- Code: Select all
For him, property simply comes about through might: "Whoever knows how to take, to defend, the thing, to him belongs property." And, "What I have in my power, that is my own. So long as I assert myself as holder, I am the proprietor of the thing." He says, "I do not step shyly back from your property, but look upon it always as my property, in which I respect nothing. Pray do the like with what you call my property!"[5] Stirner considers the world and everything in it, including other persons, available to one's taking or use without moral constraint[6] —that rights do not exist in regard to objects and people at all. He sees no rationality in taking the interests of others into account unless doing so furthers one's self-interest, which he believes is the only legitimate reason for acting
How can he possibly be considered an anarchist if he thought that exercising power and dominance over other humans is morally permissable? How is that not authoritarian?
