[231] [To understand some of the following citations it is necessary to remember that in German "law" (in the sense of common law, or including this) and "right" are one and the same word.--While it is probably not fair to say that these assaults of Stirner are directed only against some laws, it does seem fair to say that they deny to the laws only some sorts of validity. We have very little material for compiling the constructive side of Stirner's teaching, for he avoided specifying what things the Egoists or their unions were to do in his future social order; he said explicitly that the only way to know what a slave will do when he breaks his fetters is to wait and see. But, while he may nowhere have stated a law which is to obtain in the good time coming, neither has he said anything which authorizes us to declare that none of his unions will ever make laws on such a basis as (for instance) the rules of the Stock Exchange. On page 114 below is quoted a passage where he distinctly and approvingly contemplates the possibility that a union of his followers may fix a minimum wage, and may threaten violence to any person who consents to work below the scale. This would be law, and might easily be the germ of a State. On pages 108 and 109 are quoted passages which strongly suggest that the Egoistic union would undertake to defend its member against all interference with his possession of certain goods; this would be both law and property.] [232] Stirner p. 247. [233] Stirner p. 248. [234] _Ib._ p. 246. [235] _Ib._ p. 314. [236] _Ib._ p. 268. [237] _Ib._ p. 317. [238] _Ib._ pp. 317, 316. [239] _Ib._ pp. 265-6. [240] _Ib._ p. 276. [241] _Ib._ p. 270. [242] _Ib._ pp. 326-7. [243] _Ib._ pp. 248-9. [244] Stirner p. 275. [245] _Ib._ p. 275. [246] _Ib._ pp. 259, 256. [247] _Ib._ p. 220. [248] _Ib._ p. 251. [The German idiom for "it suits me" is "it is right to me"]. [249] _Ib._ p. 8. [250] _Ib._ p. 490. [251] _Ib._ p. 491. [252] _Ib._ p. 491. [253] _Ib._ p. 7. [254] Stirner p. 8. [255] _Ib._ p. 207. [256] _Ib._ p. 219. [257] _Ib._ p. 214. [258] _Ib._ p. 212. [259] _Ib._ p. 220. [260] Stirner p. 314. [261] _Ib._ p. 295. [262] _Ib._ pp. 231-2. [263] _Ib._ p. 231. [264] _Ib._ p. 259. [265] _Ib._ p. 337. [266] Stirner p. 258. [267] _Ib._ p. 339. [268] _Ib._ p. 280. [269] _Ib._ p. 257. [270] _Ib._ p. 298. [271] _Ib._ p. 298. [272] _Ib._ p. 299. [273] Stirner p. 298. [274] _Ib._ p. 336. [275] _Ib._ pp. 337-8. [276] _Ib._ p. 235; Stirner "_Vierteljahrsschrift_" p. 192. [277] Stirner p. 304. [278] Stirner p. 258. [279] _Ib._ p 411. [280] _Ib._ p. 416. [281] _Ib._ p. 411. [282] Stirner pp. 417-18. [283] Stirner "_Vierteljahrsschrift_" pp. 193-4. [284] Stirner p. 305. [285] _Ib._ p. 332. [286] _Ib._ pp. 327-8. [287] _Ib._ pp. 328, 326. [288] Stirner pp. 328-9. [289] Zenker fails to recognize this when he asserts (p. 80) that Stirner demands property based on the right of occupation [290] Stirner p. 340.