Enemies of Society An Anthology of Individualist & Egoist Thought by Various Authors

Various Authors. Enemies of Society: An Anthology of Individualist & Egoist Thought. Ardent Press

This book tells the story of the most neglected tendency in anarchist thought; egoism. The story of anarchism is usually told as a story of great bearded men who had beautiful ideas and a series of beautiful failures, culminating in the most beautiful failure of them all in the Spanish Civil War. A noble history of failed ideas and practice.

Egoism, and individualist anarchism, suffers a different kind of fate. It is not a great history and glorious failure but an obscure series of stories of winning. Victory defined by the only terms that matter, those who lived life to their fullest and whose struggle against the existing order defined them. This struggle was not one of abstractions, of Big Ideas, but of people attempting to claim an authentic stake in their own life.

Inspired by the writings of Stirner's "The Ego and His Own" the assertion these people make it not of the composition of a better world (for everyone) but of how the machinations of society, especially one of abstractions and Big Ideas, have shaped the individual members of that society. How everything that we know and believe has been shaped by structure and intent into a conformed, denatured shadow of what we could be.

Individualists anarchists have always argued that anarchism should not be a version of heaven on earth but a "plurality of possibilities". This has relegated their activity to the actions that people make in their lives rather than participating in political bodies and formations that shape, and participate in, society. Egoists have gone to war with this world, robbed banks, practiced free love, and won everything except those things worth nothing: history, politics, & acceptance by society.

People like you have been denounced as "enemies of society". No doubt you would indignantly deny being such and claim that you are trying to save society from the vampire of the State. You delude yourselves. Insofar as "society" means an organized collectivity having one basic norm of behavior that must be accepted by all (and that includes your libertarian communist utopia) and insofar as the norm is a product of the average, the crowd, the mediocre, then anarchists are always enemies of society. There is no reason to suppose that the interests of the free individual and the interests of the social machine will ever harmonize, nor is it desirable that they should. Permanent conflict between the two is the only perspective that makes any sense to me. But I expect that you will not see this, that you will continue to hope that if you repeat "the free society is possible" enough times then it will become so.

Preamble: First Blood vii

1. Rejecting the Stamp of Group Approval: first wave individualists in the US and Europe

James L. Walker: A Unique One 2
What is Justice? by James L. Walker 3
On Rights, by James L. Walker 6
Stirner on Justice, by Tak Kak 7
Selfhood Terminates Blind Man?s Bluff, by Tak Kak 11
Egoism in Sexual Relations, by Tak Kak 13
Egoism, by John Beverley Robinson 14
Biographical note: John Beverley Robinson 17
The Land of the Altruists: a parable for the infant class, by John Beverly Robinson 18
Posterity: the New Superstition, by Benjamin De Casseres 20
Zo d'Axa's Heresy 24
Individualism, by Pierre Chardon 31
Biographical note: Pierre Chardon 33
What do the Individualists Want? by The "Reveil De L'Eschlave Group of Paris 34
Renzo Novatore Outlaw Anarchist, by Daniel Giraud 36
Iconoclasts, Forward! 38
Cry of Rebellion, by Renzo Novatore 39
In the Kingdom of the Spooks, by Renzo Novatore 47
Biographical note: Renzo Novatore 45
The Bonnot Gang: A Reminiscence, by E. Bertran 49
Notes on Individualism, by E. Bertran 53
Three European Invidividualists: some notes on Armand, Martucci, and Novatore, by S.E. Parker 57
Individualist Perspectives, by E. Armand 63
Is the Anarchist Ideal Realizable? by E. Armand 67
Biographical note: E. Armand 68
An Introduction to E. Armand; what he was for, what he was against, by S.E. Parker 70
E. Armand: sexual liberationist, by Catherine Campousy 75
Letter to E. Armand, by Améca Scarfó83
On Sexual Equality: Edward Carpenter & Oscar Wilde, by E. Armand 87
Individual Differences: my polemic with E. Armand, by Enzo da Villafiore 93
In Praise of Chaos, by Enzo Martucci 98
Manifesto dei Fuorigregge 103
Individualist-Anarchism, by S.E. Parker 107

2. Rebels Building Dreams: second wave individualists reflect on their predecessors

John Henry Mackay's Appreciation of Stirner 112
poem: Anarchy, by John Henry Mackay 117
poem: To Max Stirner, by John Henry Mackay 117
Biographical note: John Henry Mackay 120
John Henry Mackay, by E. Armand 124
The Anarchists, by Jim Kernochan 125
Men against the State: the expositors of individualist anarchism in America, 1827-1908,
a review by S.E. Parker 130
Pioneering Egoist Texts, by S.E. Parker 132
The Influence of Tucker?s Ideas in France, by E. Armand 137
Stirner on Education, by S.E. Parker 141
Voltairine de Cleyre, by S.E. Parker 145

3. Smashing Fossils: individualists & egoists critique leftism and its heritage

Anarchism vs Socialism, by S.E. Parker 150
Social Totalitarianism, by Francis Ellingham 154
Stirner, Marx, and Fascism, by S.E. Parker 158
Enzo Martucci on Communism 163

4. Savage Summit: egoist perspectives on Nietzsche Nietzsche, by Enzo Martucci 168

Notes on Stirner & Nietzsche, by S.E. Parker 172
Stirner on Nietzsche, by J.N. Figgis 176
Stourzh on Stirner and Nietzche, by Herbert Stourzh 178
Nietzsche: Antichrist? by S.E. Parker 181
5. A Maze to Trap the Living: society & the unique one
Anarchism and Individualism, by Georges Palante 190
Biographical note: Georges Palante 212
Anarchism, Society, and the Socialized Mind, by Francis Ellingham 204
A Note on Authority, by Enzo Martucci 217
A Letter to a Friend, by Laurance Labadie 218
Superstition and Ignorance vs Courage and Self-Reliance, by Laurence Labadie 224
Joseph Labadie: Archivist, Poet 235
poem: Imperialism, by Joseph Labadie 227
Some Notes on Anarchism and the Proletarian Myth, by S.E. Parker 229
Enemies of Society: An Open Letter to the Editors of Freedom, by S.E. Parker 234
Anarchism, Individualism, and Society: Some Thoughts, by Scepticus 238
Anarchy and History: An Existentialist View, by N.A.W. 241
Freedom and Solitude, by Marilisa Fiorina 245
The Morality of Cooperation, by S.E. Parker 246
In Defence of Stirner, by Enzo Martucci 250
Enzo Martucci: Italian Lightbearer 264
Brief Statements, by Renzo Ferrari 269
Malfew Seklew: The Jester Philosopher of Egoism, by S.E. Parker 270
Brand: An Italian Anarchist and His Dream, by Peter Lamborn Wilson 274
Down with Civilization, by Enrico Arrigoni (aka Frank Brand) 312
My Anarchism, by S.E. Parker 317

Appendix A:

Archists, Anarchists and Egoists, by S.E. Parker 323
Flaming Resurrections of a Charred Alphabet 328
(a glossary of basic terms)
To Sketch the Echo and To Paint the Link! 360
(a reading list)

link to the publisher of this nice compliation

Egoism by John Beverley Robinson

Published in Green Anarchy issue #20

There is no word more generally misinterpreted than the word egoism, in its modern sense. In the first place, it is supposed to mean devotion to self interest, without regard to the interest of others. It is thus opposed to altruism — devotion to others and sacrifice of self. This interpretation is due to the use of the word thus antithetically by Herbert Spencer.

Again, it is identified with hedonism or eudaimonism, or epicureanism, philosophies that teach that the attainment of pleasure or happiness or advantage, whichever you may choose to phrase it, is the rule of life.

Modern egoism, as propounded by Stirner and Nietzsche, and expounded by Ibsen, Shaw and others, is all these; but it is more. It is the realization by the individual that they are an individual; that, as far as they are concerned, they are the only individual.

For each one of us stands alone in the midst of a universe. We are surrounded by sights and sounds which we interpret as exterior to ourselves, although all we know of them are the impressions on our retina and ear drums and other organs of sense. The universe for the individual is measured by these sensations; they are, for him/her, the universe. Some of them they interpret as denoting other individuals, whom they conceive as more or less like themselves. But none of these is his/ herself. He/she stands apart. His/her consciousness, and the desires and gratifications that enter into it, is a thing unique; no other can enter into it.

However near and dear to you may be your spouse, children, friends, they are not you; they are outside of you. You are forever alone. Your thoughts and emotions are yours alone. There is no other who experiences your thoughts or your feelings.

No doubt it gives you pleasure when others think as you do, and inform you of it through language; or when others enjoy the same things that you do. Moreover, quite apart from their enjoying the same things that you enjoy, it gives you pleasure to see them enjoy themselves in any way. Such gratification to the individual is the pleasure of sympathy, one of the most acute pleasures possible for most people.

According to your sympathy, you will take pleasure in your own happiness or in the happiness of other people; but it is always your own happiness you seek. The most profound egoist may be the most complete altruist; but he knows that her altruism is, at the bottom, nothing but self-indulgence.

But egoism is more than this.

It is the realization by the individual that she/he is above all institutions and all formulas; that they exist only so far as he chooses to make them her own by accepting them. When you see clearly that you are the measure of the universe, that everything that exists exists for you only so far as it is reflected in your own consciousness, you become a new person; you see everything by a new light: you stand on a height and feel the fresh air blowing on your face; and find new strength and glory in it.

Whatever gods you worship, you realize that they are your gods, the product of your own mind, terrible or amiable, as you may choose to depict them. You hold them in your hand, and play with them, as a child with its paper dolls; for you have learned not to fear them, that they are but the “imaginations of your heart.”

All the ideals which people generally think are realities, you have learned to see through; you have learned that they are your ideals. Whether you have originated them, which is unlikely, or have accepted somebody else's ideals, makes no difference. They are your ideals just so far as you accept them. The priest is reverend only so far as you reverence him. If you cease to reverence him, he is no longer reverend for you. You have power to make and unmake priests as easily as you can make and unmake gods. You are the one of whom the poet tells, who stands unmoved, though the universe falls in fragments about you.

And all the other ideals by which people are moved, to which people are enslaved, for which humyns afflict themselves, have no power over you; you are no longer afraid of them, for you know them to be your own ideals, made in your own mind, for your own pleasure, to be changed or ignored, just as you choose to change or ignore them. They are your own little pets, to be played with, not to be feared.

“The State” or “The Government” is idealized by the many as a thing above them, to be reverenced and feared. They call it “My Country,” and if you utter the magic words, they will rush to kill their friends, whom they would not injure by so much as a pin scratch, if they were not intoxicated and blinded by their ideal. Most people are deprived of their reason under the influence of their ideals. Moved by the ideal of “religion” or “patriotism” or “morality,” they fly at each others' throats — they, who are otherwise often the gentlest of neighbors! But their ideals are for them like the “fixed ideas” of lunatics. They become irrational and irresponsible under the influence of their ideals. They will not only destroy others, but they will quite often sink their own interests, and rush madly to destroy themselves as a sacrifice to the all-devouring ideal. Curious, is it not, to one who looks on with a philosophical mind?

But the egoist has no ideals, for the knowledge that his ideals are only his ideals, frees her from their domination. She acts for his own interest, not for the interest of ideals. She will neither hang a person nor whip a child in the interest of “morality,” if it is disagreeable to her to do so. He/she has no reverence for “The State.” She knows that “The Government” is but a set of men, mostly as big fools as he is himself, many of them bigger. If the State does things that benefit her, he will support it; if it attacks her and encroaches on his liberty, she will evade it by any means in his power, if she is not strong enough to withstand it. He/she is a person without a country.

“The Flag,” that most people adore, as people always adore symbols, worshipping the symbol more than the principle it is supposed to set forth, is for the egoist but a rather inharmonious piece of patch-work; and anybody may walk on it or spit on it if they will, without exciting their emotion any more than if it were a tarpaulin that they walked upon — or spat upon. The principles that it symbolizes, they will maintain as far as it seems to their advantage to maintain them; but if the principles require them to kill people or be killed themselves, you will have to demonstrate to them just what benefit they will gain by killing or being killed, before you can persuade them to uphold them.

When the judge enters court in his toggery, (judges and ministers and professors know the value of toggery in impressing the populace) the egoist is unterrified. She/he has not even any respect for “The Law.” If the law happens to be to his advantage, she will avail himself of it; if it invades her liberty she will transgress it as far as he thinks it wise to do so. But she has no regard for it as a thing supernal. It is to her the clumsy creation of them who still “sit in darkness.”

Nor does he bow the knee to Morality — Sacred Morality! Some of its precepts she may accept, if he chooses to do so; but you cannot scare her off by telling him it is not “right.” He usually prefers not to kill or steal; but if she must kill or steal to save herself, he will do it with a good heart, and without any qualms of “conscience.”

And “morality” will never persuade her to injure others when it is of no advantage to himself. She will not be found among a band of “white caps,” flogging and burning poor devils, because their actions do not conform to the dictates of “morality,” though they have injured none by such actions; nor will he have any hand in persecuting helpless girls, and throwing them out into the street, when she has received no ill at their hands.

To her friends — to those who deserve the truth from him, — she will tell the truth; but you cannot force the truth from him because she is “afraid to tell a lie.” He has no fear, not even of perjury, for she knows that oaths are but devices to enslave the mind by an appeal to supernatural fears.

And for all the other small, tenuous ideals, with which we have fettered our minds and to which we have shrunk our petty lives; they are for the egoist as though they were not.

“Filial love and respect” he will give to his parents if they have earned it by deserving it. If they have beaten her in infancy, and scorned her in childhood, and domineered over him in maturity, he may possibly love them in spite of maltreatment; but if they have alienated her affection, they will not reawaken it by an appeal to “duty”.

In brief, egoism in its modern interpretation, is the antithesis, not of altruism, but of idealism. The ordinary person — the idealist — subordinates their interests to the interests of their ideals, and usually suffers for it. The egoist is fooled by no ideals: she/he discards them or uses them, as may suit his own interest. If he/she likes to be altruistic, they will sacrifice themselves for others; but only because they like to do so; they demand no gratitude nor glory in return