/lit/ - Literature

please stay on twitter/discord with low quality posts like this

anything following individualist and anarchist is a lie.
if you truly believed in individualism you would realize some individual simply do not want to help others, and if you do not respect their position then you are not an individualist. Freedom = responsability

>>14348898
Socialism != helping people, read Stirner and Tucker. Socialism is simply a disregard for capitalist ownership of the means of production. It doesn't entail surrendering these to society as a whole (of course, Marxists and other humanistic socialists may desire collectivization, but fuck them).

>>14348878
Im confused, how am I supposed to square government ownership of industry with my propery when I'm not the government?

>>14349068
>socialism is government ownership

>>14349311
who owns what in your scenario?

>>14348878
because the self is empty and has no nature in itself

>>14349323
You get the say. As in, you made the company 200k last year and you get to say what's to be done with it.

Who was right about religion: Camus or Kierkegaard?

>>14348878
Was that drawed guy so fucking ugly and autistic and cringe like those ridiculous neets that he puts a fucking drawing instead Of a picture ?

>>14349516
Stirner lived and died before cameras were common place. The drawing is by Friedrich Engels.

>>14349323
Those who contribute labor yield the fruits of their labor without regard for capitalist authority over production. It is possible for laborers to own their workplaces without either capitalists or the state; Catalonia, the Free Territory, and the myriad successful workers cooperatives are all ample proof.

>>14349516
no, he was a secret alter ego of Engels

Because i'm not homosexual

>>14348878
I’m not a teenager anymore.

>>14348878
Camus criticized Stirner

>>14349545
He was still an individual socialist though.

>>14349529
Rojava as well.

>when you make your own mystery cult

>>14349687
Cursed image

>>14349587
Exactly, as well as the EZLN territories. State vs capitalists is a false dichotomy, the state and capitalists regularly collaborate to suppress the worker.

>>14349516
Please don't leave, beautiful one.

https://youtu.be/z0qW9P-uYfM

>>14351177
>>14349529
>>14349587
I know this is a retarded question, but what is the difference between this and syndicalism?

>>14349516
I am certainly no neet if you think that. I have to even put up with being felt up by the boss and I do not like it.

>>14351249
In practice, not much (Stirner was essentially a syndicalist economically), but individualist socialism places particular philosophical emphasis on the ideals of individualism, as opposed to the materialism of other socialist ideologies. This is essential, as history has shown that without a strong yearning for individual dignity and liberty, socialism can be easily infiltrated by authoritarianism, and then devolve into state-capitalism.

>>14349587
That's a myth btw

>>14351249
>>14351569
There's not really any unifying ideology known as "individualist socialism", as it is a myriad of ideologies only united by a combination of autonomous labor and absolute individualism. Obviously, this leaves a lot of variation, from Wilde's Utopian socialism to Stirner's Egoism, to even Konkin's black market anarchism. If you're genuinely interested in this set of ideologies, I could give you a basic reading list as a starting point for your own exploration (I've been meaning to make a full reading chart, but I frankly haven't had the energy).

>>14349687
>Individualism
>Willingly subjugating one's desires before one's bourgeois lord for most of one's life
Ok Am*rican

>>14351604
I'm genuinely interested, and a reading list would be appreciated

>>14348878
Rosenstock is that you

>>14351931
Alright, excellent. So to start, make sure you have a solid foundation with philosophy, in particular political philosophy (the Greeks, the Romans, the Classical Liberals, etc. There's probably hundreds of reading lists for gaining a philosophical foundation.) Additionally, I'd recommend reading Proudhon, as he gives an excellent foundation for socialism that isn't based on Marxism. From this foundation, I'd recommend starting with The Ego and Its Own, as it gives the essence of absolute individualism, and influences those I mention later.

Now that Stirner has given you a breathtaking entrance to individualism (and not that pussy Rand shit, REAL individualism) you can start reading according to what facets interest you.

For serious political science, I'd recommend reading Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker, as both apply individualist anarchism to society. You should probably read "No Treason" by Spooner, then "Inividual Liberty" by Tucker. Keep in mind that Spooner can be spooked by liberalism in his early writings, but he grows out of it after the Civil War. Additionally, from here the left-libertarians pursue fascinating theory, merging Austrian economics with labor empowerment, so I would proceed to them after Spooner and Tucker.

For philosophy, I'd recommend starting with The Soul of Man Under Socialism by Wilde. This book delves into the fostering of individualism by socialism. Do keep in mind that Wilde's concept of socialism is very Utopian, so you might want to read it alongside Tucker to keep yourself grounded. From there, Wilde's other works and fiction maintain his anti-materialist individualism. For more on this end, Thoreau, Emerson, and Nietzsche are all excellent individualist philosophers, but understand that due to the statism of Marx they generally avoid socialism, so take them with a grain of salt. From there, Camus is a truly extraordinary individualist, although his humanism clashes with many of the aforementioned figures.

So, upon grasping both the economic and philosophical facets of individualist socialism, you should be well founded. Still, it's important to keep an open mind, and as you progress with these figures, make sure you study their opponents as well (Marx, Lenin, Satre, etc.). Individualist socialism is groundbreaking thought, and I hope you find answers in your pursuit along this track.

>>14352053
This is awesome, thank you!

I was an anarchist when I was like 16 but I realised that what I don't like is punishment and not the state as an abstract concept and most anarchists love punishment and revenge and love angry mobs.

>>14348878
>Oscar Wilde is one of my main influences
I just hope you know you're no better than the Objectivists.

>>14353684
Marxism != socialism as a whole, Stirner was a socialist

anything that has "indivdualism" as one of its epithets goes straight into the trashcan, we are living in an age of unprecedented individualism and look what this has culminated in - social atomism, the idea that every man is an island, breeds nothing but nihilism, degeneracy and corruption of morals. we need more collectivism than ever, not more of the same individualistic disease that has gotten us to where we stand. the difference between psychology and sociology is the difference between silent dissidence and loud collective mass protest. collectivism is the correct standpoint not merely philosophically but practically too - no great movement nor a great revolution could ever take place in a society modeled after Stirner's union of egoists, not to mention that we are all socially conditioned and therefore any individuality is a mere illusion, any attempt to abstract the individual from the collective is doomed to fail. I predict that the 21st century will see a resurgence of mass movements although it is hard to forecast whether they will be simply repetitions of 20th centuries movements like fascism and communism or are we going to see some political novelties.

>>14353684 (retard numbers for retards)
10-4, dinosaur

>>14348878
Individualist anarchism isn’t socialist nor is it individualist. Tucker was a capitalist dog. Nice spooks

>>14353859
based bakuninist

>>14353859
>breeds nothing but nihilism, degeneracy, and corruption of morals
And?

>>14353889
>Thinking private enterprise, even when composed out of common ownership by the laborers, is the same as capitalism
Even better spooks on your end buddy

>>14354089
Not >>14353889, but are you an ironic spook, or are you unironically stupid?

>>14354213
What, you really think that advocating unions that aren't publicly owned is somehow capitalism? Stirner was incredibly against the society at large being entitled to the fruits of another's labor, unless they acquire it by force. You're a fucking mong if you can't tell the difference between Tuckerite socialism and capitalism