Why aren't you an sternerist Sup Forums?

Why aren't you an sternerist Sup Forums?

Because I'm not an idiot.

Because it's a spook

How is it idiotic?

It’s for pseuds who want to try and signal intelligence but can’t even be manage to memorise some Zizek quotes like the regular dunning kruger man and instead find the stupid drawing appealing and “cool” so just post that.

Because anarchism is for teenagers with daddy issues.

Because you're anti-racist for some reason. Why do you give inferior niggers a free pass when they're being niggers?

I'm unironically a Stirnerite, but identifying with Sirnerism hasn't prevented me from realizing that widespread recognition of his ideals can only lead to chaos and Anarchy. I'm content with having been exposed to him and his views personally, but it'd be better for them to remain marginal for the sake of society at large.

Stirnerism is a worldview devoid of ideological connotations. It does not concern itself with politics, but rather how the individual perceives oneself within the context of a greater whole.

>widespread recognition of his ideals can only lead to chaos and Anarchy.

>If everyone thought the same it would be anarchy.

You mean why am I not following some spook idea that will keep my true self from expressing itself?

It's a spook

Precisely. If everyone followed Stirner's teachings every trace of civilization on earth would be obliterated within a decade.

tbqh I interpreted Stirner a bit different

Stirner is a essentially a deconstruction of societal abstractions created to facilitate power structures and human coexistence. No society can function when all are aware of the subjective nature of such concepts.

Chile I didn't read this guy but for what I been told his ideas are "I can do whatever the fuck i want, now buy my milk ".
You can see how if everyone followed that it would lead to anarchism

Your first sentence I agree.
The second part, society can function still but people will have to accept willingly the power structures and not by saying "it's just like that" or by saying you want certain measures by the state because you follow some abstract ideology.

For example:
>You don't want people to steal because the preacher man says it's wrong.
>You don't want people to steal because it is your interest people don't steal from you.

You might think that's saying the same twice, but the first one would be said by an unknowing egoist. He thinks following the rules make him a good person.

The second phrase would be said by a conscious egoist. You do not live by the letter of the rules but by their spirit.

>people will have to accept willingly the power structures and not by saying "it's just like that"

That's excessively Utopian and impractical. Reminds me of Jacobin delusions regarding the creation of a truly enlightened populace through the power of Republicanism. There is a reason as to why spooks were constructed in the first place, and that is because most cannot be expected to abide by certain ideals knowingly.

>He thinks following the rules make him a good person.

Which is why he is inclined to follow said rule unquestioningly, thus allowing for coexistence to manifest without the needless and unachievable quest for true enlightenment. Cohesion depends entirely upon the unquestioning enforcement of certain concepts upon the majority, a majority that cannot be expected to understand the reasoning behind those concepts. A majority that is objectively incapable of following its own interests in a rational manner without spooks constraining their thoughts.

Nah he's closer to Ayn Rand than to that extreme liberalism, he believes the individual has a very decent logical determinism if you don't spook him with exaggerated claims.

>a conscious egoist. You do not live by the letter of the rules but by their spirit.

Conscious Egoists could exist as a marginal minority, but the collective at large cannot maintain coexistence in such a state.

Ayn Rand still places tremendous importance upon concepts like property. She also believed in objective morality, which Stirner disregards in its entirety.

Because he's the philosophical equivalent of the little girl that thinks the world has disappeared when she close her eyes.

I unironically only could manage one page of his idiocy before deciding it was a waste of time.

He has almost nothing in common with Rand, except that they (by accident) end up the same vicinity politically - although their differences are huge even there.

>unironic Trumptard
Opinion trashed.

>Mentally fapping to imagined reality, rather than doing what you can in the existing one.

Trump is, by orders of magnitude, a better philosopher than Stirner.

Athena is portrayed with a spear and shield for a very specific reason.

because these are the people who advocate it