Author of quotes: Max Stirner. Page 1
Go yourself to the world with your "love of man"! Tag along, REP each person in the "dens of Vice", spend some time in the maelstrom of a big city - except you don't see everywhere a sin, and sin, and again sin? Aren't you going to shout about the corruption of humanity, not going to complain about the incredible selfishness? Seeing the rich man, did not you say that he's a heartless, self-centered? You call yourself, may no longer be an atheist, but remain true to the Christian feeling that rather a camel through the eye of a needle than a rich man will cease to be a "non-person". How many people do you see do you not belong to a "mass of egoists"? What did you love people? Only men who didn't deserve it! And where did they all happen? From you, from your love to the man! You brought him in the mind of the sinner, and therefore found it everywhere, everywhere it is expected. Do not call men sinners, and they will not be sinful. You're the one - the Creator of sinners, you, who think like people, you throw them in the mud of sins, that you divide them into vicious and virtuous, into men and not-men, you sprinkle them with saliva of his obsession. But I'm telling you: you never seen a sinner, you saw them only in my sleep. A selfish pleasure loses its charm when I feel the need to serve the other, when I imagine that I owe him something that I'm called to "sacrifice", "inspiration" etc. Okay, so I'm not going to serve any idea, any "higher essence" itself and then will come that I will no longer serve any man, and always and everywhere itself. But then not only am I actually in Genesis, but also for my consciousness only.
You should pay more than the divine, human, etc., - yours is yours.
№ 212026 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:55
But with absolute right and the right itself is destroyed, destroyed the domination of the "legal concept". Because should not overlook the fact that over ruled us constantly concepts, ideas or principles, and that among these rulers the most powerful legal concept or notion of justice. I'm right or not is immaterial to me: if only I'm strong, I have thereby gained the right and don't need any other permission or approval of his right.
Right insanity, which gives some kind of Ghost; the power is me, for I am strong and I am the owner of power. Right above me, it absolutely is and exists in some kind of Supreme being, by whose grace I receive it. Right - the grace bestowed to me by the judge; power and authority only in me, powerful and mighty.
№ 212025 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:55
What I called "my right", is not "right" because right can be bestowed only by the spirit, be it spirit, nature, or kind, or the human spirit, the spirit of God or the spirit of his Holiness, his lordship, etc. That I have without the sanction of the spirit, those I own no rights, it is obtained by me only through my power.
№ 212024 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:55
Fight against privilege is the characteristic of liberalism, which attacks the "advantages" and "privileges", based on "right". But empty attacks on liberalism can not go, because the benefits of being a special kind of law, disappear and are destroyed only with the destruction of the law. But the right turns into nothing when he absorbs the power or force, that is when you realize that virtue precedes law. All right then becomes an advantage, and the advantage of strength, of superiority.
№ 212023 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:55
Our weakness is not that we oppose ourselves to others, and that we're not doing it sufficiently, that is, that we are not absolutely separated from them, what we're looking for some "community", "communication" and that our ideal - is communication. One faith, one God, one idea, one hat for all! If it was stuck under one hat, certainly no one would have anyone to take my hat off.
№ 212022 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:55
The idea law was originally mine, or, in other words, it was born in me, comes only from me. But, having emerged from me, taking the form of "words", she immediately asked "flesh and blood" became "an obsession". From this idea, I can't turn away, and no matter how much I spun, she stands in front of me. So people failed to learn they also created the idea of "rights": their creation carries them for themselves. This is an absolute right, the right, detached and separate from me. Revering it as absolute, we can't overpower him, and it deprives us of creative power: the creation exceeding the Creator as something self-contained as a "thing in itself".
Try for once to humble, to subdue the right, try to restore it to the place of its origin in you, and it will be your right and is the right that you think so.
№ 212021 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:55
Do not divine and certainly not the human mind, but only your and my mind, for just you and me - is real.
№ 212020 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:55
Although the society and wishes that everyone had rights, but not their own, but only the law which are sanctioned by society, that is, the so-called public right of way. I give or take themselves right on their own authority, and in relation to everything that is stronger and vlastne me, I'm an unrepentant criminal. Himself as belonging to the Creator and your right I do not recognize any other source of law other than myself, I do not recognize a source of law - neither God nor the state nor nature nor even man with his "eternal human rights," neither the divine nor human right.
№ 212019 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:54
Of obsessions occur crimes. The sanctity of marriage is one of those obsessions. The concept of the sanctity of marriage implies that adultery is a crime, and so fixed the marriage law, which for adultery relies a penalty. For those who honor "freedom as Holy," this punishment is a crime against freedom, and only in this sense, public opinion, and branded the marriage law.
№ 212018 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:54
It is clear that again the same "people" creates the concept of crime, of sin, and therefore law. People, which I do not recognize "man", "the sinful and guilty."
Only the Holy can become the criminal: you to me can never be criminal, and there would only be the enemy. But the mere lack of hatred for the desecration of the Shrine is a crime, and Saint-just, Danton shouts, "aren't you a criminal? Aren't you liable for not harbored hatred for the enemies of the Fatherland?" If, as in the era of the great revolution, the term "person" is identified with the idea of "good citizen", then the same concept of "person" is created and the concept of "political offenses and crimes." In all of this is separate, or isolated, the man regarded as "garbage", and the universal man, or a notional "person" is given the place of honor, he alone paid homage. Depends on what is referred to as this "Ghost", a Christian, Jew, Muslim, good citizen, loyal subject, "free", the patriot, etc., in the face of the triumphant "man" will disappear and those who want to spend more, which does not coincide with this conception of man, and those who want to exercise and Express themselves. And with what unction with killing in the name of law, the sovereign people, of God, etc.!
№ 212017 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:54
The leaders of the revolution often spoke about the "great revenge" of the people as his right. Revenge and right are the same. But is this the I to "I"? The people shouted that the other party has committed against him the crime. But can I make that the person has committed a crime on me, if I don't assume that the person had to do what I wanted? And only such an act I call correct, right, good, etc., and all the opposite is considered a crime. Thus I believe that others should with me strive for the same goal, that is, I treat them not as the only ones that carry their own laws and live according to them, as to creatures, obliged to obey some "rational" law. I establish that this abstract "man", "man" as such, and what is "truly human" behavior, and then demand that everyone thought this law is the norm and the ideal, otherwise it will be in my eyes a "sinner and criminal". "Guilty" also comprehends "the punishment of the law."
№ 212016 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:54
When the Christian consciousness, or "Christian" makes criminal laws, the concept of crime, of course, is identified with the heartless. Every violation and insult to the cardiac affection, that sort of callous attitude to something Holy - a crime. More intimate than this relationship would have to be, the more outraged by the abuse, the more it seems a crime deserving of punishment. The ruler is obliged to love every citizen to renounce this love is treason, punishable by death. Adultery - the heartless, deserving of punishment: perpetrators of this crime soulless, devoid of consciousness of the sanctity of marriage. Yet to dictate the laws will be the heart or the soul, until the security laws will only use heart, or soul, of man. That law establishes a spiritual man, so that sets them a moral man; all that is contrary to "the moral sense" of these people - all they condemn. For example, how can such people not be something terrible and criminal adultery, breach of vows, in short, all radical breaking, just break the old honor ties? Who violates these requirements of the heart, restores against itself all the moral, spiritual people. Sustained the legislation of the Christian state can be made only by the priests, and it still is very solid and consistent, while it will generate only servants of the priests, who are always only polopoly.
№ 212015 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:54
What does a priest who exhorted the culprit? He explains to him his guilt, which consists in the fact that he defiled his act, something consecrated by the state - property state (such should be considered and the lives of citizens).
№ 212014 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:54
I say - the people! The people - and you are in your complacency to think that people wonder how high - the people thoroughly imbued with the police way of thinking, people pleasing only the one who denies me who engaged in "self-denial".
№ 212013 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:54
All government wise come solely from the fact the fundamentals of that all right and all authority belong to set of people; none of them forgets to refer to the totality, and despot, as well as the President, or any kind of aristocratic government, acts and commands "in the name of the state." In their hands "governmental authority" is completely indifferent, showing whether it is state violence, the people as a collection of isolated individuals or only members of this conjunction, many, as in an aristocratic system, or one as in monarchies. Always a set of Excel over a single entity and has the power which is called legitimate, that is, which becomes law.
№ 212012 Added
MegaMozg 15-01-2017 / 13:54
