Stirnerism can be explained as the blockchain P2P network like Bitcoin

> Is Stirner an anarchist?

There are some arguments claiming Max Stirner is not really an anarchist because his theory regards highly of some sorts of system orders without a unified autocracy and spontaneously determined contracts.  

What defining Stirner's socio-political theory (Stirnerism) as an anarchism is that it attempts to dismantle all the architecture of the modern bureaucratic system and monopoly of both government and huge private corporations.  Furthermore, it suggests, instead of managing public goods and services in the centralised authority, free individuals cooperate together when these public things are needed to manage under a naturally made contract.  

It can be somehow similar to the fundamental form of direct democracy where all the decisions are democratically determined by means of individuals' direct representation of voices.   Nevertheless, there is a fundamental difference with the political system of direct democracy and Stirnerism. The former still owns a congress or some form of the centrally controlled organisation monitoring the whole system.  By contrast, the latter is not supposed to have any central control tower of managing politics and social issues.

 In another word, Stirnerist anarchism is different from a radical anarchism disregarding the public managements and contract-forming.  It is quite difficult to explain what Stirnerism really is.  Nonetheless, thanks to the current notable development of the information technology, it has become easier to image what Stirnerism will be like nowadays.  

> Stirnerism is like the blockchain based on the P2P network 

Frankly speaking, Stirnerist socio-political structure can be compared to the network of the blockchain like the one used in the cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin.  This network system does not have any central server monitoring the entire system as a control tower.  

Instead, each individual computer calculates and verifies the interactions and actions among the community utilising this network system.  This is called the peer to peer (P2P) network where their application architecture is distributed among these individual computers.  These individual computers participate in their tasks and workloads as the peers.  The privilege and the equipment are equally distributed among these peers, and there is no authorities overriding their rules of activities. 

This network architecture is what Stirnerism attempts to apply to the socio-politics of human individuals.  These individual humans are supposed to cooperate as the peers to share the tasks and the workload according to their needs and skills.  There is no unified central authority overriding their mutually formed peering connection. 

 

On the other hand, the P2P network system of both the blockchain and Stirnerism contains some fundamental problem.   This P2P system tends to be still inefficient when it comes to the management of data serving and access authentication.  

Establishing an centralised system is efficient to store and serve the collectively used data, services, and public goods because maintenance can be concentrated on the limited places.  By contrast, the P2P network requires all agents to share the same responsibility of maintaining, managing, and updating their quality of what required to prop up this whole entire system.  

This is why each transaction of Bitcoin still takes about at least 10 minutes.  In addition, organising human individuals in terms of the P2P network is far more extraordinarily challenging than setting up the computers. The setup for individuals cannot be flexibly adjusted as same as the artificial creations, and it is beyond our comprehension by means of the imaginablity of the current human civilisation. 

 

Yet, there is still a hope for accomplishing Stirnerist P2P public management.  At least, Stirnerism has become imaginable to establish to the certain extend by comparing the socio-politics with the hard scientific technology since the introduction of the blockchain and its P2P network. 

In the past when the information technology is not developed as much as nowadays, there has no civilisation having succeeded in establishing such an individualist mutualist anarchist society like Stirnerism even for a short time period.  This is simply because it was unimaginable.  

Some hints from the development of the hard science can be linked to developing soft-science and arts of politics, sociology, and economics in the future.  When a hard scientist discover some feasible solution of transforming the current P2P network system to the more efficient and manageable alternative, it will be beneficial for a soft scientist to innovate their own theory.