CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS THESLS SIGNATURE PAGE Tl IESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF Tl IE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF ARTS IN LITERA TUR.E AND WRITING STUDIES THESIS TJTLE: Egoism and the Post-Anarchic: Max Stimer's New Individualism AUTHOR: Kristian Pr'Out DATE OF SUCCESSFUL DEFEN E: May 911' 2019 --- THE THESIS HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE THESIS COMMITTEE IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN LITERATURE AND WRITING STUDIES. Oliver Berghof August 5, 2019 TIIESIS COMMITTEE CHAIR DATE Francesco Levato 8/5/19 TIIESIS COMMITTEE MEMBER DATE Heidi Breuer �-11 THESIS COMMITTEE MEMBER DATE Pr’Out 1 Egoism and the Post-Anarchic: Max Stirner’s New Individualism Kristian Pr’Out Pr’Out 2 Table of Contents Preface 3 Chapter 1 Max Stirner: Biographers and Interpreters 13 Stirner and The Dialectic: A Genealogy of Liberalism 23 Fichte and the Unique One: Speaking the Intangible 32 Chapter 2 Stirner and the Case for Anarchism 39 Stirner’s Egoism Meets Classical Anarchism 48 Welsh’s Dialectical Egoism and Post-Anarchist Individualism 64 Chapter 3 May 1968 and Its Impact 67 Post-Anarchism: A Contemporary Theoretical Model 82 Narrative and the Critique of Modernity 89 ‘Ownness,’ Power, and The Material 92 Conclusion: A Revenant Returns 102 Bibliography 104 Pr’Out 3 Preface In the 19th century, the influence of Georg W. F. Hegel was widespread. His works influenced anarchists, communists, the moderately liberal, and the staunchly traditional. In Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit (1977), history operates in certain movements - namely, that of a world spirit that ushers in new and different epochs (6-7). The accomplishments of science render the world intelligible and perceivable to the conscious mind. Through the act of perceiving the world, one is able to understand its content (7-8). Additionally, in Elements of the Philosophy of Right (1991), Hegel asserts that one of the chief objects of reality is the state (21). More than just social, political, and governmental institutions, the state constitutes the individuals that act within it. For Hegel, the state is a necessity because it protects the lives of its members; they are a part of it because it is in their best interest to be. Indeed, to act rationally, according to Hegel, is to act according to the altruistic nature of the state. Naturally, his thought as contained within the Elements of the Philosophy of Right was problematic for his more liberal readers, as it elevates the state to something beyond reproach. A few modern interpretations, however, seem to depict Hegel not as a political sycophant, as he may have been seen, but as one who was aware of the political turmoil of his time. Hegel wrote with this in mind and was careful to avoid provocation, but was also able to offer some criticisms. However, there were, and are, others who were less concerned with any political fallout resulting from their ideas. Among the many provocateurs who read Hegel, few would be as infamous, controversial, and misunderstood as Max Stirner - a scholar that I believe is worth reconsidering. A direct student of Hegel, Max Stirner has been relatively unexplored in modern academia, notwithstanding a few mis-readings and subjective analyses. In the few instances where he has Pr’Out 4 been explored, he was either relegated to a cursory position within the history of Marxism and/ or anarchism, or he was outright dismissed for the idiosyncrasies of his thought. His definitive work, The Ego and Its Own (1995), was polarizing in its assertions. He attacked the abstractions of modern liberalism, accusing them of repurposing the old religious doctrines of servitude to the abstract and the conceptual. He repudiated government as an enemy of the individual, and finally suggested that individuals actualize their ‘uniqueness’ in voluntary unions with other egoists. The old orthodoxies would be shattered by new forms of social organization in the wake of conscious egoists, who ‘owned’ their thoughts and actions. Prompting a number of responses, Stirner’s work was dismissed as lunacy by the Prussian government, and perceived as hypocritical by his contemporaries. Karl Marx, who devoted much of The German Ideology (1932) to a critique of Max Stirner, Ludwig Feuerbach, and Bruno Bauer accused his notion of ‘uniqueness’ of being another abstraction to which people would have to conform. It was not until John F. Welsh’s work Max Stirner’s Dialectical Egoism (2010) that a new vision of Stirner was promulgated - a work that inspired this thesis. Welsh’s interpretation considered not just the thought of Stirner, but the historical and social context in which he had found himself. Stirner drifted among a circle of liberal thinkers known as “The Free,” including Feuerbach and Bauer. As a group, they published on topics such as art, history, and philosophy - all haunted by the specter of Georg W. F. Hegel. Specifically, in Stirner’s departure from Hegel we see an evolution of his own unique contribution to philosophy and social criticism. Stirner didn’t just regurgitate Hegel, he was using Hegelianism as a springboard from which to launch his own dialectical assault against modernity. Stirner begins with an analogy comparing his dialectic to certain life stages in human development, eventually resulting in an analysis of a few key historical periods: classical Pr’Out 5 philosophy, followed by the Reformation, and finally a critique of modernity. However, the idea of an overarching “spirit” that moved within each historical epoch is dismissed as nonsense. He uses the Hegelian dialectical method of tracing periods of history to their conclusion in the present as a convenience. Stirner claims that the supposedly “radical” thought that circulated among “The Free,” and modern liberals in general, was another ideology that sought to enthrall a congregation. Indeed, it was this very same notion that inhabited religious doctrine and had been re-instated in modern liberalism. Stirner’s book is divided into two parts: in the first half, Stirner begins with a summary of sorts. ‘The ancients’ (19) is a sub-heading given to an outline of the philosophical traditions of classical antiquity. He mentions the Sophists (20-21) who focus on reason and rationalism, Socrates who dabbles in morality (22), several Greek poets (25), and the Stoics (25). He concludes that the goal of classical antiquity was to ascertain the world as object, in which people find for themselves joy in knowledge and the material world. The next section, 'The moderns’ (27), is dedicated to elucidating the stranglehold of religion on contemporary society; Stirner claims that Christianity is dedicated to the fulfillment of the spirit at the detriment of the body. Modern liberalism, and one of his contemporaries in particular, Feuerbach, is guilty of re- animating the religious spirit under the guise of the moral law; the ‘spirit of Man’ has become equivalent, and possibly superior to ‘the spirit of God’. Both of these are revered beyond reproach, yet unattainable. Where modern liberals cry out for morality, freedom, and justice, they are really calling for servitude to another power greater than the individual; the spirit of morality, freedom, etc, is one that embeds itself wholly into an individual until they become mere vessels of that spirit. The spirit is what animates them, not their personhood. This is not to say that these Pr’Out 6 ideas are necessarily wrong, but Stirner warns against them becoming the absolute. He suggests that the individual maintain control over these ideas, so as to not let his ideas control him. The second half of the book is used by Stirner as an exploration of self-mastery. Whereas the first half of the book traced the genealogy of ‘spirit’, the second half explores the ways in which one may live without 'spirit’- or at least the concept of spirit as an irrefutable truth, or immovable ideal. How one can accomplish this is through an exercise in control over oneself: not to allow the 'spirit’ of an idea to haunt your every waking moment; not to surrender entirely to the realm of essences, but to remain within a space that allows for the flexibility of your personhood. This is the primary author that I explore in my thesis. Max Stirner has been largely dismissed by contemporary scholars, and the few instances where he has been cited are largely lacking in scope and content, with only a small sampling giving Stirner fair consideration. Stirner is a contemporary of Georg W. F. Hegel, but his thinking isn’t restricted to Hegel’s phenomenology in particular, or his philosophy in general. What I think Stirner is attempting is something akin to the postmodern movement; an awareness of liminality, of the slipperiness of language, and of the role of ideology in culture. He is responding to both conservatives and liberals. Some treat Stirner as an anarchist and/or a nihilist. I offer a hybridization - a looking at Stirner in the realm of post-anarchism, perhaps even in the context of a model of post- individualist anarchism. I think he provides a unique and different perspective today, in a world where movements towards social justice and political correctness are on the forefront of social and independent media. Even academia is saturated with issues of gender, race, and politics - the ideal outcome as far as I understand it is to foster a group of thinkers capable of helping people change their material conditions of existence (or at least to cultivate an awareness of their Pr’Out 7 conditions of existence). My intention is not to offer an evaluative judgment on political correctness or social justice; my intention is merely to point out that these ideas are more widely discussed than ever before and that they reflect how people see themselves and the world around them.