Discover rare photographic glimpses of pioneering egoists such as Dora Marsden and Benjamin R. Tucker, and delve into the visionary project to produce a Braille edition of Max Stirner’s magnum opus for the indomitable Helen Keller. Unearth a plethora of fascinating artifacts pertaining to Malfew Seklew, and be riveted by the astonishing revelation of Ragnar Redbeard’s brief yet impactful foray as a Canadian Socialist Provocateur.

This sixth issue of Der Geist is sure to delight and offend, but most of all, serve as an essential philosophical reference work for centuries to come.

DER GEIST: The Journal of Egoism from 1845 – 1945 | ISSUE 6 | Winter 2023
Paperback, 212 pages, $15
ISBN 978-1-944651-29-9, ISSN 2639-5339

Der Geist, (Trevor Blake, editor; Kevin I. Slaughter, co-editor) is an English-language journal for an international audience, publishing original scholarship on the philosophy of egoism. The journal is descriptive of the first century of egoism in print (from the 1845 publication of Der Einzige und sein Eigentum by Max Stirner to the end of 1945), not prescriptive in advocacy of egoism.

CONTENTS

Introduction by the Editor  2

1. Max Stirner   7

Max Stirner’s Anarchist Gospel | A Dutch Review of Stirner’s Work | Anarchist Black Dragon | Max Stirner vs. Wahrheit-Sucher | “Celine Adele Marillier” | Pity and the Future | Max Stirner and the Grisette | Steven T. Byington’s Triple Score

2. Malfew Seklew  29

On “Bérnard’s Tour” | Minister Mocks Malfew  | Stern Critique of Christian Socialist  | Seklew Asks: Nietzsche to Blame?  | Social Aristocrat Socialist Secretary | A Freak Among Reformers  | No Guide for Anybody | Proletarians in Purgatory | No Justice for Malfew Seklew  | “We’re All More or Less Nutty” | Not Seeking Work  | Seklew Scolds Simpoleons, Supplies Sample Shilling Sericine Silk Set | No Detail Too Small!

3. Ragnar Redbeard   51

Redbeard in Canada | Desmond Selling George  | Give the New Hand a Show! | A.D. in the O.E.D.  | A Bogus Book | Australian Socialist Drinking Club | Redbeard’s Rough Stuff |“We Understand the Redbeard Philosophy” | Voima On Oikeus | Etc.

4. Dora Marsden  95

Dora Marsden for the Prosecution | The Freewomen of New York | Dora Marsden, unser aller Mutter  | Dora Marsden Ephemera | Rare Portraits

5. Benjamin DeCasseres   107

Emmeline Pankhurst | Pyrrhonism and Acatalepsy | Balzac | The Borrowed Mirror

6. Friedrich Nietzsche   117

Nietzsche and a Braille Stirner for Hellen Keller | “Will Nietzsche Come Into Vogue…” | The Works of Friedrich Nietzsche | Alexander Tille Reads Egoism

7. Enzo Martucci   135

A Sketch of Martucci | An Excerpt from The Red Sect | Martucci on Stirner

8. Free Spirits  159

Peter Lamborn Wilson Has Passed  | Hakim Bey: Real and Unreal | Vox Populi Vox Dei | Thompson at Rudolf Steiner Hall | Speakers’ Corner Anthology | Among the Anarchists | The True Comarade | Is This What You Call “Living?” | The Thirteenth Paragraph | Greeves Fisher, A Sketch | Dominance vs. Egoism | More Individualism | Individualism and Property | Why I am a Right-Wing Anarchist | Opening and Closing the Dil Pickle | Christmas a Joke! | “I” a poem  | “I GO” a poem| A Letter to the Editors of Freedom | Enrico Arrigoni Bibliography | Photo of Benjamin R. Tucker | About the Editors

The newest issue of Der Geist, the journal of historical Egoism, is here. Rare and unpublished works from the first century of egoism-the philosophy of Max Stirner.

from: Underworld Amusements or from Amazon.com: US | MX | CA | UK | DE | FR | IT

This issue of Der Geist includes rare reprints of egoist history. These include blow-by-blow accounts of Dora Marsden in her street-fighting phase, lost transcriptions of J. William Lloyd saved from the darkness by individualist feminist Wendy McElroy, the philosophical and physical wanderings of the laughing philosopher Malfew Seklew, and more. This issue of Der Geist also includes original inquiries into egoist history. These include a history of the Radical Book Shop of Chicago, and the heretofore undocumented bands of iron that link the Industrial Workers of the World (the “Wobblys”) and Ragnar Redbeard’s book Might is Right.

Sections:

1. Dora Marsden
2. J. William Lloyd
3. Malfew Seklew
4. Laurance Labadie
5. Max Stirner
6. Free Spirits
7. Ragnar Redbeard

Is This What You Call “Living”?

By E. Armand.

( First published as a pamphlet by the French anarchist journal, Hors du Troupeau (“Outside the Crowd”) (1912).

Get up at dawn. Running or using any means of rapid locomotion. Go to “work.” That is, shut up in a room – spacious or confined, airy or airless. Sitting in front of a typewriter, tapping away transcribing letters of which we would not send half if we had to write them by hand. Or, working to shape always the same parts from a machine. Or, yet again, not getting away more than a short distance from equipment that has to be operated or be monitored. Or, finally, mechanically, automatically, standing in front of a loom, repeating the same gestures, making the same movements. And that for hours and hours on end without any distraction, without any change in the environment. Everyday.

Is this what you call “living”?

Produce! Produce again!! Always produce!!! Like yesterday, like the day before yesterday. Like tomorrow – unless you are sick or dead. Produce? Things that seem useless but you are forbidden to discuss their superfluity. Complex objects of which only a tiny part is in the hands while we never know the whole of the manufacturing process. Produce? Without knowing the destination of the product. Without being able to refuse to produce for whom you do not like. Without being able to show individual initiative. Produce quickly, rapidly. To be a stimulated tool prodded, jostled, and exhausted until nothing can be extracted from it, only a cent of profit;

Is this what you call “living”?

Leave early in the morning hunting for customers. Pursue, track down the interested buyer. Jumping from Métro to a taxi, a taxi-car to a bus, a bus to an electric tram. Unless it’s in a muddy river. Make fifty visits a day. Using his saliva to hawk merchandise. Shouting, inconsiderate of others.  Come home in the late evening, burdened, jaded, worried, making everyone unhappy, emptied of all inner life, of all drive towards a better, moral being;

Is this what you call “living”?

Languish between the four walls of a cell. To feel, as the accused, the unknown of the future separating you from those who you love, either by affection or by affiliation. Sentenced, to feel that your life is escaping you, that you can do nothing to determine it. And that for months, for years. No longer able to struggle. To be no more than a number, a play-thing, a rag, an object stamped, watched, overseen and used. All this far beyond the equivalence of the committed offense.

Is this what you call “living”?

Wear a uniform. For one, two, three years, repeating the actions of a murderer. In full bloom of youth, in full explosion of manhood, locking oneself in large buildings from where you exit and return only at fixed hours. Eat, walk, wake up ­ to do – everything and nothing – at a set time. All this to learn how to handle devices taking life away from strangers. Expecting to fall one day, struck by some bullet from out of sight, shot by unknown hands. To be trained to perish – or to make others perish. An asset, a pawn, in the hands of the Privileged the Powerful, the Monopolists, the Hoarders. While you are neither privileged nor powerful nor own anything;

Is this what you call “living”?

Not being able to learn, love, keep to yourself, or wander at will. Having to stay shut in when the sun shines or the flowers of the forest unfurl. Unable to go south when the wind is freezing and the snow up against our windows. Or to the north when the heat simmers and grass burns in fields. Always, everywhere, laws, borders, conventions, the rural police, morals, conventions, judges, factories, prisons, barracks, and men in uniform protecting, maintaining, or defending an order of things hindering the expansion of the individual;

Is this what you call “living ?” O lover of “the intense life”, fawners over “progress,” peddlers of the chariot wheels of civilization.

I call this stagnation, I call it death.

The True Camarade ¹⁾“Camarade” is not translated as “comrade” here purposefully, as the term itself may have a unique and nuanced meaning to Armand and his milieu that may be lost if translated to the common English equivalent

Worthy, you are far too dignified to bear the thought that someone might have given more than you have received—

or that the one who gives to you might suspect that they have received less than their contribution—

I know well that you will say, “Fair is fair…”—

and that you consider yourself “an egoist among the egoists”—

But egoist, you are much too egoist—

to admit that, being able to give pleasure to someone in your world —

you would refuse yourself the delight of doing so—

I am well aware that you speak constantly of “reciprocity”—

but you never believe you have paid enough for a smile, reimbursed a kind word, acquitted a sign of sympathy—

you are much to individual to accept that, in their relations with you, that one of your own should have reason to fear that they have not been paid in return—

You insist, to all who will listen, that you are only bound by the terms of the contract that you have concluded with one of your own—

but I have seen you, a thousand times, torment yourself, wrack your brain, asking yourself—

if you have exactly fulfilled your obligations —

“exactly”—

that is, exactly as intended by the one who had contracted with you—

at the moment when you signed it—

You are much too “unique,” too proud—

to not exhaust, to the utmost extreme—

the capacity to give, to make and to satisfy—

in order not to leave, hands empty and their desire unfulfilled, the one of your own who reached out to you—

imagining you rich in possibilities…

E. Armand.

French Wikipedia says of Armand: “Arrested on August 6, 1907, he was sentenced to five years in prison on May 9, 1908, for complicity in issuing counterfeit money. In 1911, he signed the Petit Manuel anarchiste individualist and he married Denise Rougeault, who financially helped him.”

Denise Rougeault married Lucien-Ernest Juin and became “D. Juin”.

Madame Juin details their gift of papers to the Institute of Social History, when they had a branch in Paris (interesting aside: this branch was broken into in November 1936, where documents of Trotsky were stolen, most probably by agents of Stalin’s secret service). The International Institute of Social History (IISH) was officially established on November 25, 1935 and serves as one of the world’s leading research institutes on social history.

Also of interest is the mention of the journal Balanced Living. This was the magazine from Ralph Borsodi’s  School of Living. Edited by Mildred Loomis, it was in also in 1962, shortly after Robert Anton Wilson begins co-editing it, that the title was changed to A Way Out, a phrase from the introduction to his book Flight from the City. His previous book, This Ugly Civlilization, recently republished by Underworld Amusements).

This letter was among the papers in the Sidney E. Parker Archives. The SEP Archives contain the papers, publications and ephemera from Sidney E. Parker, British archivist and author.

The letter below was translated by historian Shawn P. Wilbur (who operates Libertarian Labyrinth), after we posted it in his “Anarchist French-Translation Workshop” group. Wilbur is a tireless archivist and historian and we would enjoy it if our work helps his cause as much as his helps ours.

D. Juin
April 15, 1962
Dear Comrade,
Please excuse my delay in replying to you: I have been very busy preparing everything that E. Armand promised to hand over to the Institute of Social History in Paris several years ago. Last Friday they took delivery of the books, pamphlets, magazines, etc. I must now carefully check all that remains and I certainly have enough of it for several weeks.
Several days ago, I prepared for you a package of publications. I add two copies of:

Les individualistes et le fait économique [E. Armand, editions de l’en dehors] La Liberté. Nous allons. [Albert Libertad, editions de l’en dehors] Pierre Chardon. [Pierre Chardon, sa vie, son action, sa pensée, editions de l’en dehors?]

As for the « Bandits tragiques » [possibly the pamphlet “Illégalisme anarchiste”] I no longer have even a single copy. As for the other pamphlets that you desire: Le Culte de la Charogne [Albert Libertad] — Le travail antisociale et les mouvements utiles [Albert Libertad] — Le refus de service militaire et sa véritable signification [E. Armand, Éditions de L’Ère nouvelle], it is impossible for me to satisfy your request; they have sold out long ago. If, by chance, in the course of my tidying up, I discover one of these pamphlets, or several, I will hasten to see that they reach you, (but I would not count too much on it.)
Armand exchanged “L’Unique” with “Balanced Living,” but we no longer receive it.
Naturally, you owe me nothing for the publications that I am sending you. It is much too small a matter.
I wish you great success in your propaganda work and beg you to believe in my very cordial feelings.
D. Juin.

L’Ère nouvelle (1901) was founded by Armand, one of a number of journals he lead. The evolving “subtitles” of the magazine reveal that it transformed from a “Libtertarian Christian” (libertarian in the older sense of the term) to an “individualist anarchist” perspective:

• “war on social inequities, the integral Gospel, spiritual, moral and social, we are waiting for a new Earth where justice will live.“
• “free tribune of the proletariat written by disciples of Christ“
• “review of complete emancipation written by disciples of Christ“
• “review of integral emancipation and practical communism“
• “libertarian agreement body“
• “monthly review“
• “periodic collection of ideas, facts, comments“

As of this writing, learning of the journal and its evolution, that it printed Armand, Stirner and De Clyere, we have added it our list of egoist and individualist journals. More information on L’Ère nouvelle can be found at Bianco: press anarchiste and Archives Autonomies.

In March we published a facsimile edition of Sidney E. Parker’s Anarchism and Individualism, a collection of three essays by E. Armand in English, as part of the Stand Alone (2016) journal series.

• E. Armand, “La grève générale,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 1 (Mai 1901): 1.
• E. Armand, “Avis importants: A nos abonnés,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 1 (Mai 1901): 3.
• E. A., “Pages de l’évangile: La vie,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 1 (Mai 1901): 3.
• E. A., “Au cours de la plume,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 1 (Mai 1901): 4.
• E. A., “Une médiation par mois,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 1 (Mai 1901): 4.
• E. A., “La scission de Lyon,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 2 (Juin 1901): 1.
• E. Armand, “Mensonges des Jésuits,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 2 (Juin 1901): 2.
• E. Armand, “La lutte suprème,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 2 (Juin 1901): 4. [verse]
• E. A., “Au cours de la plume,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 2 (Juin 1901): 4.
• E. Armand, “Pour la paix,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 3 (Juillet 1901): 1.
• E. Armand and G. Coulon,, L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 3 (Juillet 1901): 3.
• E. A,, “Simple Question: Guerre à la guerre,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 3 (Juillet 1901): 4.
• E. A., “Au cours de la plume,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 3 (Juillet 1901): 4.
• E. Armand, “L’eau vive,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 3 (Juillet 1901): 4. [verse]
• E. A., “Les retraites ouvrières,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 4 (Août 1901).
• E. A., “Les choses telles qu’elles sont,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 4 (Août 1901).
• E. Armand, “À nos amis, à nos camarades,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 4 (Août 1901).
• E. A., “Le chant des semeurs,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 4 (Août 1901). [verse]
• E. A., “Au cours de la plume,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 4 (Août 1901).
• E. A., “Surproduction,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 5 (Septembre 1901).
• E. A., “Guerre à la guerre,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 5 (Septembre 1901).
• E. Armand, “Les courses de taureaux et les chrétiens sociaux du Nord,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 5 (Septembre 1901).
• E. A., “Le cas Jaurès,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 5 (Septembre 1901).
• E. A., “Le remède,” L’Ère nouvelle 1 no. 5 (Septembre 1901). [verse]
• [Issues 6-8 not available online]
• E. Armand, “Un crime capitaliste,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 9 (Mi-Janvier 1902): 2.
• E. Armand, “La lutte suprème,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 9 (Mi-Janvier 1902): 3. [verse]
• E. A., “Bibliographie,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 9 (Mi-Janvier 1902): 3.
• E. A., “Entre nous,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 9 (Mi-Janvier 1902): 4.
• [Issues 10-14 not available online]
• E. A., “Liberté,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 15 (Octobre 1902): 2.
• E. Armand and Marie Kugel, “La fin du Christ légendaire,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 15 (Octobre 1902): 9-10.
• E. A., “Pour les vingt ans d’un camarade,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 15 (Octobre 1902): 13. [verse]
• E. A., “La réveil de l’esclave,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 15 (Octobre 1902): 16.
• E. A., “Passé ou Avenir,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 16 (Novembre 1902): 12. [verse]
• E. A., “Tolérance,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 16 (Novembre 1902): 12.
• E. Armand, “L’Inutile souffrance,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 16 (Novembre 1902): 13-14.
• E. Armand, “Le Mouvement International et le Christianisme libertaire,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 17 (Decembre 1902): 3.
• E. A., “La Colonie Tolstoïenne de Blaricum,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 17 (Decembre 1902): 4-5.
• E. Armand, “En cours de route : Notes à la volée,” L’Ère nouvelle 2 no. 17 (Decembre 1902): 6-9.
• E. A., “Tolstoï et les tentatives communistes,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 18-19 (Janvier 1903): 4.
• E. Armand, “Avis,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 18-19 (Janvier 1903): 7.
• E. Armand, “Libertaire et Chrétien,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 18-19 (Janvier 1903): 9-11.
• E. A., “Le Mioches, par Libair,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 18-19 (Janvier 1903): 16. [review]
• E. A., “Les Doukhobores,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 20 (12 Avril 1903): 20.
• E. A., “Réconciliation,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 20 (12 Avril 1903): 20. [verse]
• E. Armand, “Résurrection,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 20 (12 Avril 1903): 24.
• E. Armand, “Léon Tolstoï et l’Église orthodoxe russe,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 21-22 (1 Juin 1903): 33.
• E. Armand, “Une conception libertaire de la famille,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 21-22 (1 Juin 1903): 41-43.
• E. Armand, “A Blarikum. — Un ouragan. — La retraite de Kijlstra. — Polémique. -— Lettres de Van Eedeu, Kijlstra, Enzlin. — Les articles de Félix Ortt,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 23-24 (20 Juillet 1903): 54-57.
• E. Armand and Marie Kugel, “Les points sur les i,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 23-24 (20 Juillet 1903): 60-61.
• E. Armand, “À propos d’ ‘Une conception libertaire de la famille,’” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 23-24 (20 Juillet 1903): 65.
• E. A., “Les Droits des femmes et la morale intersexuelle,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 23-24 (20 Juillet 1903): 67. [review]
• E. A., “Nécrologie,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 23-24 (20 Juillet 1903): 72.
• E. Armand, “Campagne d’hiver,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 25 (27 Septembre 1903): 73.
• E. Armand, “Roubaix-Mouscron,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 25 (27 Septembre 1903): 77.
• E. Armand, “Le Milieu libre de Anvers.—A Bruxelles: Projets en perspective.—Hollande,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 25 (27 Septembre 1903): 77-78.
• E. Armand, “La réalisation de l’idéal libertaire,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 25 (27 Septembre 1903): 77-78.
• L’Ère Nouvelle, “L’entente libertaire,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 26 (25 Novembre-1er Décembre 1903): 99-100.
• E. A., “Canada: Les Doukhobores” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 26 (25 Novembre-1er Décembre 1903): 103-104.
• E. Armand, “Simple bon sens,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 26 (25 Novembre-1er Décembre 1903): 107-108.
• E. Armand, “Deux jours dans les Pays-Bas,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 26 (25 Novembre-1er Décembre 1903): 112-115.
• E. A., “Science et nature, par Ernest Girault,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 26 (25 Novembre-1er Décembre 1903): 121-122. [review]
• E. A., “Ce que nous sommes, ce que nous voulons,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 27 (Janvier-Fevrier 1904): 125-127.
• E. A. et M. K., [Note: “Nous remercions les amis qui nous assurent de leur sympathie…”], L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 27 (Janvier-Fevrier 1904): 128.
• E. A., “Nos camarades de Vrede et les idées de Tolstoï,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 27 (Janvier-Fevrier 1904): 154-155.
• E. Armand, “L’anarchisme aux États-Unis: Le livre de M. Paul Ghio et les idées de Benj. R. Tucker,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 28 (Mars-Avril 1904): 170-173.
• E. Armand, “Bulletin anti-militariste: La guerre,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 28 (Mars-Avril 1904): 181.
• [various authors], “À propos de l’entente libertaire,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 28 (Mars-Avril 1904): 184-188.
• E. Armand, “Ce que nous sommes, ce que nous voulons,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 28 (Mars-Avril 1904): 189-192.
• E. Armand, “Le vivant de demain,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 28 (Mars-Avril 1904): 214.
• E. Armand, “La colonie communiste de Vaux,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 29 (Mai-Juin 1904): 232-233.
• E. Armand, “Le refus du service militaire et sa véritable signification,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 29 (Mai-Juin 1904): 245-249.
• E. Armand, “Un mot personnel,” Supplément spéciale à L’Ère nouvelle nos 29 et 30.
• E. Armand, “Le Congrès antimilitariste d’Amsterdam et la deuxième internationale : Réflexions et impressions,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 30 (Juillet-Août 1904): 285-291.
• E. Armand, “Mon point de vue: Quelques explications necessaires,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 30 (Juillet-Août 1904): 297-298. [Excerpts from Notes et réflexions pour servir à la rédaction d’une autobiographie]
• [various authors], “À propos de l’entente libertaire,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 30 (Juillet-Août 1904): 306-309.
• E. Armand, “Cosme ou une ‘colonie qui réussit’,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 31 (Septembre-Octobre 1904): 335-340.
• E. Armand, “Impressions rétrospectives et réflexions d’actualité,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 31 (Septembre-Octobre 1904): 357-367.
• E. Armand, “Het Nieuw-Malthusianisme,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 31 (Septembre-Otobre 1904): 371. [review]
• E. Armand, “Noël,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 32 (Novembre-Décembre 1904): 357-367.
• E. Armand, “Winstanley le Piocheur: utopiste anglais du XVIIe siècle,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 32 (Novembre-Décembre 1904): 389-395.
• Maurice Marcel, “Sur l’entente libertaire,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 32 (Novembre-Décembre 1904): 407-408.
• E. A., “Entre nous,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 32 (Novembre-Décembre 1904): 409.
• E. A., “Vinet et le principe du socialisme par ALBERT CADIER,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 32 (Novembre-Décembre 1904): 411. [review]
• E. Armand, “Le bi-centenaire de Locke,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 33 (10 Février 1905): 3-4.
• E. Armand, “Le problème humain et la solution libertaire,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 33 (10 Février 1905): 9-14.
• E. Armand, “Au cours de la plume,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 33 (10 Février 1905): 43. [Voltairine de Cleyre, etc.]
• E. Armand, “Notes sur la vie et la jouissance de vivre,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 34 (Mars-Avril 1905): 81-84.
• E. A., “La tentative de Glisy,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 34 (Mars-Avril 1905): 84.
• E. A., “Chronique,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 34 (Mars-Avril 1905): 91-94.
• E. A., “Quelquels heures au ‘Milieu Libre’,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 35 (Mai-Juin 1905): 108-110.
• E. Armand, “La propagande vraie,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 35 (Mai-Juin 1905): 121-126.
• E. A., “Au cours de la plume” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 35 (Mai-Juin 1905): 137-141.
• E. Armand, “Aspects et rêveries,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 36 (Juillet-Août 1905): 160.
• E. Armand, “Les limites de la ‘vie libre’,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 36 (Juillet-Août 1905): 185-186.
• E. A., “L’ ‘Essai’ d’Aiglemont,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 36 (Juillet-Août 1905): 187.
• E. A., “Bulletin antimilitariste,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 37/38 (Décembre 1905): 205-206.
• E. Armand, “Les pionniers,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 37/38 (Décembre 1905): 207-209. [verse]
• E. A., “Douce patries,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 37/38 (Décembre 1905): 217-216.
• E. Armand, “Ouragan,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 39 (15 Janvier 1906): 8.
• E. Armand, “Quelques impressions,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 39 (15 Janvier 1906): 23-24.
• E. A., “La Légende Amoureuse,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 39 (15 Janvier 1906): 32. [review]
• E. A., [editorial note]” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 40 (Février-Marx 1906): 32.
• E. A., “Marie Kugel,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 40 (Février-Marx 1906): 33. [obituary]
• E. Armand, “Sur la souffrance,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 40 (Février-Mars 1906): 34-36.
• E. Armand, “Le choix,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 40 (Février-Mars 1906): 55. [verse]
• E. Armand, “Sociologie médicale: ‘La Neurasthénie, mal social )’,” L’Ère nouvelle 3 no. 41 (fin Avril-15 Mai 1906): 73-78. [review]
• E. Armand, “Un Portrait,” L’Ère nouvelle 4 no. 42 (Juin-Juillet 1906): 4. [verse]
• E. Armand, “Sur l’amitie,” L’Ère nouvelle 4 no. 42 (Juin-Juillet 1906): 5.
• E. Armand, “Souvenir,” L’Ère nouvelle 4 no. 42 (Juin-Juillet 1906): 8. [verse]
• E. Armand, “Les livres : L’Entraide de P. Kropotkine,” L’Ère nouvelle 4 no. 42 (Juin-Juillet 1906): 10-13.
• [Issue 43 not available online]
• E. Armand, “Ne l’écoute pas,” L’Ère nouvelle 4 no. 44 (Fin 1906): 36. [verse]
• E. Armand, “Chant révolutionnaire,” L’Ère nouvelle 4 no. 44 (Fin 1906): 41. [verse]
• E. Armand, “La vie comme expérience,” L’Ère nouvelle 4 no. 44 (Fin 1906): 41-42.
• E. A., “L’Avenir Social,” L’Ère nouvelle 4 no. 44 (Fin 1906): 43.
• E. A., “[editorial note], L’Ère nouvelle 4 no. 45 (Début 1907): 49.
• E. Armand, “De la liberté sexuelle,” L’Ère nouvelle 4 no. 45 (Début 1907): 49-52.
• E. Armand, “Tentatives de vie en commun et d’éducation libertaire,” L’Ère nouvelle 4 no. 45 (Début 1907): 56.
• E. A., “Paroles de franchis,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 46 (Mi-Avril 1910).
• E. Armand, “Lever de rideau,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 46 (Mi-Avril 1910): 1-2.
• E. Armand, “Se sentir vivre,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 46 (Mi-Avril 1910): 6-7.
• E. Armand, “Engeôlé,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 46 (Mi-Avril 1910): 11. [verse]
• E. A., “Pro domo mea,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 46 (Mi-Avril 1910).
• E. A., “Entre nous,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 47 (25 Mai 1910).
• E. Armand, “Max Stirner, sa vie et son oeuvre,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 47 (25 Mai 1910): 13-19.
• E. Armand, “Rimes d’un emmuré,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 47 (25 Mai 1910): 28. [verse]
• E. A., “Entre nous,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 48 (30 Juin 1910).
• Max Nettlau, “Observations d’actualité,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 48 (30 Juin 1910): 29-33.
• E. Armand, “Rimes d’un emmuré,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 48 (30 Juin 1910): 36. [verse]
• Errico Malatesta et E. Armand, “Le droit de juger,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 48 (30 Juin 1910): 37-40.
• E. A., “Entre nous,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 49 (Juillet-Août 1910).
• E. Armand, “Ta dignité,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 49 (Juillet-Août 1910): 45-46.
• E. Armand, “Anarchiste d’abord,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 49 (Juillet-Août 1910): 53-55.
• Hael, Le Rétif et E. Armand, “Des principes ou une méthode?,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 49 (Juillet-Août 1910): 55-57.
• E. Armand, “Rimes d’un emmuré,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 49 (Juillet-Août 1910): 60. [verse]
• E. Armand, “Liéfra,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 49 (Juillet-Août 1910).
• E. A., “Entre nous,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 50 (Septembre 1910).
• E. Armand, “L’abîme,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 50 (Septembre 1910): 61.
• E. Armand, “Rimes d’un emmuré,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 50 (Septembre 1910): 68. [verse]
• E. Armand, “Jouir physiquement,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 50 (Septembre 1910): 69-71.
• E. A., “Autrefois et aujourd’hui,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 50 (Septembre 1910): 74-75.
• E. A., “Questions d’administration,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 50 (Septembre 1910).
• E. A., “Entre nous,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 51 (Octobre-Novembre 1910).
• E. Armand, “Tolstoï—La Barricade—La Concurrenoe—La vasectomie,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 51 (Octobre-Novembre 1910): 77-79.
• E. Armand, “Rimes d’un emmuré,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 51 (Octobre-Novembre 1910): 84. [verse]
• E. Armand, “Le bon camarade,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 51 (Octobre-Novembre 1910): 85-86.
• E. A., “Entre nous,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 52 (25 Décembre 1910).
• E. Armand, “Le long du chemin,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 52 (25 Décembre 1910): 93-98.
• E. Armand, “Rimes d’un emmuré,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 52 (25 Décembre 1910): 108. [verse]
• E. A., “L’Art et le Peuple,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 52 (25 Décembre 1910).
• E. A., “Entre nous,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 53 (Fin Janvier 1911).
• E. Armand, et al, “Questions de tolérance et d’éducation,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 53 (Fin Janvier 1911): 109-130.
• E. Armand, “Rimes d’un emmuré,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 53 (Fin Janvier 1911): 132. [verse]
• E. A., “Entre nous,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 54 (Février-Mars 1911).
• E. Armand, “Le long du chemin,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 54 (Février-Mars 1911): 133-135.
• E. Armand, “Je suis susceptible,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 54 (Février-Mars 1911): 139-140.
• E. Armand, “Rimes d’un emmuré,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 53 (Février-Mars 1911): 156. [verse]
• E. A., “Les Livres: Anarchism and Other Essays,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 54 (Février-Mars 1911).
• E. A., “Entre nous,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 54 (30 Avril 1911).
• E. Armand, “Le long du chemin,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 54 (30 Avril 1911): 157-159.
• E. Armand, “Romance,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 54 (30 Avril 1911): 180. [verse]
• E. A., “Le théâtre: L’Oiseau bleu,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 54 (30 Avril 1911).
• E. Armand, “Le long du chemin,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 55 (s.d. (1911)): 181-185.
• E. Armand, “Aie foi en toi,” L’Ère nouvelle 5 no. 55 (s.d. (1911)): 193-195.

An interview with Svein Olav Nyberg

Mr. Nyberg, could you briefly tell us your definition of Egoism? What authors have inspired your writing?

My direct inspirations have been few. Perhaps only Max Stirner should be mentioned, since I more or less considered myself a disciple of his in my active years. But there have been other minor inspirations, and some of them even by contradiction. It is, for instance, very hard to get past Ayn Rand when you mention “egoism” in our time, and she has of sorts inspired me, but very much via negativa, by that I honed my own understanding of the word in contrast to hers. Not that I am all in disagreement, either, but where we had our differences is perhaps where I was most clarified. Other than that, smaller inspirations from popular psychology and even eastern culture (chuang tzu) have of course had their say. And much in the way of Rand, so have also Nietzsche and Socrates been useful.

My definition? As an old acolyte for Stirner, I have of course not just one. Stirner uses the term “egoist” in at least two ways, so I think I am guilty of at least three. So let me give you three simple ones: 1) The egoist as the moral philosophical disproof, the ad absurdum, is the man who does not act “as man” according to the moral philosopher, and who therefore ends up being the paradoxical “man who is not a man”. Of course, it is the philosophy that dies as a result of this contradiction, not the man. 2) “The creative nothing”. This is what Stirner’s definitions boil down to, and is perhaps the most alluring statement of egoism. It also borders on mysticism, which is another one of my long-time interests. 3) A man whose actions follow from his own interest. This leaves the word “interest” inherently undefined, and for my part at least, an examination of this leads to #2. But I notice others examine it differently and end up with egoisms much closer to the common derogatory term of someone who cares shit about others.

When did you become interested in Egoism?

In my mid teens, after a bit of a philosophical crisis. I had hoped that ethics was somehow logically provable, and of course preferably that these ethics equalled the ones I subscribed to at the time. But the more I tried, the farther away that goal became, until I discovered what all young thinkers discover sooner or later: that we cannot think so hard that we manage to materialize a bridge to “ought”. Not from “is”, but nor from anywhere else we might feel comfortably safe to start. That was when I discovered the trio of Stirner, Nietzsche and Rand, and in the former I found a positive spin on what had seemed like doom.

You have written about what egoism is not, misconceptions of what Egoism is. Could you tell us about this?

That’s an interesting question, and as you saw above, even a single person such as myself often work with several conceptions of that single word. So I won’t go the route of Rand who defines the word, and then everyone else are wrong – by definition.

What is common to most understandings of egoisms, though, is that it is an “ism” of the self, so it means to be “for yourself” in some way. I think where it goes wrong is when someone imposes an external constraint on the meaning. Say, for instance, that they insist that all of existence is a power struggle. With that constraint, being “for yourself” automatically implies “being against the other”. You see where this is going? Other pathways may also end up precisely there, equating being for yourself with somehow wanting ill fortune for others or preying on them. If that was all there was to egoism, then egoists would shun each other’s company! In essence, these people have defined the “egoist” as a predatory character, a near synonym for a “sociopath”. And aside from Sherlock Holmes in the new TV series, not many would defend that. I would not, and Stirner would not. But the sociopath *does* serve one philosophical function: that of being a counter-example to the ethical theorist’s “man”.

But yet, I meet people who argue that philosophical egoists are simply sociopaths in philosophical clothing. This is usually based on a sample of zero persons.

So perhaps just as important as clarifying what egoism is not, is to clarify what self-professed egoists in practice are not. The ones I have met have interestingly enough been very kind people, and open and generous to boot. Quite opposite of the stereotype people have of the reclusive miser scheming others’ misfortune. They actively care about people in their surroundings, and they profess philosophical egoism because they think it will help these others.

At this point, someone may well interject “But what about the non-philosophical egoists, the ones who don’t use the word but who simply act the way we mean when we say ‘egoist’?” And to that, is there really anything to answer? They have already defined “egoist” to mean what they mean, and are thus using the word in the rather common but unreflected and stereotypical way. They really want to reserve that word as a synonym for the predatory and the sociopath. Well, that’s fine too, but they do limit their understandings of the world if they insist that theirs is the only meaning, being dark mirror images of Ayn Rand, in my world.

For those who may not know, could you tell us who Max Stirner was, and why his writing is important in discussing Egoism?

Interesting question. While you could always look him up in some encyclopaedia, the entry writers seem to at best rely on second hand sources, which means they are often off-target by a near 180˚. You may also wonder how it is possible to confuse ethical egoism with epistemological solipsism without a decent dose of absinthe.

Anyway, Max himself. His lived in Germany in the first half of the 1800s, and was a student of Hegel’s. But of course, the name of the teacher does not say it all. What matters at least as much is what the student himself brings into the equation, and Max seems to have had a particularly strong individualist streak. So the short version of who Max Stirner was, was that he was the one to breathe individualism onto Hegelianism – or possibly Hegelianism into individualism.

The result of mixing the Hegelian toolcase with individualism was a very potent kind of individualism that not only asserted the individual in its nakedness, but which also used the intellectual aikido of Hegelianism to swing its oppositions arguments around and against them. This is what Stirner did so successfully: the ethical philosophers of his time tried to subdue real humans by labelling them inhuman, or “un-man”, if they did not do what the ethical theory commanded. Stirner turned that very “un-man” as a club against the philosophies themselves. A dialectical turn, an intellectual aikido, which broke his opponents.

And break his opponents he did. The Young Hegelian club from which Stirner sprang did indeed wither, and I say much as a result of his attacks. One particular weed from that club escaped, though. Not intellectually, for it was nothing but Feuerbachianism (Feuerbach was a prominent Young Hegelian) expounded with lots of gusto. But that gusto let it survive, even though its gardener Karl Marx had to let off steam against Stirner through a few hundred pages of ad hominem attacks on Stirner in The German Ideology.

And that is perhaps the most important reason why Stirner still is important: Marx and Stirner were opposites, and Stirner had the stronger case. Marx won through back then because he had the stronger personality and financial backing. But Stirner still has the stronger case. To anyone wanting to promote egoism – or any other reasonable stripe of individualism – using Stirner’s appropriation of Hegel’s toolbox will prove very valuable.

And it might even be as Hegelian philosopher Lawrence Stepelevich has suggested, that Stirner not only appropriated Hegel’s toolbox for individualism, but even did his philosophical aikido so thoroughly that he showed that Hegel’s toolbox really belonged to Stirner all the time. Stirner was the ultimate Hegelian.

Available at Underworld Amusements

This booklet, released by the Sidney E. Parker Archives and the Union of Egoists as part of the Stand Alone series, is a reproduction of one published by Mr. Parker in 1962.

Contents:
Publishers Note
Our Kind of Individualist
Anarchist Individualism as Life and Activity
The Future Society

In a 1993 interview, Sid gave some background on it:
“…I became more and more interested in what was called individualist anarchism. I then read Max Stirner because I thought he was identified with that school—wrongly I think now, but that was the case then—and I got in touch with Armand, the French individualist anarchist, and he ‘charged’ me to ‘reanimate the individualist anarchist movement in all the countries of the English language’, which I tried to do… I published some of his pieces in English translation… I issued two as leaflets, one while he was still alive; then I got together, after he died, three of his essays, already in English, had them printed by Express Printers, and brought them out as a pamphlet called Anarchism and Individualism.”

Available from Amazon.com or Underworld Amusements.

DER GEIST, The Journal of Egoism from 1845 – 1945
VOLUME 2 NUMBER 1, ISSUE 2
WINTER 2018 (Published 25 October 2018)
Paperback, 188 pages, fifteen dollars
isbn 978-1-944651-11-4
issn 2639-5339

Contents of this issue:

Introduction by Trevor Blake
1. Benjamin DeCasseres
Detroit Jewish Chronicle | Hate Everlasting | How I Interviewed Bacchus | The Fatal Smile
2. Max Stirner
The Worker and the Government | James Walker – What is Good? What is Evil? | Good Reading to Sharpen Mental Teeth | William Flygare – Vanitas | Max Stirner Bibliography Addendum | L’Unique et sa propriété | The Unique Individual | Malcolm Green – I’ve Based My Affairs on Nothing
3. Anthony Ludovici
Kevin I. Slaughter – Anthony M. Ludovici’s Egoism | The Choice of a Mate
4. Dora Marsden
Trevor Blake – Dora Marsden’s England | Casandra and the War | Trevor Blake – To the Great Name | Egoist Advertisement in The Little Review | Anent the Decalogue | N.C. Chritcher – …the Power of Thought
5. Malfew Seklew
The Rejection of Christianity | Mr. F. Wilkesbarre, Coster | Trevor Blake – Surfessor of Egoism, Introduction | MS – Surfessor of Egoism | A New Way to Earn a Living | … from the Labor Annual | Perfumed Pigs | Stars in the Talking Marathon | Trevor Blake – Victor Grayson M.P. – Introduction | Victor Grayson M.P. / A Rhapsody
6. Henry and Georgia Replogle & Egoism (1890)
Egoism’s Purpose and Whyfore | Minus the Communism | The “Selfish” Bauble
7. J. Wm. Lloyd
Personally Acquainted | Anarchist Socialism
8. Dill Pickle Club
John Nichols Beffel – Up an Alley to a Wild Place | Patricia Bronte – Dill Pickle Club | Trevor Blake – Angels of the Dill Pickle Club| Andrea Proudfoot – The Optimist’s Ego
9. The Eagle and The Serpent (1898)
C. L. Swartz – A Volcano Has Burst Forth in England | Tak Kak – A Difference of Words Only | Volcano – A Dream of Beyond | Volcano – A Unanimous Conviction | Advertisement from the Labor Annual | Marginalia
10. Friedrich Nietzsche
William Gordak – Nietzsche | Nietzsche In T.P.’s Weekly
11. Free Spirits
Kevin I. Slaughter – The Sidney E. Parker Archives | Émile Armand – Three Poems | Herbert Roseman – Laurance Labadie and His Critics | The Altruist Corner | Kevin I. Slaughter – From the Library | Photo of George Schumm | Patreon Thanks | Errata | About the Editors

May 16, 1962.

Dear Mr. Labadie,

I am engaged in the project of translating and publishing the works of E. Armand and other anarchist individualist writers. Several articles have already appeared in “Freedom” and two items have been published separately (I enclose copies of these). However, I am in need of help in the shape of translations and I am wondering if you would be willing to translate, or if you know of anyone else who would be so. Financial help would also be welcome.

During the last year I have been receiving “Balanced Living” and have noticed your name mentioned in its columns. I have noticed also that you have written a pamphlet on “Government and H-Bombs”. Is this still available? If it is, I would be willing to review it in “Freedom”, as I have done two pamphlets by Don Werkheiser. Are any other of your writings available? (The late E. Armand sent me some of your leaflets.)

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,
S.E. Parker.

Dear Mr. S. E. Parker

In reply to your letter of May 16: I am familiar only with the English language; and I am not acquainted with anyone available for translations from French. Enclosed is a mimeographed copy of the article you request. Since I live practically a hermit’s life, I am not in much contact with radicals. However, I have written quite a bit during these last years, possibly very little of it publishable, or at least it hasn’t been. It is rather pessimistic stuff, since it appears to me that the prospects for liberty are almost hopeless.

The Freedom (London) people have kindly sent me their paper for a good many years, and lately I have been able to reimburse them. I have read it religiously, and suppose that one way to give my opinion of this journal would be to say that I consider it about 90% communist and 10% anarchist.

I have a very dim view of the deleterious effect which “communist anarchism” has had on the genuine article.

The ignorant “replies” which have been made to some of your letters is indicative. And yet, amid the welter of idiocy regarding the current scene, I tend to favor them.

Sincerely
Laurance Labadie
20 De Baun Lane, Suffern, N.Y.

20.6.62.

Dear Friend,

Many thanks for your letter and the enclosures.

I think that, rather than try to summarize the article on atomic war in a review, it would be far better to send it to “Freedom” for publication in its columns and, with your permission, I shall do this.

I agree, in the main, with your estimation of “Freedom”.

In spite of their “communist” bias, however, its editors are willing to publish other anarchist points of view – something which, I am told, certain other anarchist journals – e.g. in Italy, are not prepared to do. Having “grown up with F” and, in spite of our now divergent interpretations of anarchism, still remaining on friendly terms with its editors I am particularly glad they maintain such an open attitude.

You may be interested to know that among the items sent to me by the companion of the late E. Armand – was a Spanish translation of one of your essays called “Is Communism Practical?” Also a small booklet of essays by your rather and some of his verses. (I have also acquired, from other sources, copies of “Man!” containing your “Reflections on Liberty” and other articles, and also Tucker’s “Why I Am An Anarchist” and Badcock’s “Slaves to Duty” published by you.)

I have just read again James J. Martin: “Men Against the State”. In it I found references to Victor Yarros’ rejection of anarchism and Tuckers repudiation of him in letters to you. However, in one of the few copies of “L’Unique” I possess there is an article by Yarros (circa 1948, I think) which seems – as far as my extremely fragmentary French allows me to judge – to be quite sympathetic to anarchist individualism. Have you any idea where he now stands?

I note from your letter that you live at Suffern. This was, I believe, the address of the School of Living before it moved to Brookvale, Ohio. Does any trace of it remain in Suffern? (I was surprised to find – when I came across “Balance Living” last year – that such a distinct anarchist trend has emerged from the muddled idealism of Borsodi.)

With best wishes,
S.E. Parker.