Understanding Stirner.

[Chris Hiv_E_]

This could also go under Literature I suppose, so if it needs to be moved please do so.

I am currently reading No Gods, No Masters. And I have gotten through the section containing Stirners essays, and I did not fully understand how egoism and individualism were being refered to in it. If someone could please take the time to break it down for me it would be very much appreciated because I do not want to move on further in the book until I have understood all I've read so far.

[coda]

========================

[Chris Hiv_E_]

Alright, Suprisingly the discussion thread helped. I pretty much started reading the book thinking that much of the essays would be very closely linked to my values/beliefs, and thats where I went wrong. The misunderstanding I thought I was seeing was actually just a disagreement with a lot of his logic.

[YSR]

Hey hey, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. In No Gods, No Masters, I think Guerin includes the bit explaining free association, which (as I mentioned in the discussion thread) is really cool.

This has been my prime way of dealing with primitivists and Stalinists. It's like, "hey man, if you wanna do your thing, go crazy, but if you do it in my town, I'ma have to check out." The idea that human institutions should be based on mutual choice is pretty cool. While the individualism of Stirner has its (tremendous) drawbacks, I think it is not discussed enough by the other anarchists and Stirner presents a valid perspective.

[Chris Hiv_E_]

Well yes the idea of human institutions being mutual choice is pretty cool. I mean how else would an anarchist society move forward technologically.

[working class revolutionary]

I really enjoyed reading Stirner, well, the excerpts from No Gods, No Masters. He saw society as something oppressive and reactionary, as opposed to the free association of individuals.

Good stuff. :D