[  3  /  a  /  adv  /  an  /  c  /  cgl  /  ck  /  cm  /  co  /  diy  /  fa  /  fit  /  g  /  i  /  ic  /  jp  /  k  /  lit  /  m  /  mlp  /  mu  /  n  /  o  /  p  /  po  /  q  /  sci  /  sp  /  tg  /  toy  /  trv  /  tv  /  v  /  vg  /  vp  /  w  /  wg  /  wsg  /  x  ]

/lit/ Literature

Warning: All the content of this page originally come from 4chan.org. This is only a partial archive made to avoid destruction. Some posts and images may be missing. All the messages below have been posted by anonymous users and we do not guarantee any truth of what they said.
For any illegal content, please contact me so that I can immediatly destroy it!

Anonymous 2015-12-05 12:43:42 No.7423999

[Missing image file: ]

Haven't been on here in a few years... you guys still into Stirner? Or are you all reactionary losers like most of 4chan?


>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 12:46:14 No.7424006
stirner is reactionary

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 12:54:38 No.7424025
>>7424006
Opened the thread from the catalog to say this

the joke is that he isn't

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 12:54:42 No.7424027
>>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

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 12:56:52 No.7424040
>>7424027
reactionary drivel

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 12:57:22 No.7424042
>>7424040

*dribble

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 12:59:36 No.7424046
>>7423999
>reactionary losers

Please go back to tumblr and don't come back

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:00:39 No.7424051
>>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

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:03:30 No.7424055
>>7423999
What's wrong with being a reactionary?
I'd rather be that than some left-wing idiot espousing philosophical fallacies and economic misunderstandings.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:10:39 No.7424075
>>7424055

>I'd rather be a loser than this made up spook

convincing...

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:12:55 No.7424083
>>7424075
>"""""""loser"""""""""""""""""""""

wew spookotron hold up there

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:17:55 No.7424098
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:19:08 No.7424103
>>7424098
>attacking the individual over the concept
I'm you, him and everyone else here

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:19:42 No.7424106

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:23:00 No.7424115
>>7424103

>I'm you, him and everyone else here

That's a whole lot of creative nothings to have in one creative moment.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:39:39 No.7424148
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?

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:52:27 No.7424163
>>7424148
He is against all politics. He though patriotism, traditionalism and group identity in general is for unwilling egoists (morons).

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:53:29 No.7424165
>>7424148
>>7424163
Political spectrum is a spook.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:54:44 No.7424166
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 13:59:08 No.7424171
>>7424166
you pretty obviously want him to fit your ideology

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:01:32 No.7424174
>>7424046
Please go back to /pol/ and don't come back

:^)

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:02:31 No.7424175
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:05:26 No.7424180
>>7424115
Obviously an infinite amount of nothing can share the same instant, have you not eyes

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:08:57 No.7424183
>>7424180

Gee Bill, how come your mom lets you be two nothings?

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:09:33 No.7424185
>>7424175
I mean obviously yes seeing as you alluded to the idea that anarchocapitalism is sillier than anarchocommunism
(they're both ridiculous btw)

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:11:22 No.7424188
>>7424166

Against private property? I don't recall reading that anywhere in the book; in fact from what I remember it was the opposite.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:12:14 No.7424193
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:13:35 No.7424197
>>7424188

If you think Stirner advocates the concept of respecting others "property" you're the most ignorant of anyone in this thread.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:15:43 No.7424200
>>7424193
>"anarcho" capitalism or anarcho-communism
there it is

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:15:48 No.7424201
>>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!"

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:18:14 No.7424211
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:18:34 No.7424212
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:20:49 No.7424219
>>7424211
>actual capitalism
You mean actual anarchy?

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:23:09 No.7424224
>>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"

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:24:35 No.7424227
>>7424211
my implication was not that anarcho capitalism is resonable, rather that anarcho communism is equally silly

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:29:26 No.7424239
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:32:32 No.7424245
>>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

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:33:07 No.7424247
>>7424245
Do more family.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:35:09 No.7424252
>>7424245

No, no, you've made the real contribution.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:36:55 No.7424256
>>7424212
So if I drug you and lock you up in my illicit sex dungeon, you're my property?

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:38:48 No.7424261
>>7424239
I mean you clearly do call yourself an anarcho communist lets not be silly
anarchism is radical traditionalism btw

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:40:19 No.7424265
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:42:32 No.7424271
>>7424247
>>7424252
This one is less creative

I think I will make more, improve, and post the best in future Stirner threads

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:43:08 No.7424275
>>7424174
/pol/ - 4chan
/lit/ - 4chan
tumblr - tumblr

see the difference?

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:44:17 No.7424281
>>7424275

I think you may have a spook about this "4chan" identity of yours; it's clearly a fixation of yours

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:48:31 No.7424293
>>7424271

I like it; he looks mildly contented

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:51:42 No.7424307
>>7424271
It's nice.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 14:52:20 No.7424311
>>7424027
if labour becomes free the labour is cheap :^)

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:22:24 No.7424436
>>7424256
yes

welcome to stirner

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:25:52 No.7424450
>>7424271
More friend.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:30:58 No.7424475
>>7424436
I'm beginning to like him.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:33:29 No.7424480
Marx criticism of Stirner still stands

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:34:48 No.7424490
>>7424480
Marx's criticism of anything doesn't stand.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:35:32 No.7424494
>>7424490
ok buddie

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:37:16 No.7424502
>>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

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:38:06 No.7424506
>>7424502
whistler's mother?

>>
satan 2015-12-05 15:42:37 No.7424525
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,

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:44:25 No.7424534
>>7424502
It's pretty nice. He needs more hair though.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:49:35 No.7424545
>>7424525

Lol Stan have you really changed your mind on Stirner this much?

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:49:48 No.7424546
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:50:58 No.7424551
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:52:04 No.7424558
>>7424525

You used to spam Stirner relentlessly back in the day. What changed faggot?

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:52:38 No.7424561
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 15:54:15 No.7424566
>>7424558

He progressed intellectually even less than us. It's actually pretty pathetic.

>>
satan 2015-12-05 15:56:33 No.7424577
>>7424566

Oh the ironing

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 16:15:15 No.7424635
>>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

>>
satan 2015-12-05 16:15:47 No.7424636
>>7424635
Carry on my wayward son

>>
satan 2015-12-05 16:24:13 No.7424655
jk

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 16:24:44 No.7424658
>>7424655
>>>/r/books

>>
satan 2015-12-05 16:26:21 No.7424661
I could never hate on stirner u guys

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 16:27:00 No.7424667
>>7424661
prove it -_-

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 16:28:54 No.7424672
>>7424661
That's more like the stan I know.

Weew lad.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 16:29:57 No.7424678
>>7424265
So are you just an idiot or

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 16:31:33 No.7424684
>>7424667
>tfw almost satan for stan
>_<

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 16:49:08 No.7424733
>>7423999
>you guys still into Stirner?
still working on my PhD thesis, yes.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 17:00:32 No.7424759
>>7424188
>Against private property? I don't recall reading that anywhere in the book;
do you recall reading it?

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 17:05:40 No.7424778
>>7423999
Do you think Stirner could triforce?
? ? ??
? ?

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 17:08:02 No.7424785
>>7424733

whats your thesis

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 17:18:15 No.7424816
>>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)

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 17:21:38 No.7424824
>>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".''

>>
Skyrski 2015-12-05 17:42:49 No.7424904
>>7424816
>Private property is based on state authority.
>Not on the principle of self-ownership.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 17:50:09 No.7424937
>>7424904

Private property requires a state to defend it, ergo it's based on state authority.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 17:50:53 No.7424940
>>7424778
No, but I can

? ? ?
? ?

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 17:53:27 No.7424950
>>7424940
I always had faith in you, Soren. :)

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 18:33:35 No.7425114
>>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).

>>
Skyrski 2015-12-05 18:34:25 No.7425118
>>7424937
It's guaranteed by my natural rights.
>inb4 spook

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 18:37:59 No.7425130
>>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"

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 18:39:39 No.7425136
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 18:46:19 No.7425174
>>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).

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 18:47:52 No.7425181
>>7425118
Natural Rights are not fixed and unalterable, the term natural rights itself carries with it the implication of rigidity.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 18:51:34 No.7425198
>>7425118
>natural rights

nice metaphysics you got there

>>
Skyrski 2015-12-05 20:07:50 No.7425506
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 20:09:02 No.7425512
AYN RAND IS LIKE STIRNER, RIGHT?

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 20:20:56 No.7425573
>>7423999
I am, but I don't Stirnerpost as much as I used to. I have internalised him to be honest.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 20:26:31 No.7425598
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 20:28:37 No.7425609
>>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

>>
Skyrski 2015-12-05 20:53:01 No.7425687
>>7425598
>>7425609
How about an a priori, value-free rebuke?
https://mises.org/library/argumentation-ethics-and-liberty-concise-guide

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 21:03:44 No.7425718
>>7425687
>value-free anything
doesn't work that way fann

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 21:52:10 No.7425881
>>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.

>>
Anonymous 2015-12-05 21:53:43 No.7425886
ancaps are fucking dire - the place where whiny stoners and internet fascists meet.







[  3  /  a  /  adv  /  an  /  c  /  cgl  /  ck  /  cm  /  co  /  diy  /  fa  /  fit  /  g  /  i  /  ic  /  jp  /  k  /  lit  /  m  /  mlp  /  mu  /  n  /  o  /  p  /  po  /  q  /  sci  /  sp  /  tg  /  toy  /  trv  /  tv  /  v  /  vg  /  vp  /  w  /  wg  /  wsg  /  x  ]

Contact me | All the content on this website come from 4chan.org. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.

Dofus quêtes

Page loaded in 0.025323 seconds.