/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6978794]

You have to live under a government that bases its entire rule on either the ego and its own or leviathan

which do you pick

[Anonymous No.6978804]

Just stirn my shit up fam

[Anonymous No.6978810]

what would the equivalent of a 2015 fedora be in stirner's time? Because I feel like he would wear one

[Anonymous No.6978852]

>>6978794
I would probably kill myself they're both retarded fam tbh smh

[Anonymous No.6978863]

>>6978794
Leviathan of course

Hobbes is based

[Anonymous No.6978881]

>>6978794
Stirner of course, Fuck that other fascist mother fucker

[Anonymous No.6978969]

a government based on stirners ideas would be entirely based on the person ruling the thing, and everyone else would give zero shits about the law except when it benefits them

[Anonymous No.6978986]

The Stirnerist movement would be easier to subvert, should i have to live under it.

[Anonymous No.6979009]

>>6978794
You can't base a government on Stirner's thought since he isn't prescribing any particular type of politics. Stirner is compatible with every political system.

[Anonymous No.6979025]

>>6979009
>>6979009
>You can't base a government on Stirner's thought
correct, because the political thought he espouses is radical individualist anarchism, which definitely does not work with every political system.

oh and stirner, hobbes is a fuccboi tbh

[Anonymous No.6979030]

>>6979009

Stirner is not compatible with a statist society.

[Anonymous No.6979036]

>>6979025
Calling him an anarchis too much of an allegiance to political ideology. Stirnerism is perfectly compatible with fascism as well for example as long as it benefits the individual in question. Radical individualist opportunism would be a better way of putting it.

[Anonymous No.6979040]

>>6979030
Stirner is compatible with any arrangement of society. There is no 'thou shalt not have states' spook in Stirner's philosophy that is somehow ethically normative.

[Anonymous No.6979043]

>>6979036
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/max-stirner/

However, Stirner's book can plausibly be claimed to have had an immediate and destructive impact on contemporary left-Hegelianism, to have played a significant role in the intellectual development of Karl Marx (1818–1883), and to have influenced the tradition of individualist anarchism.
>and to have influenced the tradition of individualist anarchism.
>individualist anarchism.

[Anonymous No.6979047]

>>6979040

That is like saying Stirner is compatible with Christianity since it isn't ethically normative.

[Anonymous No.6979050]

>implying we all don't already live in societies where Leviathan is the model for government

[Anonymous No.6979062]

>>6979047
Stirner isn't compatible with Christianity as an ideology, but it is compatible with a Christian state. In that way he also isn't compatible with fascist ideology (muh state over everything) but he is compatible with a fascist arrangement if it works out for him. Stirner is about the self, not an ideology of the self. He's an egoist, not an individualist.

>>6979043
Note the word 'influenced'. Very important. To influence something and to be something are different things.

[Anonymous No.6979070]

>>6979062

You right nigga, I retract my assertions.

[Anonymous No.6979073]

>>6979036
>"I am free in no State"
>"The State always has the sole purpose to limit, tame, subordinate, the individual - to make him subject to some generality or other."

an egoist is not fit for any State-oriented society, nor any anarchic commune. Thus, individualist anarchism
>spooks spooks spooks spooks

[Anonymous No.6979089]

>>6978794

[Anonymous No.6979095]

>>6979073
An egoist is fit for a State-oriented society if it allows him to achieve what he desires. He only needs as much freedom to do what he wants. He doesn't desire freedom for it's own sake, it's only a means to an end. If you have enough freedom to acquire your ends, asking for more of it is silly. Pic related.

If by individualist anarchism you mean doing whatever the fuck you want, I agree. But that has little to do with politics and matters of the State. Such an individualist anarchist would just seek to do as he please, not spend his time trying to topple structures of authority. Going behind their backs would be enough.

[Anonymous No.6979132]

>>6979095
Another quote in addition to this:

>I say: Liberate yourself as far as you can, and you have done your part; for it is not given to every one to break through all limits, or, more expressively: not to every one is that a limit which is a limit for the rest. Consequently, do not tire yourself with toiling at the limits of others; enough if you tear down yours. Who has ever succeeded in tearing down even one limit for all men? Are not countless persons to-day, as at all times, running about with all the "limitations of humanity"? He who overturns one of his limits may have shown others the way and the means; the overturning of their limits remains their affair.

[Anonymous No.6979295]

>>6979089
spurdo really is the best thing to happen to /lit/

[Anonymous No.6979381]

>>6979295
XDDDDD ebin mene m8
t. Vars Suoolinnimaa

[Anonymous No.6979412]

Spin the hobbes wheel and hope it lands on a friendly Leviathan