I was wondering about usefulness of morality and came to the conclusion that mainly useful for ruling class...

I was wondering about usefulness of morality and came to the conclusion that mainly useful for ruling class, it allows them to keep the underclass obedient and docile. However, what about hunter-gatherer societies? They don't have class division, yet they still have some sort of moral conventions, don't they?

Morality is a fucking meme, you should only act in self-interest. Adam Smith was right when he said we don't count on the benevolence of people for our survival.

I think we should reclaim this 'enlightened egoism' as Zizek calls it to deal with issues like the environment instead of endless liberal moralism and superego pressure.

But I like being nice to people.

That is not contradictory in any way with what I said though.

I'm not sure I understand.

Seems anti-being nice to people. There must be a dimension of your point that's going over my head.

If you like being nice to people you can do that. You don't need a moral code for that. All you need is your own will to do good.

Well it certainly isn't always one's self-interest to be mean-spirited. And oftentimes it is in one's self-interest to be nice to others.

Isn't that what morality is really?

What do you guys mean precisely by "self-interest"?

As in, material self-advancement or just whatever would make you feel better? Something else?

Humans are naturally "moral". Even as a Stirnerite egoist I still shudder at the thought of torture, it's just a mixture of biologic and cultural tendency.

I'd highly reccommend The Ego and Its Own if you'd like to be de-spooked on morality. To sum up: it doesn't exist.

Well yeah that's true but why not try and be moral anyway and live life to the standards that we set for ourselves?

it's in your material self-interest to be social though
emphasis goes on the 'enlightened' part of 'enlightened egoism', it does not mean 'fuck you I do what I want'

That makes sense.

Then you are nice because you like it, because that is what you wanted to do anyway. You are nice for egoist reasons.

Nah, it's more like "I don't need to fuck you to get what I want". Such is the main benefit of socialism for egoists. Less hassle.


Humans are religious creatures, we'll believe any spook. There are people on this very board who believe in spooks and will even argue over them. I think it's just a natural consequence of humans' ability for deductive reasoning, with absence of counter-evidence we'll believe literally anything we're told.

We already do that automatically when we perform actions. It is more likely for a person to kill another person when they feel justified by some external moral authority. Hitler said it was okay so we invade, kill, pillage, and round-up innocent people, without thinking about what we are doing, just following orders. If the individual has to think about their actions it becomes harder for them to justify their own actions.

So why not act morally but also examine your morals (or lack thereof) critically?


'You should only act in rational self-interest' is not some kind of spooky moral imperative.

Should is still pushing it in to the zone of a moral imperative. Maybe just something like, "Is it not simply a good idea to act in one's own interest?"

jeez, way to nitpick my post, you get my point don't you?

This seems pointless. You can't be an egoist if you don't already do this. Egoism is about critically examining your current morals and motivations. Then everytime when performing an action which affects others consider why you performed that action. Is it in line with your personal interest. You don't need to adhere to a universal moral code, which I then strictly follow.

Okay yeah that sounds alright.

I do, just don't tell me what I should do, property. :^)

Acting in my rational self interest makes me feel bad, ergo, it's in my rational self interest to ignore my rational self interest, hail spooks, stirner btfo

t. unconcsious egoist

That is actually retarded. Self-interest isn't defined as material self-interest. If you suffer mentally from performing certain actions, then it isn't in your self-interest, to begin with.

I was honestly deliberately posting the dumbest possible version of that take but the critique still stands against leftypol's version of stirner at the very least.


man, the more and more i read this shit, the more i think i should just fucking go into mathematics, where objective right and wrong at least exist and investing time and effort actually opens up doors to the new things instead of same old same old same old S A M E O L D constant fucking whatabaoutism and 'no u' discussion over and over and over A N D O V E R A G A I N

It's just a nice word for the value creating that seems to come hand in hand with life itself.

It's good for group cohesion at least, and it makes your life easier (you don't steal/murder/libel, fewer people are inclined to hurt you or otherwise see you as an enemy)
Etiquette, like you must send a thank you note to your interviewer, you shouldn't make conversation on the subway, etc., are literally "tags" of status and class.

everything is political my dude