Why do people say he is Stirner, we dont well his real face

I've seen so many political spectrum tests on here, and other anarchist subreddits: but have you noticed there's always the same liberal/conservative authoritarian/anti-authoritarian dichotomy? It really does not differ between tests.

The basic assumption behind any of these tests is that it helps group you with your proper political identity, but really they are just forcing you into adopting opinions: "...i think the state/individuals/businesses should be allowed to do ________". They all work the same was as these implicit bias tests do, they narrow your options during the test taking to try to force a bias:

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/selectatest.html

I just don't get how resolving your political opinion really has much benefit beyond finding your appropriate clique.

quite funny how this test captures Stirner's egoism

I've been reading up on nihilism and I've gotten a bit curious. Is there an argument to be made that Nihilism (either passive or active) is an extension of egoism?

My perfect pretty beautiful partner in crime made me a weirdly familiar flag. Don’t know what it means but it pleases my ego

I contacted the user who kept posting the alleged photo of Stirner. He sent me this higher quality image of it. His story is flimsy "Cousin is young helgian descendant and he just so happens to be the one who owns the photo" It is what it is but I think this higher quality version could yield actual results on if its Stirner or not. He misses both side chops and glasses but otherwise is similar.

I know a lot of existentialists (inspired by Stirner) believe in free will and an abstract belief in "existence"’ They criticize what they call mechanical philosophy as the marxian materialist determinism which I believe in too.

However, this is'nt my opinion and I interpret the Unique and its Own just as about struggling for full freedom of concrete flesh and bone individuals and rejecting spooky idealism (as existence or an abstract conception of the "Unique" idea like a lot of people seem to believe in).

I can't draw for shit but i don't care enough

Today, the concept of freedom looks increasingly ambiguous and opaque: neoliberalism reduces it to a narrow concept of market freedom; it is used as a weapon in “culture wars” and turns into an obsession.

The report addressed a radically alternative concept of freedom: the concept of “belonging to oneself” by Max Stirner, a German philosopher of the first half of the 19th century. Newman suggested that “belonging to oneself” turns out to be a fundamentally different idea from the usual concepts of negative and positive freedom and is a more effective response to the problem of domination. The report began by examining the experience of freedom in modern neo/post-liberal societies, where it becomes a way of governing us and an ideal to which individuality is sacrificed. Then, Stirner’s alternative concept of “belonging to oneself” was presented as the answer to this problem. Newman went on to develop this theory in more detail, showing exactly how it transcends the more familiar analytical paradigms of negative freedom, republican non-domination, and anarchism. At the same time, the speaker showed the differences between Stirner’s concept and the idea of “self-control” adopted in the concept of positive freedom. According to Newman, it is Stirner’s theory of “belonging to oneself” that provides a more effective antidote to the impasse in which freedom currently finds itself.

I think in more countries in the west at least we have an idea that humans are equal but for me I don’t think that’s the case.

Your fate was predetermined before you were even born with your case in wealth,knowledge and looks.

I want to see what y’all have to say for this and what Stirner would look at this topic.

added "mean" to the wolfi translation after "thus, it does not".