>national borders
How are people to going even start to overcome the spook of property (which is just borders applied on a smaller scale) if we're still stuck in the age of this massive spook?
>>1399686
>we
revolution is a spook
>I want my country to be flooded by 3rd world savages
Viper, kill yourself my man
>>1399686
>we
Take away your spook of an imagined collective.
>>1399686
With resource based economy and abolishing all countries, borders and symbols of nationalism
>>1399722
>economy
well spook'd
>>1399750
>spook'd
well spook'd
>>1399722
You wanna abolish peoples too who dont wanna be abolished?
You cannot rip the ethnic makeup off that shia kurd you know? Even if he operates under a new economy system.
>property
You are smalltime Stirner. Just naming objects and differentiating them from the Universe is a fucking spook.
>>1399701
>revolution is a spook
Not if you willfully join for your own pleasure. It's only when "The Cause" becomes autonomous in its own right and supersedes the free-will of the individuals working together that it becomes a spook
Misunderstanding Stirner will get you crushed as easily as misunderstanding Nietzsche
>>1399763
>ethnic makeup
>>1399806
>DNA is a spook
>>1399793
Can I willfullly join patriotic/nationalist feels for my pleasure too?
>>1399806
Ethnic makeup is at least more real then stuff like "Mandate of Heaven" "the proletariat" "angels". you can see it as a physical reality and if not you at least get marked by speaking some language others dont.
>>1399823
>Can I willfullly join patriotic/nationalist feels for my pleasure too?
If you want, but those groups are going to ask more than you are willing to give most likely
>>1399812
It is when you're talking about Kurdish nationalism, let alone adding the qualifier "shia"
>>1399833
>than you are willing to give
A few will die for their tribe willingly.
take your shit meme back to leftypol
>>1399686
I bet this sounded more intelligent in your head than it turned out to be.
>>1399812
>ethnic
>DNA
>>1399777
He wouldn't necessarily disagree y'know. Reality is just the Creative Nothing fucking with itself.
>>1400734
So the individual is just a spook that the creative nothing can overcome?
>>1399879
Stirner would say they are dying for a spook,the tribe, but that's where I would disagree with him. I think translation has something to say about the misunderstanding of Stirner, taking it to sometimes laughably absurd conclusions. I think what Stirner meant by ego is more akin to what a Jungian would call "the self". Einzige translates to "only one" or "the only one" in English, far too vague to just assume that what is being talked about is the personal ego; "John Crichton", but more of the Self which is in everyone as the ground of their Individualness.
If you start from that premise then Stirner is not saying "be a complete and utter soulless un-empathetic jerk because why not? lmao". There's more to it than that. Stirner is saying that the World "ie property" belongs to everyone equally. There is noone that has any more "right" to own the world than You, in everyone, the Einzige, therefore you own that whichever is within your personal sphere of power to possess or act upon directly. This applies to every individual.
That being said you have phenomena of tribal group identity which comes about seemingly spontaneously in archaic man, the tribe really is of one mind. And if it is beneficial for all members of the group, how is undesirable? The only thing in that situation which would be considered a spook is anything which imposes limits on the actions of the individual-unit of the tribe mind which are nothing but fabricated nothings such as national borders and laws. Death is less desirable.
>>1399706
>believing in cold war propaganda about whether things are first, second, or third world
Excellent retardation and spook you've got there.
>>1402432
Der Einzige translates to "one and only" as well
>>1402432
I hate to be that guy, but I think a lot of the belief that Stirner promotes being a selfish dickhead for the sake of it comes either from not reading his work, incompletely reading his work, or improperly reading his work. Because I recall him being fairly explicit that social behaviours are rather essential to your self-interest.
His ideal of self interest is closer to the Taoist perfectly selfish man, who would not pluck one hair from his head for the kingdom, and thus would not be willing to tyrannize or campaign against others to maintain dominion or power.
>>1402438
He was obviously referring to the developing world. By all means, though, try to argue that the cultural differences between a western nation in the UN security council and some backwater theocracy whose entire country is a landfill are nonexistent.
>>1402534
>culture
When will Stirnerposting be a bannable offense?
>>1402580
You can't prove Stirnerposting is material therefore it is a spook.
Get fucking owned faggot. We own this fucking board.
>>1400748
If by "individual" you mean the psychological ego, then yes. If by "individual" you mean it in the sense Stirner used it, that is to say the Unique, then no, because there's nothing to give "reality" (in the most etymological sense, i.e. to give it "thing-ness") to it because it is totally unique and so not comparable with anything on any level--there's nowhere to overcome because there's nowhere to go with the Unique.
At least this isn't a /sword general/ thread...
>>1399686
They may be a spook, but without them we would have to deal with the savage brown hordes
>>1403389
Therefore we must conclude that some spooks are useful. Check-mate Stirner.
You can't prove Stirner wrong, since he never makes a stand and just dismisses everything.
However, even if we assume he is right... so what? His views don't go anywhere. If everyone was spook free we'd still live in a similarly organized way, simply because its not in anyone's interest to devolve into anarchy.
stirner being a meme makes him into a literal spook
>>1403431
Im guessing your view on Stirner is based on /his/ memes.
>>1403399
stirner never said that spooks weren't useful. he simply asks for the reader to acknowledge these ideas for what they are, ideas, "spooks of the mind", and gauge as to whether or not subscribing to these ideas is useful for satisfying one's ego. the point of stirner is to treat ideas that we take as given or natural or necessary and see if they provide us actual utility or if we subscribe to these ideas for the sake of doing so.
so, if you're a low skilled uk worker who notices that their job is being threatened by the migrating brown hordes, maybe subscribing to nationalism is useful for you in the moment so long as it serves the purpose of preventing your job from being taken away.
>>1399701
ur a fukin spook kiddo
>>1399777
Language itself is a fucking spook and a half, let's just all stop conversing with these verbal abstractions altogether.
>>1402560
I see you've never read Stirner
is "x is a spook" the /his/ meme equivalent of the "x is a social construct" meme on /sci/
>>1402770
That's actually super compatible with the Vedic notion of abolishing the self.
>>1406521
spooks are more of a lit meme equivalent.
