“A Union of Egoists on the Printed Page”


Via an unexpected collaboration with Chip Smith of The Hoover Hog, Enemies of Society, the individualist-anarchist digest I mentioned in a previous post, is now available through his publishing house, Nine-Banded Books—with a sales pitch scribed by Yours Truly!

As an observant Teuton once remarked, “our atheists are pious people.” Some 167 years later, our most outspoken “freethinkers” continue to deify concepts in a manner befitting the religionists against whom they rail. Rather than slaying the Sacred, these ostensible infidels have merely transubstantiated it to suit their own psychological needs. And given the grab bag of idols they insist on subjecting themselves (and others) to, their needs must be legion! Such is the situation, when even the spirited souls who shake off this shackle or that end up enmeshing themselves within a thousand more: “Gaia,” “Democracy,” “Race,” “The Greater Good,” and “Humanity,” to name but a few. Even anarchists—mouthers of the mantra “no gods, no masters”— find themselves in thrall and worship to these conceptual chimeras. Under such sanctimonious skies, every breath becomes a blasphemy.

Fortunately, there are those who respire away such reifications with an unfettered gust of the lung. Not content to reject God and the State, anarchic egoists spit on the Social Contract, puke on Posterity, sodomize Society, and murder Morality. Why, they even pause to urinate on the Übermensch along the way!

Inspired by the work of the late, great Max Stirner (the reprobate earlier referenced), the likes of S.E. Parker, James L. Walker, and Renzo Novatore proudly affirm the primacy of their personal desires, slaughtering every sacred cow dumb enough to stand in their way. Their words, along with those of other individualist anarchists, can be found within Enemies of Society, an anthology best described as a union of egoists on the printed page. Forget those tiresome tomes preaching “social anarchism,” anarcho-communism, or some other uninspired utopianism; this is the beating heart behind the very notion of anarchy: Unbowed, unorthodox, untethered—unique.

Meet the beasts who shouted “I” at the heart of the world.

Especially great news for any non-Stateside readers, seeing as 9BB’s international postage isn’t quite as oppressive on the wallet as Little Black Cart’s.

Oh, and be sure to check out the other publications in Chip’s “recreational thoughtcrime” catalogue: you might just find something else to your taste…

UPDATE (9/6/12): It would appear the Hog has given me honourable mention, and I’ve learned a new Teutonism—querdenker.


This entry was posted in Amoralism, Anarchism, Egoism, Personal and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

10 Responses to “A Union of Egoists on the Printed Page”

  1. Very entertaining. Now, I have slain Morality but I find myself becoming ever moral and more confident in my morals than ever before. As one might say:

    “Why is an incontrovertible mathematical truth, which might even be called eternal according to the common understanding of words, not – sacred? Because it is not revealed, or not the revelation of, a higher being.”

    Thus we rediscover the universality in the unique one, we ‘repatriate’ it, and can move with Galt-like levels of confidence and self possession. I find moral(rather than Moral) truths in myself as I find mathematical ones. What say you?

    I must say that even as one of Stirner’s biggest fans..I have severely underestimated him.

    • MRDA says:

      I’d say that amoral egoism is conducive not to morality, but a certain authenticity, or integrity. Once you see all the Thou Shalts as nothing other than a set of opinions and wishes from various external parties, you can happily discard them and examine what really motivates you in life: in short, establish an internal locus of control.

      • Right, and here you are already basically admitting my point probably because we are really not of such different mindset at all – if there is some “authenticity” then there is some identity and means of valuation in you and thereby it contains some order and thus on the basis of the consistency of order and values a morality arises. A living, breathing morality rather than a set of fixed rules. ‘Morality’ taken generically as just value-coherent behavior. In other words, a context-laden morality. Let me put it this way: if we didn’t have any morality at all then we would be clueless even as to how to make our own decisions concerning only ourselves! To paraphrase a philosopher – freedom without restraint is meaningless. It is this ‘restraint’ (ie, this order) which provides the grounds for the so called ‘morality’ along with identity generally. Freedom can only exist within some measure of order, otherwise it is complete chaos, meaningless.

        This would be analogous to the physical phenomenon of friction; without friction we wouldn’t be able to move purposefully or work meaningfully. Yet if we look only at when friction slows us down..which appears to be all the time…then we might curse it. But it also enables us. In fact we would be helpless without it.

        I feel that Stirner’s contribution is to help us recognize the process and historical side of truth and to bring it into meaningful relation to absolute truth in ourselves. In the past, people mostly obsessed over static and absolute truth as the only kind. Yet our world also has a historical process component with an ever-evolving ‘personality’/status and as such it cannot ever be fully captured by fixed rules. Stirner represents something amazing – the intimation between contingent and absolute truth. This intersection is where the magic happens, where meaning and potent action are generated and ‘owned’.

        “Rightness of limitation is essential for growth of reality.”
        -A.N. Whitehead

        • MRDA says:

          At the same time, integrity may be synonymous with what is generally called “evil” for certain people; that, or a stark mix of commonly perceived “good” and ” evil” traits: there’s a reason I avoid use of the (rather loaded) term “morality”.

          In any case, I’m adding you to my blog list.

        • henrymoore says:

          I had a similar discussion to this early this morning. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that if there is no morality except what we each define for ourselves, it is still morality (even if that term is a big turn-off), and it can still manifest itself in orderly conduct.

          I would add that since it is a decentralized morality, like most things when not centralized, it works better than purposefully (as opposed to “organically”, that which arises out of mere coincidence of interests) collective morality.

  2. Aurini says:

    Goddamn, that post got my blood up. We need to drink whiskey and fist-fight sometime.

    Note to self: write a LInkage is Good For You post about the melanite.

  3. Pingback: A Letter to a Friend, by Laurance Labadie | MRDA's Inferno

  4. Pingback: Step Out of My Sunshine! Reflections of a Libertarian Cynic « Attack the System

  5. Pingback: Step Out of My Sunshine! Reflections of a Libertarian Cynic | MRDA's Inferno

  6. Pingback: Step Out of My Sunshine! Reflections of a Libertarian Cynic | Mere Anti Statism

Leave a Reply