stirner

The Haunted Archipelago

spooky

from Bandilang Itim

Written by Isang Alipin.

No rulers, anarchy—since there were no rulers in the first place. If there is a ruler, there are ruled; but how can you rule if authority was never real to begin with? The egoist does not have a ruler because it is not possible to rule the selfish. You may influence them, but you will never rule them; the selfish will always do things for their own sake, for their own interests, for their self above all.

Stirner, Wittgenstein, and Anarchism

Stirner, Wittgenstein, and Anarchism. Do I get to pick?

From C4SS by Rai Ling, June 25th, 2021

The work of Max Stirner is a contentious topic among anarchists, with numerous interpretations of his work, ranging from descriptive, presenting a certain framework of thought, to prescriptive, advocating for anti-authoritarianism, and expressing a commitment to “individualism.” It is my position that egoism is primarily descriptive in nature. The key distinctions Stirner makes, those between fixed and unfixed ideas, and conscious and unconscious egoism, do not lead us to any normative conclusions, despite Stirner’s clear personal opposition to the state and authority in general. Rather, many anarchists are egoists because they find personal value in this perspective. Egoism has both everything and nothing to do with anarchism.

Three Stirner Pieces, on Immediatism podcast

Listener feedback has shaped what is being read on Immediatism, lately. These two pamphlets and a book chapter each add something original to discussions around Stirner's ideas and works. "Mutual Utilization: Relationship and Revolt in Max Stirner," by Massimo Passamani, is focused on interpersonal relationships as theorized in Stirner, and the connection to a revolutionary stance.

Price on Blumenfeld

Price on Blumenfeld

From H-Socialisms by Wayne Price

'All Things Are Nothing to Me: The Unique Philosophy of Max Stirner'

Max Stirner was the pen name of Johann Kasper Schmidt (1806-56). He was part of a milieu of young philosophers who sought to develop further the philosophy of the great German thinker Georg W. F. Hegel, who had died in 1831. This milieu has been referred to as the Young Hegelians or Left Hegelians. While Hegel’s system had solidified into a reactionary form, they mainly tried to rework it in more humanistic, naturalistic, and democratic directions. The most well-known of these young men today (there were women in the grouping, but their names have dropped out of history) are Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. (Engels had been a personal friend of Stirner’s for a time.) Michael Bakunin—later a founder of revolutionary socialist-anarchism—also studied Hegel and was in contact with this milieu.

Stirner's Critics on Immediatism Podcast

In these four new episodes of Immediatism are contained the unabridged Stirner's Critics, in which Stirner responds to three prominent critics of his day. He clarifies a broad range of topics such as the nature of the unique and what egoism is, that what is interesting can only be interesting through your interest and that the rest is valueless, and then closes with a discussion of his concept of the association/union of egoists.

Jason McQuinn's egoist essays on Immediatism Podcast

The outstanding essay, "Clarifying the Unique and Its Self-Creation: An Introduction to Stirner's Critics and The Philosophical Reactionaries," is now available in podcast form. Jason McQuinn is an egoist and post-left anarchist critical theorist, known for his writings on critical self-theory, which have been spotlighted previously in Immediatism episodes 17 and 95. For even more Jason McQuinn essays, see The Anarchist Library.

Enemies of Society, Drawing First Blood

From Immediatism.com

This essay, Drawing First Blood, by Meme, Myself, & I, is the preamble to Enemies of Society: an Anthology of Individualist & Egoist Thought. It is both a broad overview of individualist and egoist thought as well as a deep look at the criticism of these and responses to those criticisms.

Rambles in the Fields of Anarchist Individualism

From Libertarian Labyrinth

Whatever we think of individualism, anarchist individualism or a range of related topics, anarchist theory can hardly dispense with some close consideration of the individual. The question is whether that is a permanent condition or whether we have yet to extricate ourselves from a philosophical problem that we will eventually solve.

Against Individualism: The Individual Is Not So, by Ausonia Calabrese

Egoism -- at least, egoism as it appears as a discursive formation -- concerns a very particular ontology of the individual. Apio Ludd, known under many names, is perhaps the most well-known living egoist-theorist, and describes this ontology thusly: ...most of today’s young “insurrectionary” communists believe that you and I don’t really act, but are simply the puppets of invisible, bodiless actors like society, social relationships, movements, various collective forces that apparently come out of nothing but themselves, since if you try to bring them back to an actual source, you have to come back to individuals acting in their worlds and relating with each other. And that won’t do, because then you’d have to recognize not “the commune,” not “human community,” certainly not that mystical absurdity “species being,” but yourself here and now – a unique individual capable of desiring, deciding and acting – as the center and aim of your theory and practice. And a whole lot of the theorizing that communists carry out seems to be aimed precisely at avoiding this.

Revisiting “The Relevance of Max Stirner to Anarcho-Communists” Two Years On

I hope this essay continues to enjoy the circulation it’s seen so far, and continues to help clarify conscious egoism, which I consider more than ever to be an extremely valuable monkey-wrench in the toolbox of revolt. The calls for discipline, sacrifice, and all the other spooky rhetoric will continue flowing unabated from the mouths of authoritarians, whether they camouflage themselves in red, black, green, or any other color.

FRR Books Podcast: The Stirner Series Ep. 10, the Finale part 1!

Listen here: http://freeradicalradio.net/frr-books-podcast-the-stirner-series-ep-10-t...
Listen here: https://archive.org/details/Stiner10

I decided I was a fucking anarchist after reading the Dispossessed by Ursula Le Guinn when I was in my early twenties living in Hawaii. I had no idea what an anarchist actually was, what an anarchist scene was..fuck I didn’t really know anything other than that I liked to surf and that I didn’t like the world that I lived in. Anarchy represented the most radical difference to that...this made it incredibly attractive to me. It stayed incredibly attractive because I kept living in Hawaii, not knowing or meeting anarchists. I read, a lot. I’ve read a lot since I was a little kid. I didn’t make friends during childhood because I was too intense, too black and white morally and took the world way too seriously. I’ll be the first to admit that I haven’t cured myself of these childhood/childish ways. I thought at a young age that there was a moral obligation to watch the news, pay attention, know everything, and that somehow this would be helpful in fixing things. All I can do now is laugh at myself, which might seem like a refrain for my life at this point.

Blumenfeld’s Stirner

From The Anvil Review

All Things Are Nothing to Me is one of the latest books to emerge from the ongoing revival of interest in the work of Max Stirner. The title is taken from the opening line of the first English translation of Stirner’s The Unique and its Property, which can also be translated literally but more prosaically as “I have based my affair on nothing.” In his introduction, the author, Jacob Blumenfeld, says that his intention is to “reconstruct” Stirner’s unique philosophy1 and show a “contemporary, critical, and useful Stirner”. This already makes the book ambitious, as Stirner is all too often reduced to merely a meme or a punchline by both his detractors and his champions. Blumenfeld acknowledges this, considering and rejecting Stirner as a precursor to the troll culture of the alt-right as well as a would-be accommodator of the neoliberal status quo. Instead, he prefers to see Stirner as a kindred spirit of the notorious Invisible Committee, as both offer critiques of ideology and alienation. As he wraps up his introduction, Blumenfeld says that in the first chapter of his book he “discover[s] something interesting, namely, that one does not need the concept of the ‘ego’ to understand Stirner at all. In fact, this might have been the biggest stumbling block toward understanding his philosophy.”

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - stirner