What is the deal with Holla Forums and Max Stirner?

A "ghost" in the mind that makes you fear about something.
Imagine that I said: "Food is a spook, only those who are orpressed by and scared by death can be manipulated by it."

"spooks" is their version of "social construct" a buzzword that they use to shut down any thought or discussion of something and dismiss it offhand, Stirner was a complete ad hoc nihilist so it is easy to use his material as rationalizations for the numerous contradictions in their shitty ideology, without resorting to SJW cliches verbatim it serves the same purpose, and they can be "le enlightened intellectual intelligence is greater than yours m'lady" because they cite an obscure edgelord philosopher.

I love this meme

"spook" = "social construct"

That's very simple, for the same reason these people will adopt Nietzsche (for example).

They just use these people as tools to attack non-leftists. They will claim that marriage or money are spooks in order to further the ends of their own ideology.

Just like Cultural-Marxism tries to weaken Europe by spreading nihilism and amoral conduct, but wouldn't automatically apply it to themselves.

It's funny to turn it on them. Most of the crap they believe can be considered spooks as well.

Of course. How the fuck can they like someone for thinking class is a spook when Marxism is fucking founded on the idea of class.

He doesn't even say property is bullshit. He says its established by force. Thus making typical legalistic capitalism entirely just, citizens submit themselves to the superior egoists of the state to protect their property. Meanwhile, Marxism, which implies the Proletariat have some moral right to the means of production - comes off less well.

You could make a fairly decent stab at claiming race is not a spook. Stirner, who was very vague, defined spooks as abstract concepts outside of the self. Race is however, part of the individual which he can directly identify with. Even if it exists only in perception. From which the principle of egoism states I should only care about my race and its interests. On the other hand multicultural humanism is most certainly a spook.

Society is bullshit? How do they call themselves socialists then? Or adopt the ideology fucking based around the greater good of society.

They must really, really, really envy our edginess.

That seems to be the case.

Why do they never talk about the "spook" of rights? This Nihilist fella didn't believe in them, so, by his phylosophy it's kind off okay to slave people, like the workers they do claim they want to save. By his phylosophy the best a man could do is just wait death, suicide is something a fool that's scared of the "spook" of life would do and keeping yourself alive would be a "spook" that makes you fear death itself.
If you analize it, it's quite contradictory.
I know there is one of ya commies lurking here, so make my mind clear.

communism is a spook

Look, to these leftists, everything is just a tool to further their own end.

Stirner get's used to attack ideas they don't like, but no ideas they do like, it's as simple as that.

You thinking like someone who wants to speak the truth, but these leftists are natural liars, everything to them is just a tool they can use to spread their own ideas, their own will.

how to spot the Americans
anarchists and communists might be on the left but the disagree about a lot, just as natsocs and neocons do.

Neocons are pretty much jews, I think you meant paleocons.

I've never mentioned unification of both sides. Did you misspost here or what?

All of the left is unified in certain assumptions. Anarchism, communism, and liberalism all come from the sam e motivations.

Are you a cummie :^)?

Nope Communism is Jewish, Socialism and Anarchism are White.

Neoconservatism and Libertarianism are Jewish, Classical Liberalism and Paleoconservatism are White.

That is sort of fair classification.

I noticed a thing
Quite ironic now is it?

Their obsession with Stirner is proof that they just pretend something doesn't exist when they can't argue against it. They probably use it because "social construct" is rather unpopular now, considering the people that use that term. It is the same with any leftist: feminists that saw the word as starting to mean something negative changed to "egalitarian", Marxists became "liberals", SJWs became "left-libertarians". Compare that to the right, where people willingly label themselves as literal Nazis, which gets them shat on by the media. Leftists are incredibly obsessed with changing definitions to argue their point, just as it was when Noam Chomsky was willing to argue that the Second Amendment does not let people own guns on the grounds that because gun ownership is to fight against tyranny and on the grounds of him defining democracy as non-tyrannical by default, there is no tyranny to fight and so there is no permission to own guns.

You just need to tell Chomski that democracy is fragile and that the gun ownership thing is backup or "plan B". The Constitution bases itself in that power can corrupt man. I kind off destroyed an "intelectual" in a Mongolian Traditional Knitting Wood Board. He should feel bad about himself.

We hate spooks as well.

Its incredibly ironic also because Marx fucking hated Stirner and he and Engels wrote endless ridicule and vitriol of him and his ideas.

Wouldn't it make more sense to ask this question on Holla Forums ?

They would call me a classcuck that it's spooked, then they would ridiculize me and then ban me. I wouldn't get any answer at all. It wouldn't be realy worth it now does it?

Fuck really*

'Spooks' are a spook.

Mate pol bans more than lefty

That's true, we get double the shitposting.

It's a nigger

Filtered

The leftists would deny having a hugbox after calling for triggering ideas to be banned.

I would've still be without an answer.
Sick dubs tho.

Yeah but unlike Holla Forums, our board doesn't give 90 year bans on the basis of "lol bootlicker" because you said Darren Wilson is innocent.

I actually really enjoy Stirner, even though I don't always agree with him. In Ego and His Own he states that rights are spooks, and as well-intentioned as constitutions are, they do nothing. The only thing that protects the rights of a society are people armed and willing to defend thst society. He also writes that because of their cultural and religious difference, Jews are an "other" in Germany and thus view the world from an entirely different lense. And even as an atheist, he wastes no time in secular humanists who remove God from society only to replace it with shallow feel-goodism.He writes "Moral people skimmed off the best fat from religion, ate it themselves, and are now having a tough job to get rid of the resulting scrofula."

Can we meme Stirner away from the commie faggots?

Fuck, bumping myself for more answers and informations.

Please do. Praise Kek.

It's basically meant to refer to something as a non-thing, its basically their speak for social construct really.

So things like race, culture, peoples, heritage and everything else that they don't like are spooks.

Oh shit this would be fun.
Rev up GIMP, /bmw/ is gonna make some dank memes.

The only decent thing Stirner ever did was send Marx into a spastic fit.

I'm the kind of person to be as offensive as possible, as belligerent (especially when I get on here after a few beers,) as possible, and actively try to question the general consensus. leftypol has banned me more than ten times and here I've only been banned once for 'datamining' because I posted a link to a quiz that asks how much of a cuck you are. pol users are really good at questioning their own rhetoric, that's why people here are so unlikely to get offended and handle awesome banter, leftypol users will get triggered as bad as reddit, they just use the word nigger to prove the opposite. leftypol's moderators delete posts all the time, I've never seen that here, they use wordfilters for national socialism, race mixing, and chimpout, and they pointed out that the word: ru'lecuck is filtered here but that's it as far as I know. pol has greater problems with shitposting from other places like /int/ and SA, leftypol doesn't have that problem because they are pretty much SA-lite. Also this place does allow leftists to come and discuss, you might get called a commie but you won't be banned for being a leftist whereas leftypol is called that for a reason, they only want to here one end of the discussion and that board exists solely for people who can't handle this place.

The bonnot gang

Sorry for being a newfag, but what is SA?

Something Awful, they control reddit from bases such as ShitRedditSays. It really is creepy if you see how well organized they are for a bunch of SJW feminists, they have moderators on just about all the main subreddits and shitpost here and on other chans on occasion. I'm pretty sure they run endchan too. They are responsible for stuff like pic related.

Vaporwave and rap don't mix.

Why don't we make an epin raid for lulz?
We have enough power from our memes to crush them.

Make a thread for it faggot.

Okay.

But he's right.

Let's not.

Check my dubs

Well, right in the sense that might is right in anarchy. Don't know why he's using red babble, though.

I'm talking about another type of raid…
Like, thos tha /baph/ do…

Check my nuts.

So if I understand this correctly, they think that spook = social construct, and that's basically why they like him?

That's fully retarded. A "spook" would be more like political correctness. Something that isn't real or has no validity but which is nevertheless used for social control.

Like gender.
What I say to leftists is that there is no gender. Only sex.
They get triggered by that.

A spook is just any abstract conception that has no concrete basis. But Holla Forums only applies it to things they care about. When it comes to their own particular brand of moralfaggotry, it no longer applies.

Epin

Bullshit, they call race a spook, and I think that is a very material thing.
Both Genotype and Fenotype exist.
These commies are true fucking liars man.

So lefties are hypocrites, gotcha.
But for a spook, it is not necessary for it to actually be used for any end, is that correct? So the concept itself of political correctness would be a spook regardless of whether or not anyone was actually bound by it?

user I think the point we can all agree on here is that Holla Forums has no fucking clue what a spook is, just as they don't understand a single fucking thing about Nietzsche's philosophy.

...

Yeah, they also apply it when it doesn't apply. Race is one of the least spooked things there is, along with sex.

Stirner was a troll and anyone who legitimately takes him seriously is too retarded to see.

Elaborate

Stirner wrote The Ego and Its Own specifically to troll the shit out of Marx and his friends.

...

Carl Marx hated stirner thats the greatest irony his cretique of stirners work was longer then stirners whole manifesto.

I mean, how did Marx react to it? The part that Stirner tried to shit on Marx was obvious but I want to know how the shitflinging between both Commies went

I don' think those guys know are care about what they are talking about, nor are they very serious about any of it.

watching Holla Forums use stirner memes is like watching a normie use pepe

its not Holla Forumss meme you gigantic faggot

He wrote a long rambling response to Stirner in a long rambling book called The German Ideology which is largely just a series of elaborate insults to disguise the fact Marx got tr0ld. I think the criticism basically boils down to the Marxist stock-critique of "Y-y-your…an idealist!" Which by the time Marx had finished using it to brush away any of the Young Hegeliens who disagreed with him had become a totally empty term. However it is telling that Marx never published the German Ideology, perhaps because he'd seen Stirner BTFO the criticisms of his mentor Feuerbach and several others and did not want to see his own precious system get similarly defeated? Methinks this was the case.

Do it faggot.

Wait… Lefty faggots think Stirner liked their communism? They know that Marx wrote over 500 pages trying to trash Stirner right?

It's a way of resolving the conflict between supporting anti-white policies and being called unmanly or a cuck - they can claim they don't care that they're being flooded with shitskins because 'spooks' when deep down it's because they're gay and suck up to brown people

I've given him a few re-reads, honestly it was his writings that firmly planted me into the right side of the political spectrum. I'm not sure how anyone can read Stirner and come to the conclusion his ideas support their leftist nonsense.

No, dude, that's Liberals and SocDems. You really need to pick up a book.

how the fuck do they fail at being anarchists?

Communists talk about workers' rights 24/7, especially when they want to shill how awesome labour unions are.

damn that is some impressive get, checked.

Sick trips mane.

This, we actually believe in the stuff we discuss, we actually hate the kikes and the fact that the white race is dying. Holla Forums isn't like that, their own ideology is just a maymay to them. Hell, even the original communists didn't take their own ideology serious since it was just a way for them to gain money and power through useful retards.

You can have right and left wing anarchism. Property rights are right wing which is the entire focus of anarcho capitalism.

Except they don't. Communism is the logical end point of liberalism yes, but anarchist has left and right branches.

And that's where Marx failed. Violated basic banter rule. You can't respond to short, sweet bait that ass-hurts you with a wall of text.
That alone makes him a fag for the ages; the fact he was one of the Heads in the Communist-Zionist hydra is just icing on the cake.

I like how the ideal image of a person for leftists is essentially an easily triggered NEET who lived off of his friend's parents whose only accomplishment was writing books upon books asking for more gibsmedat.

...

...

You what, the entire ideology is based on class envy and childish idealism.

But they THINK themselves as being ultimately scientific. Dialectic materialism, nomesayin? In this case, "idealist" doesn't mean "someone who believes far fetched, impractical things". It defines someone who operates on other than 100% materialist-robotic thinking.

yOUR DUBS BLESS THY

YOURS PARTAKE IN THE BLESSING! HAIL!

MAY THE MEMES HELP YOU IN YOUR QUEST, MEIN BRÜDER.

So tyranny of the masses got thrown out the window?

Thanks, fringe. Infinity checked

It really sums up their entire ideology perfectly.

Anons, why is reddit such fucking cancer?

Wasn't Max Stirner sort of a Voluntarist?

Source for anyone interested.

soundcloud.com/shokkbutt/ruining-songs-forever

Yes.

Spooks gonna spook.

Even they don't operate on 100% materialistic thinking otherwiase they would look at the genetic material that makes us see how it could have effected things like culture and ideas.

I don't know what is it with leftypol but to me Stirner is the silver bullet against marxists who claim they have any sort of moral ground, ever.

See, the thing about Stirner is not that he's a lefty like Marx, his whole body of work denies Marxism as a viable alternative and basically describes all the issues with materialism. Stirner's a weapon on our arsenal, not theirs, and I suggest all you faggots study it.

Other subtle distinction. Materialism=/=objectivity.

Of course racial differences are genetically concrete. Materialism is about lol muh science guy eternal progress amirite kind of worldview. No matter what actual scientific facts dispute that!

Marx did believe in rights. He just made distinctions between types of rights and tried to make it more systematically coherent in his eyes.

Marx was a bit of a moron tbh, and really a bad philosopher. He made a lot of really basic mistakes, most stemming from a seeming inability to differentiate between positive and normative statements (the origin of Marx's moralfaggotry and part of the reason he got so buttblasted over Stirner in the first place).

Anarchism and communism are both just outgrowths of liberalism, taking certain aspects to logical extremes. They still fit under the liberalism umbrella.

All forms of anarchism are left wing, along with all forms of libertarianism and liberalism.

Most notable Stirnerites have been right-wingers

t. der Einzige

to start off, i fucks w both leftypol and pol. yall have a lot more in common than u think

the crux here that u polacks don't understand is that stirner's spooks are social constructs that have no basis in material reality

the reason why class is not a spook is because our classes, being constituted by the set of material relations that constitute our existence, are the concrete conditions through which we can act

the 'right' of the proletariat to the means of production is not a right in the way you think of it. the fact is that only through WORK and LABOUR is the world changed. labour is a very real material conditioning of the world. being that the prole is he who labours, the proletariat is the primary cause for creation or production. capital, money, investment, ownership, and other such ethereal rights that have nothing to do with labour are thus SPOOKS

what you polacks dont understand is that the only way you can defeat your so-called enemy, the jew, is through understanding the works of Karl Marx. Who, yes, may have had a grandfather who was jewish, was not a jew himself, and DEFINITELY not a freemason (he is covering his RIGHT HAND, not the left hand, in the picture you all love to show, which if you knew anything about the masons means hes SPITTING RIGHT IN THE FACE OF THE FREEMASONRY). The so-called jew is indeed a spook. the control of zionists in your world is a symptom of capital

as one great comrade from leftypol once said. if you have an infestation of maggots you do not just focus on the maggots that huddle together. you exterminate the whole lot

the fact that the zionists are in charge at this particular moment is incidental. capital is the real issue

I will, I was under the impression that he was just an uber edgelord laughingstock because faggots, rapists, and pedophiles use him to justify themselves but I will read into him, its not fair to judge a book by its cover.

Nope. That's the language that they use, but they don't believe in "rights." "Rights" is liberal terminology that they've adopted in order to speak to a liberal society. Show me where "rights" occurs in "seize the means of production" or "expropriate the expropriators" – don't confuse rhetoric for theory, bro

[citation needed] Clearly you've not read Marx. He debated the idea of "rights" with the liberals in his early years (claiming that liberal rights were a sham, or at least not enough), but then went on from there. see my argument above. Ownership of the means of production is not about "rights." Alienation is not about "rights."

Its debatable what word you want to put to it (power? liberty? freedom? self-actualization?), but "rights" is certainly not the word you want to use.

also, marx never said anything about morality. das kapital is an analytic endeavor, and has nothing to do with morality

Can confirm. Marx + Nietzsche = NSDAP

Lad, stop.

Are you a self-aware entity embedded in an organized environment, or a stand-alone self-aware entity existing in an otherwise featureless thermodynamic soup?

Can Marxism contend with a refutation of the anthropic principle? Is the idea that the universe must be compatible and accommodate the life that inhabits it just another spook?

I should not need to tell you that building a substantive argument upon a tautological foundation is 'problematic,' unless one can provide empirical verification.

prove me wrong /leftycuck/

Scientific concepts are spooks, retard.

Again, you don't understand normative or positive statements, just like your guru Marx.

Yes they do. You are just a fucking retard.

Yes, it is. Again, you are a moron. Learn the difference between positive and normative statements and read up on basic shit like the is-ought gap.

Marx's writings are loaded with moral language. You just don't understand what that means because you are an uneducated clod.

Max Stirner influenced Karl Marx in the same way that HG Wells influenced Yevgeny Zamyatin. That is, it was a negative influence that prompted the later writer to come up with ideas in antithesis to the earlier one. But of course, Holla Forums is too retarded to understand this, so when they read "Stirner influenced Marx" they just assume the guy was a communist hero or something.

Stirner's epistemology directs you to emphasize empirical existence, bitch

Is Marxism subject to the anthropic principle, or not?

Which doesn't include abstract physical models, bitch. Learn the difference between empirical data and models, bitch.

gommunism is good mmmkay

gommunism is logical mmmkay

stirner is gommie i am gommie u is gommie all non gammies die

And anthropic principle is also a spook.

ur dubs r gommie mmmkay

By not being autistic.
Do you hear anyone ever talk about Stirner besides obscure leftist pseudo-intellectuals?
Mostly anarcho-gommunists :DDDDDD
Nobody will ever take this faggot seriously, and neither should you.

Consciousness is an abstract model, retard

does this invalidate your observations as spooks?

Fun fact: Stirner never looked like that, that was Engels' shit memery. his name isn't even Max Stirner.

No it isn't.

It is, like structure is.
Can you touch the structure itself of a machine?
No, you only touch matter.

was he doing a cheeki breeki?

That, atop what I already knew, paints him in a fair light in my mind. He zens the fuck out of matters, sometimes making jumps people are not ready for. I think people misunderstand him in the same way they misunderstand libertarians and Nietzsche, but that is inherent in his own perspective which is far removed from daily concerns or even societal structures.
We ask how to fix the pyramid, he says move to the jungle. We ask how to fight a war, he says change allegiance so everyone lives. We ask what's for dinner, he hands us a lighter and a .22

Or I'm misunderstanding everything

prove it, empirically, no spooks

names re spooks you don't really have a name attached to yourself

meant for

Well fuck off then
Judging from the rest of your post, you have little to no understanding in how people think here.
We are well aware of the definition of spook but calling something a social construct doesn't make something any less real. Family is a social construct, yet its existance is necessary for survival of humanity as a whole. Government too is a social construct, yet it still somehow manages to manifest itself in the form of bullets despite "not existing". There are many non-material concepts that have an effect on the material world, pretending they don't exist simply because you can't shove them up your ass doesn't mean they do nothing.
Nice mental gymnastics, faggot. You are taking a non-material classification (ie. class) that is entirely relative and stating that it is objective only because you feel it influences human existance. You could replace "class" with "race" and then all of a sudden the Stirnerites have a problem despite it matching that description you gave.
Capital is the tool by which labour is performed, a machine wouldn't lift heavy objects that humans can't if it was non-existant. Money is indeed a social construct but that is irrelevant, it is the means by which value of unequally valued and indivisible products is distributed equally. You can't cut a boot in half and expect it to hold the same function, while you can split a bag of salt into two half-bags of salt and have it retain its function and value, making it necessary to have an alternative product (ie. money) to split the value of the boot without making it lose its function when a shoe-maker does business with someone selling salt. Investment is speculation as to what will happen in the future, planting a seed in the ground is investment no matter how you look at it because you use time, effort and resources for a speculated result.
top kek
Whatever you say, Holla Forums

Again, you are wrong. And matter is a spook. You keep positing certain models and then arguing from that standpoint.

...

nope, having an idea of what race you are does not affect your ability to act. your material conditions, however, like the fact that you need to pay some jew with your sweat and blood in order to have internet access, do

how is the concept of 'family' necessary for the survival of the human race? its not. the relationship in a family between father and others that you are referring to is a power relation. it has material conditions

governments do not manifest themselves as bullets. bullets are manifested by power relations, as are governments. class relations are power relations. they have material conditions. thus not spooks

class is very much a material classification. it is a power relation. one set of individuals' actions can be restricted, determined, by another set of individuals. based in material reality. class relations are not spooks

were talking about the 'rights' brought about by investor status in a contractual relation. not the word investment. comparing that to planting a seed is the most blatant of kikery and semantic gymnastics.

this

Then am I a spook?
Is this very conversation a spook?
Are memes a spook?
If they are, I accpet them wholly.
This is truly getting autistic.

That's why the egoist becomes the capitalist.

ISHGGYDT

Anything abstract is a spook. Direct experience and the ego are not spooks.

...

matter is an abstraction from direct experience

Then I am abstract.
Then I am a spook.

Matter isn't immediately intuitive from direct experience. It requires abstract model. Most people in history had no conception of matter.

Stop avoiding the question.
Am I a spook or not?

...

the question assumes matter as fact, not just as a useful heuristic

I N E D I A
N
E
D
I
A

Historical figures can not be validated by direct experience.

Yes. Though I could be a spook, attempting to spoil communism for you.

I'll take "Reproduction" for 500, Alex.

It's a power relation that is the result of a vast number of animal species being sexually dimorphic. Humans are not excluded from this number.

Correct. History is irrelevant.

Also, what is the difference between having material conditions and being based in material reality?
Because regardless of what difference there may be, our familial roles are fairly clearly outlined by our biology, thus having a basis in material reality, that "material" part consisting of flesh and blood.
Do you think the pregnant women went out hunting while the men stayed and picked berries, when our species was just starting to crawl out of the mud?

your history is a spook

[citation needed]
NOT. AN. ARGUMENT.

Sorry. I guess I'm not as smart as you. I understand the difference between positive-normative/is-ought, but you haven't yet explained why that applies to the current topic.

Also, show me where Marx talks about "rights" – specifically, that he uses that terminology for his own theory (as opposed to criticizing the idea as he does in On the Jewish Question)!
protip: you can't
[citation needed] you fucking faggot

race isn't an abstract idea, it's the concrete foundation that we find ourselves in because it is biological and rooted in the natural world. it determines the capacity for everything you are capable of, from intelligence to strength, endurance, height, attraction, social and intellectual skills, etc, so to wave it off as unimportant is ridiculous because race IS your material condition. unless perhaps you think we were formed 6000 years ago out of rocks?

pretty sure it has something to do with Zizek and the Neo-Marxists

I'm not an expert in new leftist avant gard themes and shit so I have no idea but I'm pretty sure Stirner use by leftists and Zizek are connected and that in turns is connected to a less SJW and more Neo-Marxist movement in the modern left…

possibly the dragon that will hatch from the dying corpse of today's leftism…

It's a legacy from their /lit/ days.

As you know, 4cuck /lit/ used to be lefty hellhole, and that hellholes gives birth to the 8ch's hellhole known as Holla Forums.

As always, intellectualism is cancerous.

Nigger.

self-righteous aggrandizing pseudo-intellectualism*

You know what I'm talking about, writers, journalists, students, welfare leeches who spend too much time holding books instead of working hard with their hands.

Atheism.

Correct. Apology accepted.

You don't, and nether did Marx. In fact, this is often commented upon in regards to his work. Marx claimed to go beyond fact-value distinction and positive-normative distinction, but really he just didn't understand them (and neither do most of his adherents).

If two concepts are isomorphically or analogically identical, then they are the same concept. If one person calls a thing x and another calls the same thing y, they are still talking about the same concept only using different terminology.

It is clear from his writings that Marx believed in rights. He had an ethical stance, and his ethical stance can easily be cast in the language of rights (or can avoid the language as Marx did- but this does not indicate the inability to do otherwise).

A good book on the topic: marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/brenkert.htm

As I said, he was a bit of an idiot and a shoddy/inconsistent thinker overall, so we should not expect him to see when he is talking about something synonymous. This sort of careless nominalist error is typical of Jewish thinkers, since they more often than not live in an ungrounded verbal world.

...

I know, that's why I replied. there's good intellectuals (I mean, not so much any more)

but I hate those coffee-sippers on some sunny street who think they're changing the world by scratching their balls while they suck themselves off

His belief system certainly is structured in a manner that could support degeneracy like that but the whole idea behind it was that man would aspire to do Whatevs and Whatevs would be Good Whatevs (hahaha fucking liberals man).

But the whole point is that his deconstruction of morality fucks with Marx's materealism specifically because it proves that any fully deconstructed person has literally no reason not to be a sociopathic pirate-like parasite taking whatever the fuck they can get away with it.

You sure you are from around here? You were so confident in your previous post and yet you end up saying retarded shit like this.
So family is a spook despite having "power relations" and "material conditions", yet class is not despite also metting both criteria.
Then feel free to provide the objective distinction between one class and another without making a vague definition that only discusses relative qualities. If class isn't a vague social consturct and if it has an objective meaning as you state it does, then it should be possible to define it the same way you can define a triangle and a hexagon without drawing a point of reference from either of them.

Oh look, the materialist thinks he can pretend machinery doesn't exist by saying they consist of atoms.

He's Old Holla Forums
Stirner is the original oldfag

You're not smarter than any of us retard.