Did Stirner Contribute To The Rise of Nazism And Fascism?

Some Leftists (I could not find her name but this European, older white woman and Marxist apologist that several youtube videos out on Karl Marx and his take of Max Stirner and his Egocentric philosophy.) and traditional moralists ridicule and excoriate Stirner--or would if they knew of his existence and egoist philosophy. They blame him for advocating that each citizen cast off traditional morality, the strictures that community have encoded or customized to curb individual behavior, and altruistic regard for the needs of others and for all in society. These critics contend that Stirner's reckless, mocking, dangerous promotion of selfish anarchism, pure rebellious hedonism, and utter disregard for the teachings of Western civilization led to the rise of fascist and Nazi totalitarianism. He bears, they contend, at least some of the blame for the ruination of Europe in three ways:

By giving individual citizens in Germany and elsewhere permission to conform, obey and go along with the fascists and Nazis for personal gain, because it suited their selfish needs.

By promoting a culture of anarchy which dispensed with traditional culture and legal framework that had kept movements like the Nazis from gaining traction.

By shredding all civilized influences that restrained each citizen, leaving the people with no traditional guidelines to curb behavior and shape individual behavior and choices. The Nazis too sneered at at set aside traditional, Western values (peace, democracy) that kept the citizens relatively civilized.

Let me respond in general by agree with these Leftists Stirner's rejection of tradition and Christian ethics could and probably did contribute somewhat to the rise of wicked totalitarian ideologies and mass movements.

It is always perilous to encourage encourage the young, born wicked and in love of lawlessness, in love with authoritarianism and pack behavior, to shed moral systems that limit their excesses and sinning. When Stirner panned tradition and Christianity, it did leave the 20th century, European young vulnerable to answering the mass movement clarion call to join Hitler or Mussolini.

In the main, however. Stirner rejected conforming to any ism. He rejected and scorned both German nationalists and the Communists in the 1840s. It is absurd for Marxist to conclude that he could reject German nationalism and Communism with its utter denial of owning personal property, and then conclude that Stirner's egocentric anarchism led to the rise of Nazism and fascism.

The primary influences engendering the rise of Nazism and Communism in the 20th century were basic human wickedness in the young with spiritual and ethical restraints to bring them up right, leaving the way open for them to mishandle their frustration about their ruined private lives, seeking a most deadly altruistic solution in living as obedient true believers in European mass movements. That motivating impulse is selflessness not misinformed self-seeking.