Thank you Inspirobot
Forwarded from Tardigrade Giggle Chamber πŸͺ² (Sam Hayzen)
πŸ—Ώ2🀑1
Forwarded from RIOT DOGS (katrick "baizuo baddie" bateman, clippy comrade, ten tonne terror of tel aviv & CEO @ kinetic meat concepts LLC)
Idk man they look cool as fuck
πŸ‘»3πŸ—Ώ1
Forwarded from RIOT DOGS (katrick "baizuo baddie" bateman, clippy comrade, ten tonne terror of tel aviv & CEO @ kinetic meat concepts LLC)
πŸ“4β˜ƒ2
Tardigrade Giggle Chamber πŸͺ²
Photo
From the smoker's/vaper's perspective: If puffing away satisfies your egoβ€”maybe it's pleasurable, rebellious, or just habitualβ€”go ahead and do it. Why stop for others? Concepts like "public health," "consideration for bystanders," or "environmental harm" are just more spooks, invented by society to guilt-trip you into self-sacrifice. Stirner might say something like: "The air isn't 'sacred' or 'collective property'; it's whatever you can use in the moment." However, if exposing others leads to consequences that annoy you (e.g., people confronting you, kicking you out of a space, or worse), then weigh if it's worth it. Egoism isn't about being dumb; it's about calculated self-enjoyment.


From the exposed person's perspective: If the fumes bother your egoβ€”making you cough, feel sick, or just pissed offβ€”don't whine about "rights" to clean air or appeal to laws (those are spooks too). Instead, assert your ownness: leave the area, tell the smoker to stop, remove them if you have the power (e.g., in a space you control), or band together with like-minded egos to create smoke-free zones. But do it because it serves you, not some abstract principle of justice or harm reduction. Stirner emphasizes that conflicts aren't resolved by ethics but by powerβ€”whoever has more "might" (through persuasion, force, or association) gets their way.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9203939/
🀑6πŸ•Š3🐳1
🐳7
🍌5
🐳1
🍌5
🍌1
2025/10/27 02:19:11
Back to Top
HTML Embed Code: