/lit/ - Literature

>>20433975
The Ego and Her Own by Maxine Stirner.

>>19021283
>respected
spook
>society
spookiety
>ranks
more like spooks amiright?
>career
spookeer
>family
spookily
>legacy
spookacy

>>18381778
Postan

>>18132449

Why is Stirner not popular these days?

I know he was suppressed back in his time for undermining social cohesion, but in an age of constant deconstructionist thought you would think he would gain prominence? I know there are a handful of slackers and edgelords who like Stirner's ideas and meme about him here and elsewhere but he never turned into a real cultural figure like other thinkers despite being surrounded by and responding to some of the most popular ones.

Is it just too hard for people to accept despooking? Do they read his long barrage of spooks, see one they like, and put him down for fear of losing grasp to parts of their identity? Why are people getting spooked nearly two centuries later?

>>12086718
>implying
I can play the antinatalist better than the antinatalist themselves by explaining why people breed while using the views of antinatalism itself to disprove it.
People seek to impose their will on the world and by doing so, condemn people to living, knowing full well the pain of living. Yet they do so anyways because of selfish reasons.
Ultimately, antinatalists are idiots that think that people will act in altruistic selfless interest for people that will never be born!
>don't breed, think of the people you'll cause misery by giving them life!

But the thing is that most people don't see this as a 'causing suffering' when bringing life to this wrong because of their self-interest. This is why most life created either accidental or on purpose is always selfish and why the general public will never accept antinatalism. It's betting on people being purely selfless to abstractions.
Or to put it in a way that /lit/ would understand: thinking that avoiding pain is 'good' is a spook

--
So come on, now that I've given the best arguments against antinatalism, surely you'll explain how I shouldn't care for my self-interest and think of invisible unborn people!

>>11114746
I wouldn't mind a doujin of loli Ayn Rand and Stirner yuring it up desu

>>10149228
I will always find it hilarious that the three big three egotist, Nietzsche, Ayn Rand and Stirner, were either cucked or cucks.
Nietzsche got cucked by Lou Salmone and lived miserably.
Ayn Rand cucked her husband and then got cucked by her lover for another woman and lived miserably.
Stirner cucked a friend's wife and never gave a fuck.

Moral of the story is to always cuck or else you will be cucked.

>>8926141
Spook spook spook.
She put a gun to his head and couldn't even decide if he should live.

>>8880551
Spook'd

I finally figured out how to explain that Striner is shit.
He's a cuck who advocates for everyone to being a cuck.

He wants everyone to share his property and doesn't really care if people use it. If the goal of life is to acquire more property, a lover would be his property that he lets other use as they wish.

Thus, anyone who likes Striner is advocating for being a cuck.

>>8677110
No, I'm telling you to find a woman who represents your values and that you value her highly in your hierarchy of values. And that her race, skin color, or anything else doesn't matter so long as you love her unless you already value your race and a sense of duty towards your race above your own happiness.

Here's a question for you, if you found a girl that was quick witted, read a lot more books then you, went to a well educated school, is pretty decent in terms of looks, and you really click with her in a romantic way, would you fall in love with her even if she's another race than you?

If you value the well being and future of your collective over your own happiness, you'll say no. But if you value your own happiness over your duty towards your race, you'll say yes.

The reason I have an annoying fixation that marrying within your race is a spook is simply the concept of duty and the fact that the alt right is annoying on this subject.
>OMG, THIS PERSON WAS IN CONTACT WITH A BLACK PERSON, SHE OR HE IS IMPURE!

It's simply a collectivist tactic that is used on all sides
>this person talked to a guy who is an MRA! We feminist can no longer accept this person in our group

Do whatever you want, love someone who makes live more valuable and worth living rather than the spook of prolonging your duty towards your race.

>Are you trying to get with some white girls, Tyrone?
No, towards any girl. It doesn't matter if she's white, black, asian or an alien.

>>8677121
That's inherently wrong.

>>8658837
>Rationality bottoms out at a certain point.
No, it doesn't. You derive value out of your life and whatever will give you happiness. Reason helps you attain that goal. Taking a leap of faith is commitment to an ideal or position, which, obviously, is known as a spook.
Each ideology has semblances of truth and unknown faults, all trying to obtain the perfect ideology that encompass truth and everything.

Rationality only bottoms out when humans collectively can no longer think or when there is nothing new to discover. Until then, rationality will never bottom out.

>>8651276
Shame is a tactic of the collectivist.