Introduction to Egoist Criticism
In an era marked by people thinking of themselves as brands, and intersectional analysis being used as an excuse to obsess over which social spook one aligns with most, the need for a new form of sociocultural criticism—one that transcends traditional frameworks and confronts fundamental contradictions—becomes apparent.
This is where we enter egoist criticism.
I know, you’re probably wondering…who the hell are you and why should I care? And I get it…Philosophy is a bummer and critical thought makes everything bleak and depressing.
I agree. It sucks to be disillusioned. But escapism and defeatism aren’t it either, friends. Don’t you want to have a say in your own thoughts and beliefs? Don’t you want to find ways of actually connecting to others? Fostering empathy? Don’t you ever seek depth or freedom?
Please hear me out then…
Let me start at the beginning. Let’s look at what I even mean by criticism.
Brief Introduction to Critical Theory
In essence, critical theory is a response to post-Enlightenment philosophies and positivism in particular. Critical theorists “deconstruct” the notion that there is a unitary truth that can be known by using one way or method.
Elizabeth DePoy PhD, MSW, OTR & Laura N. Gitlin PhD, in: Introduction to Research (Fifth Edition), 2016
Critical theory is a philosophical and interdisciplinary approach to…well…anything, really. It examines all aspects of society, culture, politics, and economics with a focus on understanding and challenging power structures and systems of oppression.
It emerged primarily from the Frankfurt School in the 20th century, drawing from Marxist theory and combining it with insights from sociology, psychology, and philosophy.
Key elements of critical theory include:
Critique of Power: Critical theory seeks to uncover and critique the power dynamics that shape society, including how certain groups dominate and oppress others.
Interdisciplinary Approach: It integrates insights from various disciplines, including sociology, psychology, philosophy, and cultural studies, to analyze complex social phenomena.
Emphasis on Praxis: Critical theory emphasizes the importance of theory in action, encouraging scholars and activists to apply critical insights to social change and liberation efforts.
Recognition of Social Construction: It highlights the role of language, culture, and ideology in shaping social reality, emphasizing that many social categories and norms are socially constructed rather than natural or inevitable.
Commitment to Social Justice: Critical theory is often associated with a commitment to social justice and the goal of challenging and transforming oppressive social structures to create a more equitable and just society.
So What Can Egoist Anarchism Add to Critical Theory?
Egoist anarchist philosophy can contribute several unique perspectives and insights to critical theory.
To answer this question though, we need to look deep into what Egoist Critcism means.
Let’s circle back to this question in the end.
What is Egoist Criticism?
At its core, egoist criticism represents a departure from popular modes of critique, which often rely on ideological frameworks such as Marxism, liberalism, or post-structuralism. While these approaches have provided valuable insights into the workings of power and ideology, they often fall short in addressing the complexities of individual autonomy and self-determination.
Egoist criticism is here to offer a fresh perspective which follows some fundamental underlying assumptions:
Power & Ideology - Felt Power & Anti-Legitimacy
Criticism means deconstructing power structures and ideologies and invalidating their binary systems.
Egoist criticism means saying that these power structures aren’t just valid in the material realm. They can’t just be approached through historical materialism, a Hegelian conceptual analysis, structuralist and post-structuralist analysis, critical discourse analysis, or psychoanalysis.
Power isn’t just a mode of oppression. Power isn’t just relational, productive, disciplinary, biopolitical, or discursive.
Unlike traditional conceptions of power as something to be possessed or wielded over others, Stirner's concept of power revolves around the idea of "ownness" or "self-ownership." This egoistic power can be framed as a kind of ‘delusion of grandeur’ - or what I am referring to as felt power.
And felt power assumes that legitimacy cannot be received from an external source. It therefore comprises another delusion - namely the delusion of anti-legitimacy, or the rejection of legitimacy as a valid concept which holds meaning and authority.
Stirner, in his work which I am basing this whole thing around, argues that he, as an individual, assert his own desires and interests without being constrained by external authorities or moral norms. True power, according to Stirner, lies in the egoist's ability to act according to their own will and interests, unrestrained by societal expectations or obligations.
As easy and simplistic as this sounds, I claim that this ability to act according to one’s own desires is actually one of the most difficult things for people to achieve in life, as it underlines an understanding of self as anything but pro-social in the traditional sense, basically relieves humans of all that could potentially be considered a virtue (which many people base their identity on), and it demolishes the concept of identity altogether.
Furthermore, felt power also, in a way, necessitates a rejection of oppression. While it does not pretend that the world is peachy and everything is wonderful, it does say: “This shit is not going to define me.”
This, of course, is an incredibly controversial perspective. There are so many people in this world who are struggling to survive, who may be bombed in their homes right now as we speak. Human trafficking, domestic violence, disciplinary madness,…the list is long. This world sucks. There is no denying it.
However, I would like to offer a thought experiment to explain why I believe it is important to give the concept of felt power a chance.
Let’s say little ol’ you is out there, having realized that society, morality, identity, knowledge, sensual experience, and authority are spooks. You still have to exist in this world. You still have to go to work. You still have to acknowledge material reality: capitalism as a socioeconomic system, law as a basis for morality, self-actualization as identity, educational systems and media as knowledge, entertainment as sensual experience, and the state as authority. These things exist. Hierarchies still categorize us by privilege.
So you go outside with your new-found existentialism. You act in accordance with Sartre’s wet dreams. But nothing is different. And that sucks. You don’t like that. So you do what I am doing right now. What Stirner did. You express. You utter an idea. You try to create a way to systematize egoism. You try to explain it to people. You try to help people see the validity of felt power. And you want that because…well…you want to connect. You want to see if other people can relate.
The problem with that is…as soon as you do it, as soon as you try to systematize egoism, as a principle…it falls apart. It is no longer a way to aid in the breaking of binaries. It is no longer a way to support the deconstruction of social hierarchies.
It is its own power mechanism. It is its own agenda. It wants something. And every want creates hierarchies.
Are you getting what I am trying to tell you?
No matter how much deconstructing you do. No matter how much you hate power. No matter how much you try to make it disappear. No matter how much equality you try to create. No matter how much you want to tell yourself that if someone handed you the gun during a riot you wouldn’t fucking love the power…
Let’s get real. We all want it. And we also want to be good. We want to connect. We want to be intimate. We want to be loved and cared for and love and care for.
These desires can exist at the same time.
So egoist criticism invalidates external sources of power and legitimacy, and engages in a conscious delusion of grandeur, where power is held only by the individual. And the thing it possesses is oneself.
So on one hand, power is delegitimized. On the other hand, it is psychically conquered.
Egoist Desire & Actualization as a Thing-in-Itself
Egoist criticism approaches desire through a fundamental look at the underlying motivations and mechanisms that drive human behavior, particularly in the context of self-actualization. I argue that conventional coping mechanisms and post-structuralist analyses are insufficient in addressing the complexities of desire and self-actualization. Instead, I propose a deeper examination of the unconscious processes that influence individual actions and societal structures.
The way human desire is perceived, through the eyes of Marxism, Hegelianism, Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalysis, and structualist as well as much of post-structuralist theory, tends to turn the ego into an object or the Lacanian small other (objet-petit-a) - as a brand or a identity category - and turns the driving force of whatever you want to consider the fundamental dialectic of existence (thought before matter, matter before thought, existence before essence etc.) into a big Other - or a overarching narrative for one’s own life.
This is why I choose to go for a third option which combines Stirner’s egoism with Deleuze and Guattari’s framework which frames capitalism as a mirror image or a direct projection of a fundamental desire through a Marxist lense. In their framework, capitalism is more than a socioeconomic system. And it is self-reproductive, with its own agenda. In this framework, capitalism is the way our desire manifests under the regime of existence itself. We exist because otherwise there is nothing. And that is not an option.
Egoist Criticism assumes this as a fundamental notion and draws on Stirner’s tripartite development of the ego from his book The Ego and Its Own. He refers to these stages as "the stages of the times," illustrating the evolution of individual consciousness and autonomy. These stages represent different levels of awareness and engagement with external influences and societal norms:
1. The Stage of Unfreedom:
In this initial stage, individuals are constrained by external forces and influences, which limit their autonomy and self-awareness. Stirner describes this stage as characterized by a lack of freedom and agency, as individuals are shaped and controlled by societal expectations, cultural norms, and authority figures. Children are particularly susceptible to unfreedom during this stage, as they are socialized and conditioned by their caregivers and society at large. Individuals in this stage may conform to societal expectations and adopt external values and beliefs without questioning or asserting their own desires and interests.
2. The Stage of Rebellion:
In the second stage, individuals begin to question and challenge the constraints of unfreedom, asserting their own desires and interests in opposition to external authority. Stirner portrays this stage as a period of rebellion and resistance, during which individuals assert their autonomy and reject external norms and obligations. This stage is characterized by a sense of defiance and opposition to societal expectations, as individuals seek to assert their own identity and autonomy in the face of external pressures. However, Stirner cautions that rebellion alone is not sufficient for true liberation, as individuals may still be influenced by external ideals and values, albeit in opposition to them.
3. The Stage of Ownness:
In the final stage, individuals achieve true autonomy and self-awareness, embracing their own desires and interests without regard for external constraints or authority. Stirner describes this stage as the realization of "ownness," in which individuals prioritize their own desires and interests above all else. In this stage, individuals reject external values and obligations entirely, asserting their sovereignty and autonomy as "unique ones" (Eigenen) who exist beyond the constraints of societal norms and expectations. Ownness represents the pinnacle of individual autonomy and self-realization, as individuals embrace their own desires and interests as the primary drivers of their actions and identity.
The notion of actualization-as-a-thing-in-itself is a departure from traditional understandings of self-actualization as a goal-oriented process. I suggest that self-actualization is not a personal pursuit but that it is intertwined with broader existential structures- represented as socio-cultural power dynamics.
Desire operates independently of individual agency and is interwoven with systemic forces such as commodification - desire’s favorite tool to control the narrative for your ownness.
The commodification process works by diluting every single aspect of self-determination which is uttered or shared as a way of relation, and turns it into a copy of a copy of a copy version of self-expression.
There is no fixed self outside of this commodification mechanism, which makes it crucial to understand identity as fluid and desire as suspicious, and worthy of critique.
By utilizing Max Stirner's concept of egoism, a critic is able to oppose this commodification process.
Ownness = Fluid Identity
In the realm of egoist criticism, a fundamental principle emerges: agency over identity does not necessitate a rejection of identity. Instead, it heralds a transformative paradigm shift aligning with Deleuze and Guattari's concept of nomadic and schizophrenic subjectivity.
Central to this framework is the notion that individuals are not bound by fixed cultural or societal norms. Instead, they navigate a fluid landscape where self-determination takes precedence in a perpetual state of becoming. In this state, identity is not a static entity but rather a dynamic process of continuous self-reinvention.
Within the framework, individuals exist liberated from the confines of rigid cultural identities. The emphasis shifts from conformity to autonomy, from assimilation to self-assertion.
Importantly, this emancipation from fixed identities does not entail a rejection of identity and its subcategories like culture, race, class, gender etc. Instead, culture becomes a versatile tool for self-expression, a palette from which individuals can draw to craft their own narratives.
And no, Ben Shapiro…calm down. I am not saying physicalities don’t exist. I am not saying I can just say I identify as a black male rapper from Compton with several Grammy awards, and then suddenly I live in Kendrick Lamar’s mom’s house. Material reality is there in my face. It’s visible. It’s trying to make me feel all kinds of ways.
I AM NOT LOOKING FOR ANOTHER IDENTITY!!!
So identifying in itself defeats the purpose, doesn’t it?
I don’t want to be legitimized.
Make sense?
In essence, embracing nomadic subjectivity in egoist criticism entails transcending the limitations of fixed identities while simultaneously existing within a material space where identity is negotiated.
It represents a paradigm shift towards a more fluid and dynamic understanding of the self, but it does not end there. It does not end in social categories and shapeshifting.
This is about ownness.
How To Do Egoist Criticism
So what Egoist Criticism does is add that very understanding to the solid methodology of critical theory.
And the best way to do that is to work with what all the oppressed people of this world are working with. Listen, attentively, to any methodology offered or fundamental arguments made by freedom fighters, thinkers, analysts and activists from realms that are neither imperialist, white supremacist, patriarchial, or capitalist.
The Methodological Framework
So, first step for Egoist Criticism is to work with frameworks that utilize the insights of feminist theory and critique, queer theory, postcolonial theory, intersectionality, critical race theory, and post-capitalist critique.
Why?
Avoiding Imperialist, White Supremacist, Patriarchal, Capialist Thought
Well…because they come from people and explore the experiences, imaginaries and subjectivities of people generally fucked by the system and currently trying to achieve a state of felt power.
So, gathering our fundamental framework for sociocultural, socioeconomic and sociopolitical critique within those realms is an active ‘fuck you’ to enlightenment-rationality-based thought and allows for a much more nuanced understanding of oppression.
Maybe it’s true that oppressive structures rely on legitimacy. Maybe we can just kind of forget they exist.
Radical Self-Focus
Second step is to speak only in first person. I know…this sounds weird. But hear me out.
Through radical self-focus, language becomes something else.
First and foremost, it becomes a rejection of the authority of meaning and moves the purpose of language from a space for social expectations to a space of personal truth.
Second, through radical self-focus, language becomes a tool for anti-essentialism, which decenters objective reality and centralizes subjective experience. This is a radical rejection of enlightenment philosophy and everything that followed in the name of rationality.
Third, it devalues the power of language as a force of manipulation by highlighting the supremacy of internal conditions and convictions over anything external and invested in validation or legitimization. This makes it a tool for asserting freedom.
And lastly, it turns language into a weapon against any external authority of truth, including racialized and gendered narratives which exist to hierarchize individuals into groups and subgroups based on social value and capital.
Language is to be a tool for self-expression and that is all.
Again…What Can Egoist Criticism Add To Critical Theory?
Alright, let’s circle back…
If nothing else…Egoist Criticism offers a unique perspective that challenges traditional frameworks within critical theory, particularly by emphasizing individual autonomy and self-determination. Here's what it can add to critical theory:
1. Deconstruction of Power Structures: Egoist criticism challenges the conventional understanding of power by asserting that it is not merely relational or possessed externally but is also felt internally.
2. Rejection of Legitimacy: By emphasizing the concept of "felt power" and the rejection of legitimacy as a valid concept, egoist criticism invalidates external sources of power and legitimacy.
3. Fluid Identity: Egoist criticism views identity as fluid and dynamic yet invalid as a force of power, where individuals navigate a landscape of self-determination rather than conforming to rigid cultural or societal norms.
4. Methodological Framework: Egoist criticism suggests working within frameworks that prioritize the insights and experiences of marginalized communities, such as feminist theory, queer theory, postcolonial theory, intersectionality, critical race theory, and post-capitalist critique. This approach offers a more nuanced understanding of oppression and challenges imperialist, white supremacist, patriarchal, and capitalist thought.
5. Radical Self-Focus: Egoist criticism highlights self-expression by speaking in the first person and embracing radical self-focus as a means of rejecting external authority and asserting personal truth. This approach devalues the power of language as a tool of manipulation and emphasizes subjective experience over objective reality.
So…egoist criticism contributes to critical theory by offering alternative perspectives on power, legitimacy, identity, and language, ultimately challenging traditional frameworks and encouraging individual autonomy and self-expression.
Next time…I’ll give y’all an example.