/lit/ - Literature

In 2006 a high school English teacher asked students to write a famous author and ask for advice. Max Stirner was the only one to respond - and his response is magnificent:

Dear Xavier High School, and Ms. Lockwood, and Messrs Perin, McFeely, Batten, Maurer and Congiusta:
I thank you for your friendly letters. They are now my property. The letter you are reading is also my property. Please send it back to me once you are done reading it.

God bless me!
Max Stirner

>>23128735
Stirner was a schoolteacher and tried to start a milk business with his wife's money.

>>23003783
>The web of present-day hypocrisy is attached to the edges of two realms, between which our time swings back and forth, attaching its fine threads of deception and self-deception. No longer firm enough to serve morality without doubting of weakening, not yet reckless enough to live entirely through egoism, it dithers now toward one side and now toward the other in the spider-web of hypocrisy, and, paralyzed by the curse of half-measures, catches only stupid, wretched gnats. If one has dared once to make a “free” petition, one immediately waters it down again with loving assurances, and—feigns resignation; on the other hand, if one has had the nerve to fight back against the “free” petition with moral references to trust, the moral courage also immediately declines, and one assures the petitioner that they hear the free words with special pleasure, one—feigns appreciation. In short, one wants to have the one, but not do without the other; one would like to have a free will, but would not for his life go without the moral will. Just get together with a servile loyalist, you liberals. You will sweeten every word of freedom with a gaze of the most loyal trust, and he will clothe his servility in the most flattering phrases of freedom. And then you go your separate ways, and he, like you, thinks, “I know you, fox!” He smells the devil in you as much as you do the gloomy, old Lord God in him.

>>22960152
I’m an egoist fascist

simple as

niggers are spooks

>>22958266
Based

>Or some other German autist writing about spooks like he's so fucking clever.

>>22749626
>uses dialectics when he wants to support Christian Egoism

Does anyone have that meme on Stirners take on property? It is essentially a multiple answer question with a hidden answer. I can't seem to find it.

I do what the fuck I want

>>22675701
The best solution for these faggots is to come up with a philosophy so contrary that it causes them to completely sperg out.

Why is he so underrated?

How do I utilize philosophy to take what I want from this world

>>22615285
>What have you done to topple world governments today?
Fuck off fed

You are well aware of Stirner's concept of the ego, but one thing that is lacking from his analysis to truly be an end to all philosophy is it's relation to causality.

Stirner never really defines explicitly what is ego and seems to mix it with the will. Ego and will are two different concepts because the will is subject to causality. What you will is ultimately dependent on your environment while the Ego is not. So what is the Ego ? The will being a consequence of causality it never really entails it, you can never use your will to alter
causality but the Ego is causality and fully entails it. Ego is not merely part of the causal line but the root not the tree, the cause not the form. The One.

This might seem circular but let's develop further. The Ego is you, but also others, the outside, which are also part of you and are you. The Ego is made manifest in our anticausal decisions and ideas. Accessing the Ego means being able to abstract your consciousness, ideas, logic and memories. It's a void full of meaning from which everythings flows. Trying to understand it is meaningless but we can access it. To access it is anticausal.

Altering causality is anticausal. This is a platitude but how does one become anticausal ? One way will be realising the causal lies and living despite them for that decision is anticausal Another will be to simply end the Ego, the death of human. And finally the last one will be to determine the superdeterministic hidden variables confering you the power to access the
primal causal void. What decision such a person will take is undetermined for that too is anticausal.

>>22559399

>>22494974
>Wahhh wahhh
>Remind is a transitive verb
evidently NOT anymore, you FAGGOT
LMAOO

I don't get it. There are things that are absolutely beyond my control such as the natural laws of physics and as a result I am never free from spooks. My mind is never free but always constrained by the natural order and even logic itself. Those are things I can abstract and even decide to act against them, but I will be proven wrong and maybe even physically harmed.

I am still under the influence of spooks and my mind is not free.

>"Ha ha ha, you're so spooky."

I'm interested in reading Stirner: what are prerequesites to read before him?

Stirner is a nihilist because the Unique is nothing, indeterminate. So by nihilist I mean someone who really believes there is nothing "behind" anything. Eriugena for example is not a nihilist because he doesn't believe in nothingness but in "nothingness par excellence" (i.e. instead of saying "there is no highest essence he says nothing is the highest essence) and because he's a catholic. Buddha and Nagarjuna are not nihilists because they believe in "enlightenment" as the highest essence. Pessimists obviously aren't nihilists either. So are there any real nihilists besides Stirner?

A few words about how bullshit the legal system is.

Firstly , the legal system is a weapon of violence, not of justice. Quite literally direct violence, as when it leads to capital punishment, or in times past when it involved torture or corporeal punishment. And even when the violence is not manifest, it is implicit, through the threat of violence via law enforcement and the prison system. Or even figuratively, for the law if used against you can inflict terrible abstract violence on your conditions of life, finances, etc. Without this threat of violence, direct or allusive, the justice system reveals itself as a mirage with no force or gravity to bind it. When is violence just?

Second, the law only has utility for the wealthy and is a weapon of the rich. Without the ability to pay for a private lawyer, the law is essentially unnavigable, and turns legal subjects into objects for its machinery rather than agents to actuate its mechanisms . One cannot use the law for offensive purposes unless one is wealthy for there are no public prosecutors . A public defender’s attention is too divided and is too overloaded with cases to provide anything but cursory, general advice unsuited for a complex case. Therefore the law exists to victimize the poor.

The law patently exists not to preserve and vindicate justice, though it may occasionally, incidentally serve that purpose, but to project the will of the state and the wealthy.

Furthermore, lawyers are a kind of cartel, whose product is their authority over a bunch of words that have been invested by the state with the fetishistic power of legality. They are henchmen, cutthroats, brigands, all, who are rewarded for their cleverness at bending the laws as they are discovering and pointing to them. Lawyers are inventors, authors of fiction, storytellers, first and foremost. Yet they are considered to be arbiters of truth and justice.

The state exempts itself from the very crimes it punishes its citizens for. In its corruption, theft, and murder, the law suddenly ceases to apply. For there is often no greater perpetrator of injustice than the state, though the state is above its laws.

>>22153062
>man obsessed with "spooks"
>his middle name is casper
who writes this shit?

>they will slave away for a pittance, thank you for the opportunity to do so and shun anyone who isn't a slave like them
this is your brain on society