< prev
next>
INTRODUCTION
Fifty years sooner or later can make little difference in the
case of a book so revolutionary as this.
It saw the light when a so-called revolutionary movement was
preparing in men's minds, which agitation was, however, only a
disturbance due to desires to participate in government, and to
govern and to be governed, in a manner different to that which
prevails. The " revolutionists " of 1848 were bewitched with an
idea. They were not at all the masters of ideas. Most of those
who since that time have prided themselves upon being revolu-
tionists have been and are likewise but the bondmen of an idea,
-- that of the different lodgment of authority.
The temptation is, of course, present to attempt an explana-
tion of the central thought of this work; but such an effort ap-
pears to be unnecessary to one who has the volume in his hand.
The author's care in illustrating his meaning shows that he real-
ized how prone the possessed man is to misunderstand whatever
is not moulded according to the fashions in thinking. The
author's learning was considerable, his command of words and
ideas may never be excelled by another, and he judged it needful
to develop his argument in manifold ways. So those who enter
into the spirit of it will scarcely hope to impress others with the
same conclusion in a more summary manner. Or, if one might
deem that possible after reading Stirner, still one cannot think
that it could be done so surely. The author has made certain
work of it, even though he has to wait for his public; but still,
the reception of the book by its critics amply proves the truth of
the saying that one can give another arguments, but not under-
INTRODUCTION
xiii
standing. The system-makers and system-believers thus far can-
not get it out of their heads that any discourse about the nature
of an ego must turn upon the common characteristics of egos, to
make a systematic scheme of what they share as a generality.
The critics inquire what kind of man the author is talking about.
They repeat the question: What does he believe in ? They fail
to grasp the purport of the recorded answer: " I believe in my-
self "; which is attributed to a common soldier long before the
time of Stirner. They ask, What is the principle of the self-
conscious egoist,--the Einzige ? To this perplexity Stirner says:
Change the question; put " who ?" instead of " what ? " and an
answer can then be given by naming him !
This, of course, is too simple for persons governed by ideas,
and for persons in quest of new governing ideas. They wish to
classify the man. Now, that in me which you can classify is not
my distinguishing self. " Man " is the horizon or zero of my
existence as an individual. Over that I rise as I can. At least
I am something more than "man in general." Pre-existing wor-
ship of ideals and disrespect for self had made of the ego at the
very most a Somebody, oftener an empty vessel to be filled with
the grace or the leavings of a tyrannous doctrine; thus a No-
body. Stirner dispels the morbid subjection, and recognizes
each one who knows and feels himself as his own property to be
neither humble Nobody nor befogged Somebody, but henceforth
flat-footed and level-headed Mr. Thisbody, who has a character
and good pleasure of his own, just as he has a name of his own.
The critics who attacked this work and were answered in the
author's minor writings, rescued from oblivion by John Henry
Mackay, nearly all display the most astonishing triviality and
impotent malice.
We owe to Dr. Eduard von Hartmann the unquestionable
service which he rendered by directing attention to this book in
his "Philosophie des Unbewussten," the first edition of which
was published in 1869, and in other writings. I do not begrudge
Dr. von Hartmann the liberty of criticism which he used; and I