The philosopher who singlehandedly saved /lit/ from /pol/chuds

[Anonymous No.21330156]

Say thank you

[Anonymous No.21330206]

leftwing cant into stierner either, they think they can practice idpol and morality while being a cool stirner fag, when morality is a spook, a way to control people

[Anonymous No.21330217]

>using American high schooler terms like "chud"

[Anonymous No.21330240]

Marx destroyed Stirner

[Anonymous No.21330250]

>>21330240
Marx wrote a childish tirade on a frankly irrelevant philosopher lmao. it's the equivalent of someone like Drake shitting on MC Ride

[Anonymous No.21330259]

>>21330250
MC Ride is a visionary

[Anonymous No.21330263]

>>21330259
agreed, and Drake is extremely overhyped

[Anonymous No.21330305]

>>21330250
Marx and Engels had good reasons to attack Stirner ideas. But they utterly failed because Stirner carried Hegelian philosophy to its concrete limit: nihilism. Since Marx and Engels wanted to create a critical materialist philosophy, they failed in keeping it dialectical and too hegelian.

Stirner was ---maybe--- the last philosopher (at his time), since he revealed the naked truth of idealism (ie philosophy in itself since Plato), but he also revealed that philosophy is sheer nihilism, cope, bad taste fiction, and so on... pure democratic decadence. Stirnerites are just the other of the coin in which Evolite down syndrome incels are engraved.

[Anonymous No.21330647]

>>21330156
Stirner was a huge influence on fascism. Mussolini and Schmidt were fans of him.

[Anonymous No.21330772]

>>21330647
Except fascism in practice has nothing to do with Stirner.
Geezus, you dumdums still trying to recruit for the neoliberal army and your globalist empire? Games up.

>ah-a-actually fascism is the one truly Green political ideology!

[Anonymous No.21330824]

>>21330772
>ah-a-actually fascism is the one truly Green political ideology!
why not? For every marxist, at least, individualism is crypto-fascism (and contemporary ancap just confirm that).

[Anonymous No.21331014]

>>21330156
Stirner is to transgender people what Evola is to closseted transgender people

[Anonymous No.21331042]

>>21330824
Imagine not being a stirner marxist using collective means to fuck over capital owners and maximize ones own profit.

Who the fuck cares about workers rights, i just dont want to be exploited. idc if my coworkers get exploited.

[Anonymous No.21331088]

>>21330156
Arigato, Stirner-chan!

[Anonymous No.21331110]

>>21330156
I love Stirner and Schopenhauer because they make both the leftoids and rightoids seethe

[Anonymous No.21331365]

As a third culture kid I found Stirner especially liberating

[Anonymous No.21331406]

>>21330217
spbp

[Anonymous No.21331513]

>>21330305
The only philosophy beyond such reproach is descartes, Hume, critique of pure reason, nichomachean ethics, early Plato.

Hegel had a small point that the ‘Noumena is unknowable’ is a contradiction, that the absolute is one undifferentiated reality with human perception creating artificial boundaries but the rest of him is faith based poetry ie that the absolute had a rational telos.

[Anonymous No.21331524]

Was Stirner a socialist or are stirner fags on reddit just epic edgy posers?

[Anonymous No.21331618]

>>21330156
I like Stirner, don't get me wrong, but he's a mere footnote in the history of philosophy, and that is all, a novelty, someplace for a pseud to get their feet wet, etc.

[Anonymous No.21331624]

>>21331042
>Who the fuck cares about workers rights
Average sti*nerite everyone. at least fashoids pretend to care

[Anonymous No.21331675]

>>21331624
making a moral grand stand on 4channel automatically disqualifies your opinion on anything. Get a grip loser.

[Anonymous No.21331679]

>>21331675
>advancing the self interest of your class is le heckin moral standpoint
Go back

[Anonymous No.21331697]

>>21330156
>"w-wait... you mean to tell me that... tranny rights are a spook? N-NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO"

[Anonymous No.21331812]

>>21331618
Then show me another good individualist philosopher?

[Anonymous No.21331815]

>>21330156
Stirner literally says there is nothing wrong with a mother strangling her babies. How can you defend this man?

[Anonymous No.21331830]

>>21331815
Because he's right under the framework he's using. Stirner is a tautologist, he says stuff that is inherently true.
Everyone acts in their own self interest - true, because you're using "self interest" to mean "things I want". Thus compassion, charity, virtue and such are all self interests since you want to do them.
There is nothing "wrong" with murder - true, if you take self interest as your judge, there is nothing wrong with murder.
You will notice that many moral systems follow stirners logic - things are wrong because overall they damage you, even if In the heat of the moment they seem like things you want. Stirner was crying out against the intellectual suicide of other kinds of morality, which tells you things are wrong because of an exterior judge and dogmatically ignore the fact that you and your self interest are the final judge.
Why does a man follow the rules of god? Because overall he wants to follow them more than he wants to break them...
Stirner is great because he makes you take responsibility for your own decisions and ethics. Being an "egoist" just means awareness of basic life facts. It doesn't mean you have to be a mean spiteful man, as many people seem to take it as. Being mean and spiteful tends to overall be bad for you, so it's in your own self interest not to be so!

[Anonymous No.21331837]

>>21330824
>For every marxist, at least, individualism is crypto-fascism
Marx shilled his vision of a communist society by saying it would be free from the wage labour, and instead everyone could fuck around and not need a boss because "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".
What the faggots don't realise in this thread is that Marx did not refute Stirner. Marx absorbed Stirner into his own work, because Stirner cannot be refuted (which is why his work is partially meaningless in a way).
>>21331524
He's a protonihilistic commie with edgelord characteristics.
>>21331815
There is nothing inherently wrong or right with that, just like how there is nothing inherently wrong or right about you thinking that is wrong.

[Anonymous No.21331927]

Why do people like Stirner, while they hate Ayn Rand. Aren't they similar?

[Anonymous No.21331937]

>>21331927
Stirner upvotes
Rand downvotes

[Anonymous No.21331942]

>>21331927
stirner goes further than rand and says private property and crapitlism are spooks. he would despise rand

[Anonymous No.21332795]

>>21331513
>The only philosophy beyond such reproach is descartes, Hume, critique of pure reason, nichomachean ethics, early Plato.
Could you elaborate on that?

[Anonymous No.21332903]

>>21331927
I don't like any of them, but at least Stirner is doing philosophy (actual philosophy, not philosophical fiction). Stirner philosophical conclusions are grounded in his radicalization of Hegel; and Rand, well, she's the youtube video-essay genre of her time.

[Anonymous No.21332951]

>>21330156
Stirner was a chud though

[Anonymous No.21332960]

>>21331837
Stirner was not a commie, he rejected communism and explicitly said it would lead to totalitarian government. He's basically an Epicurean
>>21331937
Nah, but they can put together. Stirner did like Adam Smith's works.

[Anonymous No.21332985]

>>21330772
In practice, Stirner can be anything you want him to be. He's not a gate-keep philosopher, you dumb commie. I'm sorry this isn't twitter where you can be a pseud defending dead, irrelevant people as an identity.

[Anonymous No.21332990]

>>21330647
And Schmitt was 100% right when you look at what is going on in the world.

[Anonymous No.21332998]

>>21332960
Too many people mix up Stirner's personal feelings with what he implies. He personally doesn't see communism as favorable; he doesn't rule out one can be a self serving communist. It just finds it to be stupid and unworkable. If a communist was intelligent enough to make communism work in a way that's benefits them - they can do so. Anyone who isn't a complete retard though, understands history, knows its idealistic and a waste of time. Just like can become trannies, but I'm not going to help them or respect them.

[Anonymous No.21333003]

>>21332960
He pointed out contradictions in it, while pointing the way to a stronger individualist. Though lightly hinting that they’re nothing, or lesser, when operating by themselves. His ideas aren’t a rejection of the communist dream but of slavish conformist state-socialism. He died a socialist. (Of the libertarian/anarchist type)
He’s something of an Epicurean, true, though a more risk taking political actor

[Anonymous No.21333014]

>>21332998
>communism is when the government does stuff
That’s state socialism. Eastern or western varieties, tankie to EU.
The Commune is that dream village or city on a hill, run by the working class with common sense and benevolence

[Anonymous No.21333042]

>>21333003
He was no socialist or anarchist. He attacks Proudhon though out the book. One his critiques of anarchists is their obsession with morality. revolution, and social engineering. He also mocks socialists for caring about the poor when the rich use their philanthropy to pay for everything, and mocks the poor for being weak and not fighting them back. The only people calling Stirner a "socialist" are people who got their understanding of him from Greg/Reddit and not the entire book. Or have read any academic papers on his work. There are plenty.

[Anonymous No.21333050]

>>21333014
Communism is when the government does stuff though. You can't have communism, a planned economy, with a hierarchical government that forbids the accumulation of wealth, competition, wage labor, profitting et cetera. Your understanding of communism is retarded and is not backed up by the theory or historical evidence of it in practice. Marx literally killed anarchokiddies like you out of the international because you thought that communism would be that. That's Proudhonian non-sense.

[Anonymous No.21333083]

>>21333014
Socialism can not exist without a state. There's no examples of it. There's no way you're getting rid of the bourgeois without a bureaucracy that outlaws and suppresses it. Again, Stirner had already pointed that out before Marx even wrote the Manifesto - socialism is so against human nature it requires totalitarian dictatorship to force people act against their own instincts, and history after his death proved him right. Your theoretical, "real communism" is just childish non-sense not seen in reality and violates even the most basic laws of common sense. Only a complete fool would buy into your dumb hippie shit. And seeing how most anarchists are drug addicts, trannies, and sexual predators - its no wonder your beliefs are so degenerate and stupid.

[Anonymous No.21333124]

>>21330156
He was a one trick pony. Not worth discussing

[Anonymous No.21333145]

>>21333003
"State-socialism" wasn't a thing in his time though. He was talking about Proudhon and the Owenites. You do realize state socialism was not a theory until the 1870s, right?

[Anonymous No.21333156]

>>21330156
stirner is a spook

[Anonymous No.21333223]

>>21331679
>the self interest
>of your class

[Anonymous No.21333241]

>>21333223
>you

[Anonymous No.21333260]

>>21331812
There are no good individualist philosophers

[Anonymous No.21333261]

>>21333260

[Anonymous No.21333284]

>>21333261
Why does he attract so many /pol/fags then? /pol/fags are opposite of individualists.

[Anonymous No.21333295]

>>21333284
That's like asking why Jesus attracts intolerant people.

[Anonymous No.21333303]

>>21330156
GK Chesterton

[Anonymous No.21333320]

What does Stirner think about having contradictory ideals at different times based on what's best for you? For example, What if I practice socialism, use state NEETbux to survive. Somehow come into money, stablish a successful business and become rich. Dodge taxes, shit on NEETbux and try to get it removed. What does Stirner think of such hypocrisy?

[Anonymous No.21333323]

>>21333320
>What does Stirner think about having contradictory ideals at different times based on what's best for you?
Woman moment

[Anonymous No.21333329]

>>21333323
What would Stirner think of it? Based on what he says this is completely okay. Therefore women are the true followers of Stirner's philosophy.

[Anonymous No.21333373]

>>21330156
Who?

[Anonymous No.21333382]

>>21333042
I just told you how he was socialist. This is why anarchists still read him. You don’t just wave a wand and he’s not. He critiques his Christian socialist friends, but to strengthen the movement. This is how we grow.
>flexin’ that reddit knowledge
I’ve no idea who you’re talking about. I’ve read the entire book and his other works.
>>21333145
Marxism might not have gone off the rails with historical materialist prophecy, but there were still varying types he was critiquing in hopes of making stronger. The base of my post is fine

[Anonymous No.21333418]

>>21333050
No.
A “Communist Party” running a vanguardist state-capitalist authoritarian regime is not communism.
They’re “scientific socialists” who think there are stages to follow before getting to communism. To go their directly is considered utopian and mocked. This is why China is a fascist state now. No amount of contradiction from you changes these facts I’ve just shared with you.

>>21333083
I don’t care what “socialism” needs. Our “theoretical communism” has existed and does exist in smaller pocket communities around the world right now. Shrank down in the face of “civilization” and greatly impoverished, they hang on till global economic “downturns” and collapse. The Commune of European lore was also a thing, less pure in many cases, but still people banding together to evade the state/kingdom’s authority. Oh yes, communism is the natural state of mankind.

[Anonymous No.21333426]

>>21333418
>To go their
*go there directly

[Anonymous No.21333428]

>>21333418
>Oh yes, communism is the natural state of mankind.

Oof.

[Anonymous No.21333443]

>>21333428
Are you an oof that believes in the Bible?

[Anonymous No.21333518]

>>21330156
He is the exact same thing as normalfags who say YOLO, get shitty tattoos, and go out drinking every weekend yet you feel superior for having the exact same mindset but in a more convoluted way. You're no different than a TikTok/IG faggot. Prove me wrong.

[Anonymous No.21333725]

I just wanted to mention how happy I am that you-know-who doesn't post regularly on this board anymore. My daily enjoyment of this board has risen considerably ever since the user in question stopped posting consistently, or at all.

[Anonymous No.21333915]

>>21333725
I still post; I only keep my wings hidden. :^D!

[Anonymous No.21333922]

>>21333725
Stupid frog posters

[Anonymous No.21334170]

>>21333382
Anarchists are retarded and don't really understand him. Neither do you. He did critique of every socialist. He did not like you.
>>21333418
>It wasn't real communism
This isn't an argument. Your understanding of communism is utopian - it does not reflect communism in the real world. Communism, historically, has always been minority dictatorship and always will be. Your ideas have never existed, and most people agree you're just retarded college students without jobs. No one will ever take you morons seriously besides the drug addicts, hedonists, other degenerate trannies that push your non-sense.

[Anonymous No.21334176]

>>21333443
>Communism is the natural state
>uses bible fables as proof
Lmao, communists are fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.21334182]

>>21334170
>He did critique of every socialist.
Not every socialist/anarchist existed at the time. Like I already said. We grow through critique.

>Not real communism
You're right. That isn't a valid critique anymore. Now either accept it or stop talking about it.

[Anonymous No.21334206]

>>21334182
>Not every socialist/anarchist existed at the time. Like I already said. We grow through critique.
His critique is immanent. You still cling on the same failed ideas that have failed every time. Even as you denounce China - China is rich today because it abandoned communism in the 1970s for markets and private property. Its the perfect case study, like every post-Warsaw Pact state, that your ideas don't work. The fact theory doesn't align with reality is proof enough communism, as an idea, can be discarded as non-sense.

[Anonymous No.21334216]

>>21333725
She's still here, she posts a little less lately.

[Anonymous No.21334581]

>>21334216
I haven't seen her post in over 1 year i miss her

BUTTERFLY CHAN COME BACCCK

[Anonymous No.21334753]

>>21334206
To MARXISM. Not Bakunin, not Goldman, not Kaczynski.

>defends state socialism under authoritarian vanguardism in China
Make up your mind

[Anonymous No.21335444]

>>21330156
For me, Stirner was like Buddha but cool

[Anonymous No.21335452]

>>21332960
>he rejected communism
Only if it's not for the benefit of the individual, which goes for every single -ism he talked about.
>Stirner did like Adam Smith's works.
So did Marx, and they both agreed that muh workers should murder capital owners for their benefit.

[Anonymous No.21335460]

>>21334206
>China is rich today because it abandoned communism in the 1970s for markets and private property
So it's "not real communism" after all, huh?

[Anonymous No.21335467]

>>21333725
Who is you-know-who? I don't frequent this board that regularly cuz of work, but I'd still like to know

[Anonymous No.21335518]

>>21335467
The resident Anarcho-Stirnerian-Epicurean-Lesbian-Permaculturalist that made all the nazi-trad-caths seethe

[Anonymous No.21335577]

>>21333261
Nietzsche was the chud version of Stirner. I think Nietzsche was slightly less racist however.

[Anonymous No.21335593]

>>21333725
True. I only wish 'guy who posts "who?"' and 'guy who shits up N threads by offering opinions despite not having read him' would leave.

[Anonymous No.21335602]

>>21330156
Acknowledging that everything is a spook does not disbar you from making your own judgements

What Stirner was trying to say was that HIS truth is more significant than other peoples truths. Stirner is the framework of the proto-schizo-racist.

[Anonymous No.21335652]

>>21333284
>liked caste systems
>thought slavery was good
>obsession with warfare
>thought women should be property
>admired conquerors
>LARPed as a polish aristocrat
>shit on anarchists and socialists
>hated his mother
Checks out

[Anonymous No.21335745]

>>21335518
Who is this

[Anonymous No.21335882]

>>21335745
You want her name?
Newfriend, she's an old tripfag of lit's who's been a regular since a decade ago. Butterfly. Been gone for about a year mostly. Last saw her briefly in the summer or something.

[Anonymous No.21335932]

>>21330206
Fpbp

[Anonymous No.21335968]

>>21333329
Stirner would think it's fine because you're just following your self-interest

Like as long as you're honest about it (to yourself) there should be no copium required desu

[Anonymous No.21336021]

>>21332795
Most philosophy is just an extension of the thinkers worldview which is often formed as coping, idiosyncratic aesthetics etc. the philosophers listed were able to cut through psychological projection to reality itself, or at least questions thereabouts. What is the only sound epistemology, what is a necessary construction of the mind (pure a priori intuition) etc.

[Anonymous No.21336667]

>>21331812
Emile Armand is my favorite individualist

[Anonymous No.21336865]

>>21335882
Butterfly was an annoying retarded tranny and I'm glad that fag is gone

[Anonymous No.21337396]

>>21336865
Found the nazi-trad-tran-Cath. Seethe more.

[Anonymous No.21337422]

>>21330772
"stirner" isn't an ideology. it's just a guy saying you can do whatever you want.

[Anonymous No.21337436]

>>21335882
I've been on and off on this board forever and that person would usually post some midwit take brimming with condescension and arrogance, followed by absolutely zero defense of their statements.