Editing Max Stirner (section)

== Influence ==
While ''Der Einzige'' was a critical success and attracted much reaction from famous philosophers after publication, it was out of print and the notoriety that it had provoked had faded many years before Stirner's death.<ref name=sep>{{cite SEP|url-id=max-stirner |title=Max Stirner}}</ref> However, since his death, it has seen a revival in publication in multiple languages.<ref name=sep/> Stirner had a destructive impact on [[left-Hegelianism]], but his philosophy was a significant influence on Marx and his magnum opus became a founding text of [[individualist anarchism]].<ref name=sep/> [[Edmund Husserl]] once warned a small audience about the "seducing power" of ''Der Einzige'', but he never mentioned it in his writing.<ref>[http://www.lsr-projekt.de/poly/eninnuce.html "Max Stirner, a durable dissident – in a nutshell"<!-- Bot generated title -->] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060518155939/http://www.lsr-projekt.de/poly/eninnuce.html |date=18 May 2006 }}.</ref> As the art critic and Stirner admirer [[Herbert Read]] observed, the book has remained "stuck in the gizzard" of Western culture since it first appeared.<ref>Quoted in Read's book, "The Contrary Experience", Faber and Faber, 1963.</ref>

Many thinkers have read and been affected by ''The Unique and Its Property'' in their youth including [[Rudolf Steiner]], [[Gustav Landauer]], [[Victor Serge]],<ref>See ''[[Memoirs of a Revolutionary, 1901–1941]]'' by Victor Serge. Publisher Oxford U.P., 1967.</ref> [[Carl Schmitt]] and [[Jürgen Habermas]]. Few openly admit any influence on their own thinking.<ref>See Bernd A. Laska: ''Ein dauerhafter Dissident.'' Nürnberg: LSR-Verlag 1996 ([http://www.lsr-projekt.de/msstudien.html#ss2 online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080228034538/http://www.lsr-projekt.de/msstudien.html#ss2 |date=28 February 2008 }}).</ref> [[Ernst Jünger]]'s book ''[[Eumeswil]]'', had the character of the [[Anarch (sovereign individual)|Anarch]], based on Stirner's Einzige.<ref>Bernd A. Laska: ''Katechon und Anarch.'' Nürnberg: LSR-Verlag 1997 ([http://www.lsr-projekt.de/msstudien.html#ss3 online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080228034538/http://www.lsr-projekt.de/msstudien.html#ss3 |date=28 February 2008 }}).</ref> Some have tried to use Stirner’s ideas to defend capitalism while others have used them to argue for anarcho-syndicalism.<ref name="McKay 2012" />

Several other authors, philosophers and artists have cited, quoted or otherwise referred to Max Stirner. They include [[Albert Camus]] in ''[[The Rebel (book)|The Rebel]]'' (the section on Stirner is omitted from the majority of English editions including [[Penguin books|Penguin]]'s), Benjamin Tucker, [[James Huneker]],<ref>Huneker's book ''Egoists, a Book of Supermen'' (1909)contains an essay on Stirner.</ref> Dora Marsden, [[Renzo Novatore]], [[Emma Goldman]],<ref>See Goldman, Anarchism and Other Essays, p. 50.</ref> [[Georg Brandes]], [[John Cowper Powys]],<ref>{{cite news|last=Wilson|first=A. N.|date=1 November 2004|title=World of books|work=The Daily Telegraph|location=London|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/11/01/do0106.xml|url-status=dead|access-date=12 May 2010|archive-date=20 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210220062510/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/}}</ref> [[Martin Buber]],<ref>''Between Man and Man'' by Martin Buber, Beacon Press, 1955.</ref> [[Sidney Hook]],<ref>From Hegel to Marx by Sidney Hook, London, 1936.</ref> [[Robert Anton Wilson]], [[Horst Matthai Quelle|Horst Matthai]], [[Enrico Arrigoni|Frank Brand]], [[Marcel Duchamp]], several writers of the [[Situationist International]] including [[Raoul Vaneigem]]<ref>"The long revolution is preparing to write works in the ink of action whose unknown or nameless authors will flock to join Sade, Fourier, Babeuf, Marx, Lacenaire, Stirner, Lautréamont, L'hautier, Vaillant, Henry, Villa, Zapata, Makhno, the Communards, the insurrectionaries of Hamburg, Kiel, Kronstadt, Asturias—all those who have not yet played their last card in a game which we have only just joined: the great gamble whose stake is freedom". [[Raoul Vaneigem]]. ''[[The Revolution of Everyday Life]]''.</ref> and [[Max Ernst]]. [[Oscar Wilde]]'s ''[[The Soul of Man Under Socialism]]'' has caused some historians to speculate that Wilde (who could read German) was familiar with the book.<ref>[[David Goodway]], ''[[Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow]]'', Liverpool University Press, 2006. p. 75.</ref>

=== Anarchist movement ===
{{anarchism sidebar|people}}
{{main|Egoist anarchism|Individualist anarchism}}
Stirner's philosophy was important in the development of modern anarchist thought, particularly [[individualist anarchism]] and [[egoist anarchism]]. Although Stirner is usually associated with [[individualist anarchism]], he was influential to many [[social anarchism|social anarchists]] such as [[anarcha-feminist]]s Emma Goldman and [[Federica Montseny]]. In [[European individualist anarchism]], he influenced its major proponents after him such as [[Émile Armand]], [[Han Ryner]], Renzo Novatore, John Henry Mackay, [[Miguel Giménez Igualada]] and [[Lev Chernyi]].

In [[American individualist anarchism]], he found adherence in Benjamin Tucker and his magazine ''[[Liberty (1881–1908)|Liberty]]'' while these abandoned [[natural right]]s positions for egoism.<ref name="mcelroy">"Only the influence of the German philosopher of egoism, Max Stirner (né Johann Kaspar Schmidt, 1806–1856), as expressed through The Ego and His Own (Der Einzige und sein Eigentum) compared with that of Proudhon. In adopting Stirnerite egoism (1886), Tucker rejected natural rights which had long been considered the foundation of libertarianism. This rejection galvanized the movement into fierce debates, with the natural rights proponents accusing the egoists of destroying libertarianism itself. So bitter was the conflict that a number of natural rights proponents withdrew from the pages of Liberty in protest even though they had hitherto been among its frequent contributors. Thereafter, Liberty championed egoism although its general content did not change significantly". Wendy Mcelroy. [http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1300&layout=html#chapter_100896 "Benjamin Tucker, Individualism, & Liberty: Not the Daughter but the Mother of Order"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110524105129/http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1300&layout=html#chapter_100896 |date=24 May 2011 }}.</ref> Several periodicals "were undoubtedly influenced by ''Liberty'''s presentation of egoism". They included ''I'', published by [[Clarence Lee Swartz]] and edited by William Walstein Gordak and [[J. William Lloyd]] (all associates of ''Liberty''); and ''The Ego and The Egoist'', both of which were edited by Edward H. Fulton. Among the egoist papers that Tucker followed, there were the German ''[[Der Eigene]]'', edited by [[Adolf Brand]]; and ''The Eagle and The Serpent'', issued from London. The latter, the most prominent English-language egoist journal, was published from 1898 to 1900 with the subtitle ''A Journal of Egoistic Philosophy and Sociology''.<ref name="mcelroy"/> Other American egoist anarchists around the early 20th century include [[James L. Walker]], George Schumm, [[John Beverley Robinson (anarchist)|John Beverley Robinson]], [[Steven T. Byington]].<ref name="mcelroy"/>

In the United Kingdom, Herbert Read was influenced by Stirner and noted the closeness of Stirner's egoism to existentialism (see existentialist anarchism). Later in the 1960s, Daniel Guérin says in ''Anarchism: From Theory to Practice'' that Stirner "rehabilitated the individual at a time when the philosophical field was dominated by Hegelian anti-individualism and most reformers in the social field had been led by the misdeeds of bourgeois egotism to stress its opposite" and pointed to "the boldness and scope of his thought".<ref name="Guerin">[[Daniel Guérin]],''Anarchism: From Theory to Practice''</ref> In the 1970s, an American [[Situationist International|Situationist]] collective called For Ourselves published a book called ''[[The Right To Be Greedy: Theses On The Practical Necessity Of Demanding Everything]]'' in which they advocate a "communist egoism" basing themselves on Stirner.<ref>[http://libcom.org/library/right-be-greedy-theses-practical-necessity-demanding-everything "Four Ourselves, The Right To Be Greedy: Theses On The Practical Necessity Of Demanding Everything"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130622062115/http://libcom.org/library/right-be-greedy-theses-practical-necessity-demanding-everything|date=22 June 2013}}</ref>

Later in the United States, it emerged the tendency of [[post-left anarchy]] which was influenced profoundly by Stirner in aspects such as the critique of ideology. [[Jason McQuinn]] says that "when I (and other anti-ideological anarchists) criticize ideology, it is always from a specifically critical, anarchist perspective rooted in both the skeptical, individualist-anarchist philosophy of Max Stirner".<ref name="Cuchuflito">"What is Ideology?" by [[Jason McQuinn]].</ref> [[The Abolition of Work|Bob Black]] and Feral Faun/Wolfi Landstreicher strongly adhere to Stirnerist egoism. In the hybrid of [[post-structuralism]] and anarchism called [[post-anarchism]], [[Saul Newman]] has written on Stirner and his similarities to post-structuralism. [[Insurrectionary anarchism]] also has an important relationship with Stirner as can be seen in the work of Wolfi Landstreicher and [[Alfredo Bonanno]] who has also written on him in works such as ''Max Stirner'' and ''Max Stirner and Anarchism''.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Bonanno |first1=Alfredo M. |title=Max Stirner und der Anarchismus |date=1996 |publisher=Anares |location=Bern |isbn=3-905052-61-X }}</ref>

==== Free love, homosexuals and feminists ====
{{See also|Anarchism and issues related to love and sex}}
German Stirnerist Adolf Brand produced the homosexual periodical ''Der Eigene'' in 1896. This was the first ongoing homosexual publication in the world<ref>[[Karl Heinrich Ulrichs]] had begun a journal called ''Prometheus'' in 1870, but only one issue was published. Kennedy, Hubert, ''Karl Heinrich Ulrichs: First Theorist of Homosexuality'', In: 'Science and Homosexualities', ed. Vernon Rosario. New York: Routledge, 1997, pp. 26–45.</ref> and ran until 1931. The name was taken from the writings of Stirner (who had greatly influenced the young Brand) and refers to Stirner's concept of "[[self-ownership]]" of the individual. Another early homosexual activist influenced by Stirner was John Henry Mackay. Feminists influenced by Stirner include anarchist Emma Goldman, as well as [[Dora Marsden]] who founded the journals ''[[The Freewoman]], [[The New Freewoman]]'', and [[The Egoist (periodical)|''The Egoist'']]. Stirner also influenced [[free love]] and [[polyamory]] propagandist [[Émile Armand]] in the context of [[Individualist anarchism in Europe#France|French individualist anarchism]] of the early 20th century which is known for "[t]he call of nudist [[naturism]], the strong defense of birth control methods, the idea of "unions of egoists" with the sole justification of sexual practices".<ref name="frenchexperimentation">Xavier Diez. [http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=2044944 "La insumisión voluntaria. El anarquismo individualista español durante la dictadura y la Segunda República"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191220143610/https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=2044944 |date=20 December 2019 }}.</ref>

==== Post-structuralism ====
{{see also|Post-anarchism|Post-structuralism}}
In his book ''[[Specters of Marx]]'', influential French poststructuralist thinker [[Jacques Derrida]] dealt with Stirner and his relationship with Marx while also analysing Stirner's concept of "specters" or "spooks".<ref>[[Jacques Derrida]]. ''[[Specters of Marx]]''. Routledge. 1994.</ref> [[Gilles Deleuze]], another key thinker associated with post-structuralism, mentions Stirner briefly in his book ''[[The Logic of Sense]]''.<ref>"Human or divine, as Stirner said, the predicates are the same whether they belong analytically to the divine being, or whether they are synthetically bound to the human form" (Gilles Deleuze. ''[[The Logic of Sense]]''. Continuum. 2004). p. 122.</ref> Saul Newman calls Stirner a proto-[[Post-structuralism|poststructuralist]] who on the one hand had essentially anticipated modern post-structuralists such as [[Michel Foucault|Foucault]], [[Jacques Lacan|Lacan]], Deleuze and Derrida, but on the other had already transcended them, thus providing what they were unable to—i.e. a ground for a [[non-essentialist]] critique of present liberal capitalist society. This is particularly evident in Stirner's identification of the self with a "creative nothing", a thing that cannot be bound by ideology, inaccessible to representation in language.

=== Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels ===
Friedrich Engels commented on Stirner in poetry at the time of ''Die Freien'':
{{poem quote|Look at Stirner, look at him, the peaceful enemy of all constraint.
For the moment, he is still drinking beer,
Soon he will be drinking blood as though it were water.
When others cry savagely "down with the kings"
Stirner immediately supplements "down with the laws also."
Stirner full of dignity proclaims;
You bend your willpower and you dare to call yourselves free.
You become accustomed to slavery
Down with dogmatism, down with law.<ref>Henri Arvon, Aux sources de 1'existentialisme Max Stirner (Paris, 1954), p. 14.</ref>}}

Engels once even recalled at how they were "great friends" (''Duzbrüder'').<ref name="autogenerated2" /> In November 1844, Engels wrote a letter to Karl Marx in which he first reported a visit to Moses Hess in [[Cologne]] and then went on to note that during this visit Hess had given him a press copy of a new book by Stirner, ''The Unique and Its Property''. In his letter to Marx, Engels promised to send a copy of the book to him, for it certainly deserved their attention as Stirner "had obviously, among the 'Free Ones', the most talent, independence and diligence."<ref name="autogenerated2"/> To begin with, Engels was enthusiastic about the book and expressed his opinions freely in letters to Marx:
{{blockquote|But what is true in his principle, we, too, must accept. And what is true is that before we can be active in any cause we must make it our own, egoistic cause—and that in this sense, quite aside from any material expectations, we are communists in virtue of our egoism, that out of egoism we want to be human beings and not merely individuals.<ref>Zwischen 18 and 25, pp. 237–238.</ref>}}

Later, Marx and Engels wrote a major criticism of Stirner's work. The number of pages Marx and Engels devote to attacking Stirner in the unexpurgated text of ''The German Ideology'' exceeds the total of Stirner's written works.<ref>[http://www.zeno.org/Philosophie/M/Marx,+Karl/Die+deutsche+Ideologie/I.+Band%3A+%5BKritik+der+neuesten+deutschen+Philosophie+in+ihren+Repr%C3%A4sentanten+Feuerbach,+B.+Bauer+und+Stirner%5D/III.+Sankt+Max "Chapter ''Sankt Max'' in ''Die deutsche Ideologie''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110929113759/http://www.zeno.org/Philosophie/M/Marx,+Karl/Die+deutsche+Ideologie/I.+Band%3A+%5BKritik+der+neuesten+deutschen+Philosophie+in+ihren+Repr%C3%A4sentanten+Feuerbach,+B.+Bauer+und+Stirner%5D/III.+Sankt+Max |date=29 September 2011 }}.</ref> In the book Stirner is derided as ''Sankt Max'' (Saint Max) and as ''Sancho'' (a reference to Cervantes' [[Sancho Panza]]). As [[Isaiah Berlin]] has described it, Stirner "is pursued through five hundred pages of heavy-handed mockery and insult."<ref>I. Berlin, Karl Marx (New York, 1963), 143.</ref> The book was written in 1845–1846, but it was not published until 1932. Marx's lengthy ferocious [[polemic]] against Stirner has since been considered an important turning point in Marx's intellectual development from [[idealism]] to [[materialism]]. It has been argued that [[historical materialism]] was Marx's method of reconciling communism with a Stirnerite rejection of morality.<ref name="Lobkowicz 1970">{{cite book|last=Lobkowicz|first=Nicolas|year=1970|chapter=Karl Marx and Max Stirner|title=Demythologizing Marxism|pages=64–95|edition=illustrated|location=Heidelberg|publisher=Springer Netherlands|isbn=978-9024702121 |doi=10.1007/978-94-010-3185-1_3|doi-broken-date=1 November 2024 }}</ref><ref name="Stedman-Jones 2002">Stedman-Jones, Gareth (2002). "Introduction". In Engels, Friedrich; Marx, Karl. ''The Communist Manifesto'' (illustrated, reprinted, revised ed.). London: Penguin Adult. {{ISBN|978-0140447576}}.</ref><ref name="Alexander">{{cite journal|last=Alexander|first=Green|url=http://consciousegoism.6te.net/pdfs/nonserviam/23.pdf|title=Stirner & Marx – Max Stirner: A Biographical Sketch|journal=Non Serviam|volume=1|issue=23|pages=5–42|access-date=8 May 2020|archive-date=20 April 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200420153640/http://consciousegoism.6te.net/pdfs/nonserviam/23.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Possible influence on Friedrich Nietzsche ===
{{main|Relationship between Friedrich Nietzsche and Max Stirner}}
The ideas of Stirner and Friedrich Nietzsche have often been compared and many authors have discussed apparent similarities in their writings, sometimes raising the question of influence.<ref>Albert Levy, ''Stirner and Nietzsche'', Paris, 1904; Robert Schellwien, ''Max Stirner and Friedrich Nietzsche'', 1892; H.L. Mencken, ''The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche'', 1908; K. Löwith, From Hegel To Nietzsche New York, 1964, p. 187; R. A. Nicholls, "Beginnings of the Nietzsche Vogue in Germany", in ''Modern Philology'', Vol. 56, No. 1, August 1958, pp. 24–37; T. A. Riley, "Anti-Statism in German Literature, as Exemplified by the Work of John Henry Mackay", in ''PMLA'', Vol. 62, No. 3, September 1947, pp. 828–843; Seth Taylor, ''Left Wing Nietzscheans, The Politics of German Expressionism 1910–1920'', p. 144, 1990, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York; Gilles Deleuze, ''Nietzsche et la Philosophy'', Presses Universitaires de France, 1962; R. C. Solomon and K. M. Higgins, ''The Age of German Idealism'', p. 300, Routledge, 1993.</ref> During the early years of Nietzsche's emergence as a well-known figure in Germany, the only thinker discussed in connection with his ideas more often than Stirner was [[Arthur Schopenhauer]].<ref>While discussion of possible influence has never ceased entirely, the period of most intense discussion occurred between 1892 and 1900 in the German-speaking world. During this time, the most comprehensive account of Nietzsche's reception in the German language, the 4-volume work of Richard Frank Krummel called ''Nietzsche und der deutsche Geist'', indicates 83 entries discussing Stirner and Nietzsche. The only thinker more frequently discussed in connection with Nietzsche during this time is Schopenhauer, with about twice the number of entries. Discussion steadily declines thereafter, but it is still significant. Nietzsche and Stirner show 58 entries between 1901 and 1918. From 1919 to 1945, there are 28 entries regarding Nietzsche and Stirner.</ref> It is certain that Nietzsche read about ''The Unique and Its Property'', which was mentioned in Friedrich Albert Lange's ''History of Materialism'' and [[Karl Robert Eduard von Hartmann]]'s ''Philosophy of the Unconscious'', both of which Nietzsche knew well.<ref>"Apart from the information which can be gained from the annotations, the library (and the books Nietzsche read) shows us the extent, and the bias, of Nietzsche's knowledge of many fields, such as evolution and cosmology. Still more obvious, the library shows us the extent and the bias of Nietzsche's knowledge about many persons to whom he so often refers with ad hominem statements in his works. This includes not only such important figures as Mill, Kant, and Pascal but also such minor ones (for Nietzsche) as Max Stirner and William James who are both discussed in books Nietzsche read". T. H. Brobjer, "Nietzsche's Reading and Private Library", 1885–1889, in ''Journal of the History of Ideas'', Vol. 58, No. 4, October 1997, pp. 663–693; Stack believes it is doubtful that Nietzsche read Stirner, but notes "he was familiar with the summary of his theory he found in Lange's history." George J. Stack, ''Lange and Nietzsche'', Walter de Gruyter, 1983, p. 276.</ref> However, there is no indication that he actually read it as no mention of Stirner is known to exist anywhere in Nietzsche's publications, papers or correspondence.<ref>Albert Levy, ''Stirner and Nietzsche'', Paris, 1904.</ref> In 2002, a biographical discovery revealed it is probable that Nietzsche had encountered Stirner's ideas before he read Hartmann and Lange in October 1865, when he met with Eduard Mushacke, an old friend of Stirner's during the 1840s.<ref>[http://www.lsr-projekt.de/poly/ennietzsche.html Bernd A. Laska: Nietzsche's initial crisis] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171020022410/http://www.lsr-projekt.de/poly/ennietzsche.html |date=20 October 2017 }}. In: Germanic Notes and Reviews, vol. 33, n. 2, fall/Herbst 2002, pp. 109–133.</ref>

As soon as Nietzsche's work began to reach a wider audience, the question of whether he owed a debt of influence to Stirner was raised. As early as 1891 when Nietzsche was still alive, though incapacitated by mental illness, Hartmann went so far as to suggest that he had plagiarized Stirner.<ref>Eduard von Hartmann, Nietzsches "neue Moral", in ''Preussische Jahrbücher'', 67. Jg., Heft 5, May 1891, S. 501–521; augmented version with more express reproach of plagiarism in: ''Ethische Studien'', Leipzig, Haacke 1898, pp. 34–69.</ref> By the turn of the century, the belief that Nietzsche had been influenced by Stirner was so widespread that it became something of a commonplace at least in Germany, prompting one observer to note in 1907 that "Stirner's influence in modern Germany has assumed astonishing proportions, and moves in general parallel with that of Nietzsche. The two thinkers are regarded as exponents of essentially the same philosophy."<ref>This author believes that one should be careful in comparing the two men. However, he notes: "It is this intensive nuance of individualism that appeared to point from Nietzsche to Max Stirner, the author of the remarkable work ''Der Einzige und sein Eigentum''. Stirner's influence in modern Germany has assumed astonishing proportions, and moves in general parallel with that of Nietzsche. The two thinkers are regarded as exponents of essentially the same philosophy." O. Ewald, "German Philosophy in 1907", in ''The Philosophical Review'', Vol. 17, No. 4, July 1908, pp. 400–426.</ref>

From the beginning of what was characterized as "great debate"<ref>[in the last years of the nineteenth century] "The question of whether Nietzsche had read Stirner was the subject of great debate" R.A. Nicholls, "Beginnings of the Nietzsche Vogue in Germany", in ''Modern Philology'', Vol. 56, No. 1, August 1958, pp. 29–30.</ref> regarding Stirner's possible positive influence on Nietzsche, serious problems with the idea were nonetheless noted.<ref>Levy pointed out in 1904 that the similarities in the writing of the two men appeared superficial. Albert Levy, ''Stirner and Nietzsche'', Paris, 1904</ref> By the middle of the 20th century, if Stirner was mentioned at all in works on Nietzsche, the idea of influence was often dismissed outright or abandoned as unanswerable.<ref>R. A. Nicholls, "Beginnings of the Nietzsche Vogue in Germany", in ''Modern Philology'', Vol. 56, No. 1, August 1958, pp. 24–37.</ref> However, the idea that Nietzsche was influenced in some way by Stirner continues to attract a significant minority, perhaps because it seems necessary to explain the oft-noted (though arguably superficial) similarities in their writings.<ref>"Stirner, like Nietzsche, who was clearly influenced by him, has been interpreted in many different ways," [[Saul Newman]], ''[[From Bakunin to Lacan: Anti-authoritarianism and the Dislocation of Power]]'', Lexington Books, 2001, p. 56; "We do not even know for sure that Nietzsche had read Stirner. Yet, the similarities are too striking to be explained away." R. A. Samek, ''The Meta Phenomenon'', p. 70, New York, 1981; Tom Goyens, (referring to Stirner's book ''The Ego and His Own'') "The book influenced Friedrich Nietzsche, and even Marx and Engels devoted some attention to it." T. Goyens, ''[[Beer and Revolution|Beer and Revolution: The German Anarchist Movement In New York City]]'', p. 197, Illinois, 2007.</ref> In any case, the most significant problems with the theory of possible Stirner influence on Nietzsche are not limited to the difficulty in establishing whether the one man knew of or read the other. They also consist in determining if Stirner in particular might have been a meaningful influence on a man as widely read as Nietzsche.<ref>"We have every reason to suppose that Nietzsche had a profound knowledge of the Hegelian movement, from Hegel to Stirner himself. The philosophical learning of an author is not assessed by the number of quotations, nor by the always fanciful and conjectural check lists of libraries, but by the apologetic or polemical directions of his work itself." Gilles Deleuze (translated by Hugh Tomlinson), ''[[Nietzsche and Philosophy]]'', 1962 (2006 reprint, pp. 153–154).</ref>

=== Rudolf Steiner ===
The individualist anarchist orientation of Rudolf Steiner's early philosophy—before he turned to [[Theosophy (Blavatskian)|theosophy]] around 1900—has strong parallels to and was admittedly influenced by Stirner's conception of the ego, for which Steiner claimed to have provided a philosophical foundation.<ref>Guido Giacomo Preparata, "Perishable Money in a Threefold Commonwealth: Rudolf Steiner and the Social Economics of an Anarchist Utopia". ''Review of Radical Economics'' 38/4 (Fall 2006). pp. 619–648.</ref>