>post yfw you realize he was named Max Stirner because his forehead was so huge
Stirn is German for forehead, btw
Why are there only cartoons of him? I've never seen a real picture of him.
>>335373
He was dead before camera technology was widespread and relatively cheap.
>>335373
He was pretty unknown in his time. There are no photos of him. OP's picture and this one are the only known images made by anyone that personally saw him. Both are drawn by his enemy Engels. Engels would reportedly hang up the pictures in his room and throw darts at them for hours and cursing.
>>335373
Cameras were a bit rarer in his days and most of his acclaim came after his death. Guess nobody thought to snap a picture of him.
>>335380
>Engels would reportedly hang up the pictures in his room and throw darts at them for hours and cursing.
source?
>>335373
Because there was never a photograph, or a portrait, or any real record of what he looked like.
The closest thing in existence to a real picture of him is that little cartoon, which was drawn 40 years after Engels met him just going off memory.
>>335380
Do we know what the deal was with the chair on the floor?
>>335406
Here's the full version.
It was a very rowdy scene.
Yeah, it was based on a nickname he had in school. I wonder why he chose it as a pen name.
>>335388
No source, because he is full of shit.
Engels called Stirner brother, or old friend. He reviewed his books, and paid for his staying there.
Is this him?
>>335556
no.
>>335519
>naming yourself giant forehead
that's some nietzsche-tier self acceptance
>>335217
spooky
>>335689
he literally invented nietzsche
>mfw discovering stirner was a kek and a wittol
>>335861
So thats what the face of a haunted man looks like.
>>335861
wittol?
>>335861
Should we care?
>>336030
>I don't dismiss the notion of spooks
I never said that you did.
>>336118
>definitions are now spooks
top kek mate, if you're legally married and your wife is fucking others you are a kek, no buts or if.
>>336123
Once again I didnt say you used the word incorrectly or that you dismissed the notion of spooks.
>>336131
You claim the image was the face of someone who was haunted.if I were acknowledging the term spooks then that means I have already rose above them (as much as one can anyways)
>>336133
My comment was more regarding the fact that only someone accosted with spooks would react in such a way to that part of the meme mans life.
>>336134
Sure they would.
>>336138
Exactly
>>336143
Nah man. It's as simple as not wanting to eat your food with bits of feces in it (or can end up pregnant). I suppose that in an STD free world then only a spooked person would react that way.
>>336150
>Nah man. It's as simple as not wanting to eat your food with bits of feces in it (or can end up pregnant). I suppose that in an STD free world then only a spooked person would react that way.
Yeah but that seems to be a justification cooked up by people trying to cloth their spooky relvsions in reason. Were your point correct then people would find the fact that his milk bar used unpasteurized milk just as bad.
Peoples concern with cheating and sexuality goes far beyond personal safety.
>>336166
I didn't say people weren't spooked, I was just saying that someone can still be an Egoist a la stirner and still react that way for the reason I mentioned.
>>336172
Of course in the same way one can be a religous martyr whilst still being an egoist. Always possible but on the balance unlikley.
For instance most soldiers who went to risk their lives in WWI werent Ernst Younger types despite the possibility
>>336179
True. It's also likely (if you believe in instinct and evolution) that the only people defending kekoldry and wittols on the grounds of spooks actually get off to it themselves rather than being genuine egoists, but it doesn't mean it isn't possible.
no TRUE egoist
holy shit the spookery in this thread
>>336184
I tend to see it more as people who were revolting against the traditional ideas of marriage and cohabitation. This is especially the case when it comes to the anarchist left which has a reputation for such views and sexual openess.
>>336200
Well, as Willhelm Reich might assert, it's both. Fighting for sexual freedom is done for pleasure and liberty.
>>335393
And it was made for the first gay magazine in Europe.
>>335861
Considering he didn't hold fidelity sacred, I'm not sure that he cared.
slowspooke
>>336179
>Of course in the same way one can be a religous martyr whilst still being an egoist
I really don't think so. He'd have to be putting a divine authority above himself. To be religious in anything but the most ridiculously dishonest and superficial sense, you have to hold the divine as something sacred, fixed, and untouchable.
>>338229
I wonder how someone that had the strongest argument for hedonism was strangely stoic and reserved in behavior, save smoking fine cigars.
>>338291
Well, I think he just did what he wanted to do. Even the pursuit of pleasure, should you let it overcome you and become something sacred to you can become another spook to enslave you.
cptn spooks
>>338291
Right at the beginning of 'The Ego and Its Own' is a compelling egoist argument against hedonism T B H F A M
>>338322
A Stirnernian is always free!
>>338353
No, freedom is a Christian value that can wind up as yet another spook to enslave you. An egoist owns himself, and everything that he is strong enough to claim, acting as he will.
>>338353
kek, don't you see the inherent contradiction ?
You're spooked, my friend
post your spooks
>>338466
RARE
A
R
E
>>335556
Yes, it is.
>>335556
That's Rudolph Steiner, not Johann Kaspar Schmidt (Max Stirner).
If only he knew that he would be a shitty meme for "philosophical" manchildren in the 21st century...
How would he react??
>>338538
memes are a spook
>>338538
I really don't think he'd care. As far as I can tell, he was writing out of profound disagreement and dissatisfaction with supposedly radical, secular thinkers of the time.
>>338548
so he was shitposting before the internet
>>338555
No, what he said has substance, and was stated from a genuine standpoint. Disagreement and dissatisfaction is not what makes a shitposter a shitposter; it's the fact that they post nothing of substance for the sole purpose of causing discord and dysfunction that makes them a shitposter.
>>338564
Diogenes?
>shitpost on Plato's lectures
>literally shitpost on the city walls
>>338567
Sort of, but Diogenes was also willing to back up his points logically and thought that his way would make things better. He was just a fucking asshole.
The problem with calling philosophers shitposters is that there are few who write philosophy strictly for the purpose of making things worse for everyone.
Wow. Saint Max on the chan! Anyone here familiar with the 80s-90's post-lefty anarch zine ANARCHY: A JOURNAL OF DESIRE ARMED? And if so, what do y'all think of their take on individualism? I suppose "their take" was best represented by their "editorial stance" and the writings of their regular contributors and prominent individualist anti-authoritarians like Bob Black, Tad Kepley, Feral Faun/Wolfi Landstreicher et al.... curious what the opinions out there might be.
>>338600
Heard of it, never read it. Post-leftism always seemed really weird to me, even by the standards of anarchism.
>>338600
>movement
>something stirner would agree with
they're spooked
>>335417
>a flying squirrel
Ok
>>338600
Filthy anarkek, don't make me bring out the chains.
>>338879
He'll still own himself, and labor only for his own benefit; ready to shake off his chains the second the opportunity should present itself.
>>338908
i had a kek
