Max Stirner was one of the most important and seminal thinkers of the mid-nineteenth century. He exposed the religiosity behind secular humanism and rationalism, and the domination of the individual behind liberal modes of politics. This edited collection explores Stirner's radical and contemporary importance as a political theorist.

A reassessment of the controversial, yet still influential nineteenth-century German philosopher that explores the contentious issue of whether he was, as his critics frequently claim, a nihilist.Max Stirner (1806-1856) is often regarded as an enfant terrible of nineteenth-century German philosophy, but he has continued to exert an influence despite his marginalization as a nihilist. This study is the first to tackle head-on the question of whether Stirner can indeed reasonably be described as a nihilist. Although he is not known ever to have used the word "nihilism" or any of its derivatives, he was first accused of being a nihilist immediately after the publication of his magnum opus Der Einzige und sein Eigentum (translated in most English editions as The Ego and His Own) in 1844. Since then, the allegation has been repeated by well over a hundred writers and critics, with the result that it has become something of a truism. The book aims, first, to establish a clear understanding of the multifarious meanings of the term nihilism; second, to examine the accusations leveled at Stirner in the light of those meanings; and third, to assess not only the fairness and accuracy of the imputation of nihilism but also its usefulness in understanding Stirner as a thinker. It thus provides new insights into Stirner's thought, challenges the orthodox view of him as a philosophical pariah, reassesses his ideas and their place in the history of philosophy, and addresses the recurrent issue of his contemporary relevance.ngs of the term nihilism; second, to examine the accusations leveled at Stirner in the light of those meanings; and third, to assess not only the fairness and accuracy of the imputation of nihilism but also its usefulness in understanding Stirner as a thinker. It thus provides new insights into Stirner's thought, challenges the orthodox view of him as a philosophical pariah, reassesses his ideas and their place in the history of philosophy, and addresses the recurrent issue of his contemporary relevance.ngs of the term nihilism; second, to examine the accusations leveled at Stirner in the light of those meanings; and third, to assess not only the fairness and accuracy of the imputation of nihilism but also its usefulness in understanding Stirner as a thinker. It thus provides new insights into Stirner's thought, challenges the orthodox view of him as a philosophical pariah, reassesses his ideas and their place in the history of philosophy, and addresses the recurrent issue of his contemporary relevance.ngs of the term nihilism; second, to examine the accusations leveled at Stirner in the light of those meanings; and third, to assess not only the fairness and accuracy of the imputation of nihilism but also its usefulness in understanding Stirner as a thinker. It thus provides new insights into Stirner's thought, challenges the orthodox view of him as a philosophical pariah, reassesses his ideas and their place in the history of philosophy, and addresses the recurrent issue of his contemporary relevance.

"John F. Welsh provides us with a superb distillation of the thought of Max Stirner and the dialecticalegoist paradigm he developed. Througth this brilliant study. Welsh demonstrates the power and breadth of dialectics as a radical mode of analysis and social transformation--Chris Matthew Sciabarra author of Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical Libertarianism.

Max Stirner on the Path of Doubt examines Stirner's incisive criticism of his contemporaries during the period from the death of Hegel, in 1831, to the 1848 German Revolution. Stirner's work, mainly the Ego and His Own, considered each of the major figures within that German school known as “The Young Hegelians.” Lawrence S. Stepelevich argues that for Stirner, they were but “pious atheists,” and their common revolutionary ideology concealed an ancient religious ground – which Stirner set about to reveal. The central doctrine of this school, that Mankind was its own Savior, was initiated in 1835 by the theologian, David F. Strauss's in his Life of Jesus , and it progressed with August von Cieszkowski's mystical recasting of history, followed by Bruno Bauer's absolute atheism and Ludwig Feuerbach's statement that “Man is God.” This soon found reflection in the “Sacred History of Mankind” declared by Moses Hess. Within a decade, the result was the secular reformulation of this theological ideology into the “Scientific Socialism” of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. Although linked to it, Max Stirner was the most relentless and feared critic of this school. His work, never out of print, but largely ignored by academics, has inspired countless “individualists” set upon rejecting any form of religious or political “causes,” and finding Stirner's assertion that he had “set his cause upon nothing” took this as their own cause.

A major essay on the basis of individualist thought, with reference to the major influence of Stirner.

Guerin's classic anthology of anarchism translated and reprinted, available for the first time in a single volume.

Originally published in 1978. When compared with socialist and communist systems in other nations, the impact of radicalism on American society seems almost nonexistent. David DeLeon challenges this position, however, by presenting a historical and theoretical perspective for understanding the scope and significance of dissent in America. From Anne Hutchinson in colonial New England to the New Left of the 1960s, DeLeon underscores a tradition of radical protest that has endured in American history—a tradition of native anarchism that is fundamentally different from the radicalism of Europe, the Soviet Union, or nations of the Third World. DeLeon shows that a profound resistance to authority lies at the very heart of the American value system. The first part of the book examines how Protestant belief, capitalism, and even the American landscape itself contributed to the unique character of American dissent. DeLeon then looks at the actions and ideologies of all major forms of American radicalism, both individualists and communitarians, from laissez-faire liberals to anarcho-capitalists, from advocates of community control to syndicalists. In the book's final part, DeLeon argues against measuring the American experience by the standards of communism and other political systems. Instead he contends that American culture is far more radical than that of any socialist state and the implications of American radicalism are far more revolutionary than forms of Marxism-Leninism.