Haven't been on here in a few years... you guys still into Stirner? Or are you all reactionary losers like most of 4chan?
stirner is reactionary
>>7424006
Opened the thread from the catalog to say thisthe joke is that he isn't
>>7424006
"The labourers have the most enormous power in their hands, and, if they once became thoroughly conscious of it and used it, nothing would withstand them; they would only have to stop labour, regard the product of labour as theirs, and enjoy it. This is the sense of the labour disturbances which show themselves here and there.
The state rests on the – slavery of labour. If labour becomes free, the state is lost." - Max Stirner
>>7424027
reactionary drivel
>>7424040
*dribble
>>7423999
>reactionary losers
Please go back to tumblr and don't come back
>>7424027
>The labourer cannot realize on his labour to the extent of the value that it has for the consumer. “Labour is badly paid!” The capitalist has the greatest profit from it.
>Stirner had an understanding of the surplus theory of value in 1843
>>7423999
What's wrong with being a reactionary?
I'd rather be that than some left-wing idiot espousing philosophical fallacies and economic misunderstandings.
>>7424055
>I'd rather be a loser than this made up spook
convincing...
>>7424075
>"""""""loser"""""""""""""""""""""
wew spookotron hold up there
>>7424083
nothing spooky about me making fun of you. I assure you, no compulsion or fixity is necessary for this feeling of humorous disgust to arise within my uniqueness.
>>7424098
>attacking the individual over the concept
I'm you, him and everyone else here
>>7424103
>I'm you, him and everyone else here
That's a whole lot of creative nothings to have in one creative moment.
What kind of delusional moron thinks Stirner is not reactionary? Is there a bigger spook than "progress"? He rails against equality of any kind, against every political impulse descended from Protestantism (i.e. progressive politics)...how more reactionary can you get?
>>7424148
He is against all politics. He though patriotism, traditionalism and group identity in general is for unwilling egoists (morons).
>>7424148
Stirner is against family, state, nation, and private property, and all other forms of hierarchy. He pretty obviously shows his support for a proletarian revolution (i.e. he makes it clear he thinks its within the proletarians egoism to have one). Keep deluding yourself.
>>7424166
you pretty obviously want him to fit your ideology
>>7424046
Please go back to /pol/ and don't come back
:^)
>>7424171
Quite the opposite, I'm just pointing out the factual things that can be said about him that shows what ideologies he definitely doesn't fit into. And those include reactionary ideologies, i.e. nationalism, "anarcho" capitalism, etc.
>>7424115
Obviously an infinite amount of nothing can share the same instant, have you not eyes
>>7424180
Gee Bill, how come your mom lets you be two nothings?
>>7424175
I mean obviously yes seeing as you alluded to the idea that anarchocapitalism is sillier than anarchocommunism
(they're both ridiculous btw)
>>7424166
Against private property? I don't recall reading that anywhere in the book; in fact from what I remember it was the opposite.
>>7424185
Where did I even mention anarchocommunism? You're trying to make this an argument about something it's not. I'm literally only pointing out what things Stirner thought and how this makes him irreconcilable to certain ideologies.
At any rate, I seriously doubt you know much about either "anarcho" capitalism or anarcho-communism, since you're a person on 4chan trying to argue that Max Stirner is reactionary because he doesn't believe in liberal progress.
>>7424188
If you think Stirner advocates the concept of respecting others "property" you're the most ignorant of anyone in this thread.
>>7424193
>"anarcho" capitalism or anarcho-communism
there it is
>>7424188
"Property in the civic sense means sacred property, such that I must respect your property. “Respect for property!” Hence the politicians would like to have every one possess his little bit of property, and they have in part brought about an incredible parcellation by this effort. Each must have his bone on which he may find something to bite.
The position of affairs is different in the egoistic sense. I do not step shyly back from your property, but look upon it always as my property, in which I need to “respect” nothing. Pray do the like with what you call my property!"
>>7424200
Anarcho-capitalism isn't actual capitalism because it believes in private property. Disagreeing with that only puts you at serious odds with the entire anarchist tradition - including, perhaps most of all, with Max Stirner.
>>7424188
Property is to stirner whatever you have power over, unlike private property which is yours because you bought it or made it or first dug it out of the ground because of a spooky aura.
>>7424211
>actual capitalism
You mean actual anarchy?
>>7424219
oh lol yeah. though that typo makes for a funny inversion of what ancaps always say about how our current economy/material relations "isn't real capitalism!11"
>>7424211
my implication was not that anarcho capitalism is resonable, rather that anarcho communism is equally silly
>>7424227
My implication was that anarcho-capitalism isn't real anarchism. Once again, you're trying to make this argument about something it's not. For all you know, if I even am an anarchist, I could be a proudhonian mutualist or some kind of individualist, and completely anti-communist. Or, I may not even be an anarchist at all, just a weirdo who has actually read Stirner and thus can argue about him on 4chan to make fun of the kind of disgruntled spook-ridden dweebs like you who dwell here.
>>7424106
I'm sorry I didn't contribute anything to the discussion, from only looking at pictures and not reading the OP I concluded this thread was about drawing Stirner in ms paint
>>7424245
Do more family.
>>7424245
No, no, you've made the real contribution.
>>7424212
So if I drug you and lock you up in my illicit sex dungeon, you're my property?
>>7424239
I mean you clearly do call yourself an anarcho communist lets not be silly
anarchism is radical traditionalism btw
>>7424256
You would quit literally be exerting control over them; no matter what anyone said, they'd have to stop you if they didn't want that to happen. This is already how we function in regards to these things... not very radical.
>>7424247
>>7424252
This one is less creative
I think I will make more, improve, and post the best in future Stirner threads
>>7424174
/pol/ - 4chan
/lit/ - 4chan
tumblr - tumblr
see the difference?
>>7424275
I think you may have a spook about this "4chan" identity of yours; it's clearly a fixation of yours
>>7424271
I like it; he looks mildly contented
>>7424271
It's nice.
>>7424027
if labour becomes free the labour is cheap :^)
>>7424256
yes
welcome to stirner
>>7424271
More friend.
>>7424436
I'm beginning to like him.
Marx criticism of Stirner still stands
>>7424480
Marx's criticism of anything doesn't stand.
>>7424490
ok buddie
>>7424450
>>7424307
>>7424293
In this one a candle illuminates one side of Stirner's head
I'm not fully satisfied with how it came out, but I feel like I should post it anyway since it's done and I think there's something to the concept
>>7424502
whistler's mother?
Stirner is here to stay, i made sure of that 4 years ago.
I thought to myself st the time: what could i put on the board to ensure that these whipped curs remained as shortsighted and socially regressed as possible? Cue Max. It works well because the kind of egoism "argued" for is the kind which triggers nothing but a state wherein immediate sattisfaction or, in your cases, aversion from discomfort becomes the only priority. His incidiary 6edgy9me writing style would of course bate a lot of you nuttless rabbits--polemics always work well on impressionable college kids,
>>7424502
It's pretty nice. He needs more hair though.
>>7424525
Lol Stan have you really changed your mind on Stirner this much?
>>7424506
>>7424534
In hindsight he really does look like an old woman in that one
Once I was told that the great painters of the Renascence would often leave and return to paintings at a later time to new see them anew as an observer would
Now I understand why
I'm too tired for more Stirners and the quality of my work is slipping, I will continue later or in another thread to avoid another elderly woman looking Stiner.
>>7424525
I don't think your plan worked because a lot of this thread has been concerned with Stirner's potential in terms of a material revolution. And the other part of it has been about making great fan art. Keep deluding yourself though.
>>7424525
You used to spam Stirner relentlessly back in the day. What changed faggot?
>>7424546
>In hindsight he really does look like an old woman in that one
I like it, brings out the maternal qualities of Stirner's writing.
>>7424558
He progressed intellectually even less than us. It's actually pretty pathetic.
>>7424566
Oh the ironing
>>7424577
>comes into a thread where people were actually having discussions to share his power fantasy and tries to pretend like it isn't the most transparent and pathetic thing on this whole board
>>7424635
Carry on my wayward son
jk
I could never hate on stirner u guys
>>7424661
prove it -_-
>>7424661
That's more like the stan I know.
Weew lad.
>>7424265
So are you just an idiot or
>>7424667
>tfw almost satan for stan
>_<
>>7423999
>you guys still into Stirner?
still working on my PhD thesis, yes.
>>7424188
>Against private property? I don't recall reading that anywhere in the book;
do you recall reading it?
>>7423999
Do you think Stirner could triforce?
▲
▲ ▲
>>7424733
whats your thesis
>>7424188
"Whoever knows how to take, to defend, the thing, to him belongs property." "What I have in my power, that is my own. So long as I assert myself as holder, I am the proprietor of the thing."
Stirner his property is based on individualistic Authority (Force of the Ego justified by voluntary self interest).
Private property (Capitalism) is based on state Authority (Force of the Executive justified by the Legislation of the State)
>>7424816
Also little qoute on Voluntary and non-Voluntary Ego'ism.
''Sacred things exist only for the egoist who does not acknowledge himself, the involuntary egoist ... in short, for the egoist who would like not to be an egoist, and abases himself (combats his egoism), but at the same time abases himself only for the sake of "being exalted", and therefore of gratifying his egoism. Because he would like to cease to be an egoist, he looks about in heaven and earth for higher beings to serve and sacrifice himself to; but, however much he shakes and disciplines himself, in the end he does all for his own sake... [on] this account I call him the involuntary egoist....As you are each instant, you are your own creature in this very 'creature' you do not wish to lose yourself, the creator. You are yourself a higher being than you are, and surpass yourself ... just this, as an involuntary egoist, you fail to recognize; and therefore the 'higher essence' is to you — an alien essence. ... Alienness is a criterion of the "sacred".''
>>7424816
>Private property is based on state authority.
>Not on the principle of self-ownership.
>>7424904
Private property requires a state to defend it, ergo it's based on state authority.
>>7424778
No, but I can
▲
▲ ▲
>>7424940
I always had faith in you, Soren. :)
>>7424785
I'm examining the role of Stirner in the first (and possibly last) wave of post-anarchism (postmodern/poststructuralist). After explaining why despite some parallels Stirner's work transcends the framework(s) of post@, I offer instead a different theoretical apparatus with which to fruitfully enrich a reading and more importantly application of Stirner's ideas. This is secret ingredient X and I'm not going to tell you what it is because it's legitimately good and new (I have posted about it in the past though, some years back).
>>7424937
It's guaranteed by my natural rights.
>inb4 spook
>>7425118
>natural rights
"Natural rights" only exist if you believe in a God or the State, otherwise it's only you who can create so called "rights"
>>7425114
does it have anything to do with pragmatism? that's one thing I've wondered about... can't help but feel like Stirner was a bit of an influence on James (he did identify as an anarchist after all) and they got a bit in common, dislodging ideas from fixity and whatnot. If I was gonna write a paper on stirner that's probably what I'd try to examine.
>>7425136
I know almost nothing about pragmatism, desu. It wasn't present in my university background, unlike French Theory. Pragmatism and Stirner sounds like something that could work well, and I haven't seen it done before (probably a handful of essays or something exist which are more or less relevant, but Stirner in general is a very good subject if you want to publish on something that has actually not been discussed to death already like most things in academia).
>>7425118
Natural Rights are not fixed and unalterable, the term natural rights itself carries with it the implication of rigidity.
>>7425118
>natural rights
nice metaphysics you got there
>>7425130
Well no, they exist as a concept. They're essentially an extension of the NAP. All that is required for natural rights to exist is external beings to myself not using force in a coercive manner against me.
AYN RAND IS LIKE STIRNER, RIGHT?
>>7423999
I am, but I don't Stirnerpost as much as I used to. I have internalised him to be honest.
>>7425506
If natural rights were natural, how come people can transgress against them?
Stop trying to claim things you like are natural and things you dislike are not, you filthy Stoic.
>>7425506
>unironically swallowing ancap theory
Actually private property cannot exist without a higher authority capable of enforcing it through coercive force. Same goes for contracts, money, "natural" rights etc. ancap is pretty spooky, based on pretty farfetched metaphysical assumptions about human nature and the way things 'ought' to be
>>7425687
>value-free anything
doesn't work that way fann
>>7425687
>equivocating argumentation as a logical process with debate as a social form of conflict resolution
Hoppe uses an idealized/arbitrary concept of argumentation that can only exist in the abstract and holds it as the only true standard. a purely logical interaction based solely on appeals to 'truth' and 'values', completely detached from the world of force, lies, emotion etc. He assumes people argue to form 'accurate beliefs' and not just to win.
And that's not getting into the whole issue of the is/ought distinction. When person A is communicating with person B, the only thing that he momentarily demonstrates as preferring is that A momentarily has enough control over his body to have the conversation, and that B momentarily has enough control over his body to have the conversation.
ancaps are fucking dire - the place where whiny stoners and internet fascists meet.
>>7424275
>U TUMBLR U TUMBLR
The posters from the fast boards seem to consider it a sign of strength to be able to stick around their garbage heaps without growing sick to their stomachs. Aren't they just growing desensitized to repeated stimuli? Like a sea slug being prodded in the same place, over and over.
And for what? All for for the sake of being a contrarian, and to stick it to the SJWs! Any last remnants of discipline and self-control are left to atrophy until the poor autist finally blurts out one of his favorite words in public and his social suicide is soon followed by the real thing. The /pol/tard's mother will shed a single tear, then sigh in relief. "The curse is lifting. It's happening."
PS:
Please go back to /pol/ and don't come back
:^)
>>7424525
>His incidiary 6edgy9me writing style would of course bate a lot of you nuttless rabbits--polemics always work well on impressionable college kids
I never understood what's edgy about him to be honest
>>7424525
>implying there's any more to life
>unironically buying into transcendentalist narratives
>not doubling down on nihilism as the ultimate amor fati
>>7425971
>nihilism
thank god I grew out of my highschool white dude nihilist phase. you eventually learn the value of empathy, you realize we are all here to make a difference, it's all part of growing up.
>>7425984
>growing out of nihilism and into new age nonsense
That's how a lot of the people who can't bear the weight of nothingness do it, family. Enjoy your platitudes.
>>7425984
>you eventually learn the value of empathy, you realize we are all here to make a difference, it's all part of growing up.
Is Max Headroom's namesake supposed to be a reference to the Spookbuster.
>>7425971
>thinks value is found in transcendental narratives and not immanent moments of experience
no wonder you had to abdicate to nihilism
nihilism is incompatible with Stirner's thought, btw. he makes value judgments.
>>7426314
>nihilism and value judgements are mutually exclusive
