No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Egoism and Class Consciousness, or: Why Marx and Engels Wrote So Much About Stirner
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 July 2022
Abstract
Interest in The German Ideology has largely focused on the ‘chapter’ on Feuerbach—invariably the focus of the various abridgements in which the work is usually read. But this does not reflect the weighting of the text itself, which is dominated by Marx and Engels's critique of the radical egoist philosopher Max Stirner. Which begs the question: just why did they spend so much time and effort writing about Stirner? In this paper, I will provide an answer—which comes down to three related points. The first concerns the critique of reason; the second, egoistic self-interest. On both of these two points, Stirner makes a novel contribution—contributions which Marx and Engels feel clear affinities with. However, Stirner can ultimately be seen to get these two points, as it were, the wrong way around. This then leads to the third point: Stirner's misunderstanding of the nature of Communism. To clarify the nature of Communism, then, Marx and Engels were compelled to turn Stirner on his head.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Hegel Society of Great Britain
References
Althusser, L. (2005), ‘Marxism and Humanism’, in For Marx, trans. Brewster, B.. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Beiser, F. (2011), ‘Max Stirner and the End of Classical German Philosophy’, in Moggach, D. (ed.), Politics, Religion, and Art: Hegelian Debates. Evanston IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Carver, T. and Blank, D. (2014a), A Political History of the Editions of Marx and Engels's ‘German Ideology Manuscripts’. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Carver, T. and Blank, D. (2014b), Marx and Engels's ‘German Ideology’ Manuscripts: Presentation and Analysis of the ‘Feuerbach Chapter’. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
De Ridder, W. (2008), ‘Max Stirner, Hegel and the Young Hegelians: A Reassessment’, History of European Ideas 34:3: 285–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hook, S. (1950), From Hegel to Marx: Studies in the Intellectual Development of Karl Marx. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. (2021), ‘The Early Life of Marx's “Mode of Production”’, Modern Intellectual History 18:2: 349–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leopold, D. (2006), ‘The State and I: Max Stirner's Anarchism’, in Moggach, D. (ed.), The New Hegelians: Politics and Philosophy in the Hegelian School. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lobkowicz, N. (1969), ‘Karl Marx and Max Stirner’, in Adelman, F. J. (ed.), Demythologizing Marxism. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Marx, K. (2000a), ‘Preface to A Critique of Political Economy’, in McLellan, D. (ed.), Karl Marx: selected writings, second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marx, K. (2000b), ‘Alienated Labour’, in McLellan, D. (ed.), Karl Marx: selected writings, second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1976), Collected Works, Vol. 5. London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
Stepelevich, L. (1985), ‘Max Stirner as Hegelian’, Journal of the History of Ideas 46:4: 597–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stepelevich, L. (2011), ‘Max Stirner and the Last Man’, The Heythrop Journal (available online).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, P. (2011), ‘Max Stirner and Karl Marx: An Overlooked Contretemps’, in Newman, S. (ed.), Max Stirner. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Wood, A. (2014), ‘Marx on Equality’, in The Free Development of Each: Studies on Freedom, Right, and Ethics in Classical German Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar