to understand him. And nobody here understands the ego and his own and critics but just create their idea of what stirner is and criticize their own idea of what their stirner is wrong about (They Create a Stirner and Attack their own Stirner). This usually gets pretty silly, especially if you allready have a structure of thought set up and critize your own created stirner for not being what your structure of thought demands something to be, because its their truth. This is usually done by people with an absolutely awfull reading of the verry first chapter and the chapter on the Humane critic and post script.

But thats just lazy ass criticism where you critize something by external logic and not by its internal logic. (Schmidt from the young hegelians tried this and failed and turned Materialist, if you research why this happend then you understand Stirner mutch better) *Cought* Freud Poster *Cought*

Idea's are irrelevant (Within the rhealm of idea's the ego is too irrelevant thus non-existant thus nihilism) but free to be taken by your own liking with your own subjectivity. (Self Theory, thus choose to get inspired by whatever and use it not for the sake of the idea itself but fro your understanding) and the only thing that mathers within the material world is Might wich can only exist throught the corporeal ego. (The Self outside the rhealm of idea's)

Stirner works with Idealism and Materialism (Wich is a form of idealism), he both considers them nothing as in idealism you got nihilism and with materialism you got buddhist style absolute emptiness. (Cause without our idealism we can not create materialism or else everything allready hasnt got any value as it still needs to be applyd)

The fixed idea wants to take over the corporeal ego (Material Self) to REALIZE (A super fucking important word to understand Stirner as Realize means to become real) its existance within the material world and assert its value by might. Transform existance by enforcement of its idea's.

Thus only by might throught the corporeal ego can the fixed idea make itself existant. For example for private property to exist there needs to be people to ==ENFORCE THE IDEA== of private property. Another example would be borders, if there arnt any army guys enforcing the idea of a border being existant than you can ==DISREGARD THE IDEA AS A SPOOK AS NOBODY IS ENFORCING THAT IDEA.==

The corporeal ego/self is being used by a fixed idea to realize itself. Stirner realizes that the rhealm of idea's want to cast down the material world and form material reality towards the rhealm of idea's so stirner in his intended irony creates the idea of ego to present that there is a will in itself within the corporeal ego outside the rhealm of idea's and pokes holes in the intend of the fixed idea to be all dominating at using the corporeal.

To put it in another way, the corporeal self is the Mech a pilot is commanding. Put who is the pilot? If its a pilot from some space empire then its a possessed pilot that is commanded by its navy staff to enforce the policy's of the space empire. The Pilot uses the mech to enforce the will of the space empire. Anyhow imagin if there was a mech without a pilot but had a conciousness AI without any other organisation controlling it. The Mech is the corporeal self and the AI is the creative nothing, the mech itself has become that wich commands the mech in its own interest while the mech itself is the Ai and the AI is the mech.

Its kidna hard to explain and my english skills are to awfull to actually explain it well enought. But its bassicly.. There are two rhealms, rhealm of idea's and rhealm of material. The Corporeal Self/Ego exists within the material rhealm and is controlled by the idealistic rhealm. And the material rhealm is existent within our idealistic rhealm or else its emty in itself. (Budhistic sense of emtyness as in meontology) anyway material and idealistic rhealm constantly connect with eachother and need eachother. You constantly interact with both and progress in life to first experience material existance alone like an animal/infant and then you learn the idealistic rhealm as youth and then you maintain a youth (Made by idea's (Family/Society/Religion) and exist for idea's(Maintain idea's and so enforce the idea into material existance just as the others did around you to make all the idea's existant in the first place as idea's can only be shared throught the material rhealm via langauge and interaction)) or become man (made by idea but exist for YOUR idea's)

Okay so now you go on and create the idea of the ego (Based on the corporeal self) and attack all idea's to the point of destroying the rhealm of ideas untill you have the ego left and destroy that and what you have left is nihilism. (Emtyness within the rhealm of idea's) now you have the creative nothing and can take property of idea's and use them (Self Theory) but also enforce them by the corporeal self. (Defend your property/your idea by might)

It boils down that the end of idealism for stirner is subjectivism within nihilism and that in the material world only force mathers. If you wanne go deeper then look into Foucault, Nietzsche and post structuralist Anarchism.

I dont know if i explained this well cause my english is horrible but just take this as a grain of salt or disregard it as memes and le non middle class intellectual hard word masturbation fest.

Well… isn't that what anarchist communism is supposed to be? Just systematised

What if you really really like being a fascist though

I feel like Stirner would have sounded less mystical about consciousness and identity, had he access to what we know now.

I'm not sure, even knowing what we know to day, there are no solid rules as to what is included as "oneself". In fact, I feel it would be a bit tyrannical to do so.

I think it's 10 MB.

Stirner wasn't a moralist. But if a anything it could be said that the wanting of control of others is merely yourself wanting to be controlling over others which is controlling yourself so that it in itself becomes a spook, "I must have power over others for the sake of it", and sacrificing yourself to this task actually deceives you by not serving your ego.

also reminder self-interest and ego are not the same.

The only way he's compatible with your precious cuckmunism is if every indiviudal magically takes pleasure in the idea.

The only way to realistically implement an ideology or system IS to spook peoples heads full with bullshit.

That's why the only association he acknowledges is a union of egotists, and communism would only be acceptable if it functions like one which is literal horseshit nonsense and would require a window for everyone to just say "nope i'm keeping my property fuck off".

THIS IS THE ONLY PERSON IN THIS THREAD WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT. HEED THEIR WORDS.

Buddhism for pussies.

are you implying stirner is a buddhist?

WEW

...

Stirner was a communist. He would support a workers revolution, but only if the workers wanted it. The person could say "No I'm keeping my property", and if it was property the workers crafted they would be justified in "regarding it as theirs". As Stirner said "the workers have immense power in their hands" and "the State rest on the slavery of labour; he also doesn't think the labourer's are even aware of this power.

Stirner:

Buddha:

People enjoy shitposting him since it evokes a "I technically win" button for any argument.

0/10

Very convincing there matey.

the ego matters in egoist anarchism because is the only proveable entity, as if you denied yourself and your desires, you would be literally cucking yourself

the material world doesn't matter in buddhims because "lol peace peace guise", not for the sake of your ego and desires

sticky this to the globe

mods need to ban all these newfags asking dumbass questions that could be answered in 2 seconds. having 600 users was a mistake.

You fell for the Western new age Buddhism spook. Buddhism goes one step further than Stirner by acknowledging that everything is an illusion including yourself, aka Buddhism for pussies. You could be the same exact egoist anarchist as you were as a Stirnerite except with arguably more control of what your ego actually consists of.

This.