Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

polpotisevil2 wrote

A spook can absolutely be a spook and be beneficial to the individual. If the individual recognizes a spook and puts themselves above it and destroy it, and use it for their ends, then it has ceased to be a "spook" for the individual, but is still so for others.

No, it is not important that it is codified. I'm surprised you have (supposedly) read Stirner and still throw out words like justice, "mitigate negative consequences of people's actions", etc. You realize these are all subjective and doom the individual to communal slavery? If you disagree with individualism (and it seems you do), you may go ahead, and we can discuss that more deeply if it is the case. I'll start it off.

False accusations of crime is a very large topic. I expect it will boil down to a few differences on the topic of civilization itself, but why would someone falsely accuse someone of a crime and why would they be believed? Fail-safes against such accusations are trust, character, and preventing the opportunity. There are others that don't involve a court getting involved and deciding it. It should be obvious of course that courts are also just as susceptible to error as a non-court result.

If you want to pedant and say Stirner is against not killing and murdering people cuz "that's just a spook bro" then you haven't read the man it's that simple.

What are you talking about? Stirner wasn't against or for people killing and murdering, he was for it being considered for the individual by the individual himself, all while recognizing morals, as you want to establish them included, as societies impositions as to whether it was something they should do; and justify to themselves.

It doesn't seem to me that you have read the man, and if you have, perhaps you went through the material far too quick to understand it and are one of those who read but do not bother to comprehend the material.

If you want to discuss what Stirner meant by passages you have read, I'm totally game for a discussion and reading on Stirner's work. I have already cited one myself.

3