/dead/ - Post-Left

I did
marx was too autistic for stirner. he read ironic parts as earnest positive theory.

>>3457
Hippity-hoppity, your meme is now My property.

>>3455
Marx liked Stirner, hence why he didnt publish his screeds against him.

>>3463
I tend to think that he didn't publish it because he either couldn't do that at the time for whatever reason or wanted to deliberately stab Stirner in the back so he wouldn't have time to refute his arguments like he did to others in Stirner's Critics so Marxism will remain victorious and become popular with woke college kids on campuses while Stirner will be forgotten.

>>3455
Engels: *sends a letter praising Stirner, calling it the basis for >communism
>???
>Marx writes a criticism of Stirner in the German Ideology that is more huge than anything Stirner wrote, filled with name calling and ultimately left unpublished.
>Later in "Ludwig Feuerbach and the End Of German Philosophy" Engels just reduces Stirner to a footnote and associates him with Bakunin

What an odd development

>>3457
stirner never read the german ideology because it wasnt published until the 20th century
also, stirner didnt say ratarded shit and paddled back afterwards. he simply used irony to create negative theory, to critizie. marx just couldnt handle that because he was an earnest theorist.

>>3463
marx definetly wouldnt have developed historical materialism without reading the unique

>>3472
they feared the power of the spook man so they tried to pretend he doesn't exist

>>3473
>also, stirner didnt say ratarded shit and paddled back afterwards. he simply used irony to create negative theory, to critizie. marx just couldnt handle that because he was an earnest theorist.
I still would imagine Stirner saying that just to mess with Marx.

>>3475
Unlikely. Stirner didnt really mention marx in the unique. he talked about communism, but it reads more like a saint-simon-type conception of communism rather than a marxist one. Like we have to keep in mind that in the times Stirner wrote the Unique Marx was not a well known theorist. If at all, he was known as a journalist. Proudhon, Feuerbach and Bauer were just much more relevant before the 1848 revolution, which is why they are mentioned directly.
Of course I agree that Stirner definetly used irony or provocation in the Unique, but even then the goal wasn't to mess with Marx specificly. Imo Stirner probably didn't know Marx or only as part of the rheinische, his journal.

>>3476
I was referring to the meme above, not to the book. Like, imagine Stirner saying that to a pissed-off Marx. I mean, in Philosophical Reactionaries we had this paragraph of Stirner making fun of his contemporaries:
>Do you philosophers actually have an inkling that you have been beaten with your own weapons? Nothing but an inkling. What retort can you hearty fellows make against it, when I again dialectically demolish what you have just dialectically put up? You have shown me with what “eloquence” one can make all into nothing and nothing into all, black into white and white into black. What do you have against it, when I turn your neat trick back on you? But with the dialectical trick of a philosophy of nature, neither you nor I will cancel the great facts of modern natural research, no more than Schelling and Hegel did. Precisely here the philosopher has revealed himself as the “clumsy” subject; because he is as ignorant in a “clumsified” sphere in which he has no power, as a witless Gulliver among the giants.

I would imagine that if he read The German Ideology he would mock the hell out of Marx's ass.

>>3471
this is the stupidest thing. If marx really had that in mind it only would serve to prove his total intellectual ineffectiveness against stirner's ideas.

>>3485
I would kill for a time machine so I could go back, hand Stirner a copy of "The German Ideology", and get a snap shot of his massive forhead. I've always wondered how he would respond to his critique of his use of lumpenproletariat. Something tells me it would be a bit more nuanced than Marx anticipated.