Freedom, Society, and State - Ludwig von Mises Institute

ished or expelled from the Union. And further, while
there are neither rights nor duties, and power is the be
a 1 I and end a I 1, sothat 0 ne own son I y wh a the has the
power to control, it is clear that Stirner believes that
the utility of a secure property structure would encourage
the Unions to protect that institution. "Unions
will ,n hewr i t e s, "mu I tip I Y the i nd i v i d ua I 's me a nsand
SeCure his assailed property."(51)
Asin 0 the r t ypes 0 fanarchism, the ego i s tic wr i tings
of Stirner contain a sustained condemnation of capital
ism and "legal property." A closer view,however,
makes it evident that what Stirner opposes is actually
the mercant i list, or state capitalist,system. Thus he
wr i t esthat "t heState i sac0 mm 0 ner' s [merchant's]
State. ""Under the regime of the commonality," he
says, "the laborers always fall into the hands of the
possessors -- i.e., of those who have at their disposal
some bit of the State domains, ••• especially money
and 1and; 0 f the ca pit a lis t the ref 0 r e. " And aga in:
"The commoner is what he is through the protection of
the State, through the State 's gr ace. " ( 52 )Thesestatemen
t s, i nth ems e 1 ve s, are compa t ib 1e wit h f r e e -ma r ke t
capitalism. Further, Stirner was such a bitter opponent
of any type of communism that Karl Marx wrote that
S t i r n e r 's It ego i s ticalpr ope r t y • • • is not h i ng more
than ordinary or bourgeois property sanctified."(53) So
wh i I e hewa s vag u e concern i ng wh a t r ole the rna r ketand
private property would play in a Stirnerite society,
Charles Madison accurately captures the thrust of
S t i r n e r ism when herema r ks t hat "i ron i ca I 1yen0 ugh, the
h a r d s elf ish n e s s 0 f t his i n d i v i d ua listanarchism wa s
admira b 1 Y ad 8 pte d tothe' rug g edind i v i d u 8 I ism' 0 f
modern capitalism."{S4) It might also be pointed out
that such prominent exponents of egoism as John Babcock
and John Henry Mackay considered private property sacrosanct
and reserved a central role for voluntary contract
and exchange for mutual benefit. But both, it should be
noted, were also heavily influenced by the prominent ind
i v i d uali s tor "ph i los 0 phi cal" a narchis t, Ben jamin
Tucker. (55)
g. Philosophical Anarchism.
What is usually termed the philosophical anarchist
tradition received its fullest expression in the writings
of the nineteenth century American anarchists, and
in particular'Benjamin Tucker and Victor Yarros. Tucker,
1 ike other anarchists, couc'hed his arguments in socialist
terminology. Yet an examination of his ideas, as
15