What Would An Egoist Mislabeled As A Communist Look Like?

So I asked ChatGPT, Meta AI, Grok, and a few other models what it would look like if a left egoist mislabeled themselves as a communist. I then summarized their answers. Turns out, their answers hit close to home, sounding like a lot of our comrades. As you read on, you might picture a spoiled kid or reckless teen, or maybe an adult who is manipulative and unreliable. This could strike a chord with you, or it might firm up your commitment to putting others first. Let’s dive in.

A left egoist, whether leaning anarchist or libertarian, who mislabels themselves as a communist would embody a paradoxical blend of individualism and superficial collectivism, rooted in self-interest rather than communal ideals. At their core, they prioritize personal autonomy, desires, and needs over collective welfare, contrasting sharply with communism’s focus on class struggle and egalitarianism. They might adopt communist rhetoric, denouncing capitalism, praising resource-sharing, or citing figures like Marx or Kropotkin, but their motives revolve around personal liberation rather than a classless society. For example, they could argue, “I’m against private property because it limits my freedom,” revealing an egoist philosophy dressed in communist garb.

Their economic stance would reflect this tension. They might support seizing the means of production or abolishing hierarchies, but only to avoid personal exploitation, not to ensure universal equity. A true communist seeks collective ownership for all, while this egoist seeks it to secure their own stake. Their rejection of authority further underscores the mislabeling: while communists might accept temporary centralized control, a left egoist, especially an anarchist-leaning one, abhors any hierarchy, and even a libertarian-leaning one tolerates only what directly benefits them. Submitting to a “greater good” is unthinkable.

Theory holds a central place in communism, serving as a foundation for understanding class dynamics, historical materialism, and the strategies needed to achieve a classless society. Communists often rely on the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and others to guide their actions and unify their movement. However, this left egoist would likely dismiss such theory as irrelevant or elitist, scoffing at those who emphasize it as “purists” or “ivory-tower intellectuals” detached from real struggle. They might say, “All you need to be a communist is to be a good person and help others,” reducing a complex ideology to simplistic moralism. This stance would lead them to occasionally contradict established theory or raise questions it has already addressed, like questioning the need for organized revolution while ignoring the Marxist critique of spontaneous uprisings, further exposing their shallow grasp of the communist label they claim.

Mutual aid highlights their pragmatic twist on collectivism. They would embrace it enthusiastically, organizing cooperatives or resource networks, but as a tool for self-empowerment, not altruism. Picture them saying, “I’ll help with the community garden because I want fresh produce,” or joining mutual aid to gain resources, social capital, or influence, rather than to foster solidarity. A communist sees mutual aid as a step toward collective liberation, but for the egoist, it’s a transactional means to an end, sometimes even a way to manipulate others by tracking favors or pushing their own agenda.

Their rhetoric would blend egoist defiance with communist buzzwords, like “The workers should rise because I’m tired of being exploited!” This self-focus betrays their mislabeling, as would their actions. Imagine Alex, a self-styled “communist” in a cooperative, railing against landlords and hoarding the best resources “to keep the group strong,” while dismissing Marxist ideas of centralized control with, “No one rules me.” They might adopt the communist label for clout, radical appeal, or confusion, given the shared anti-capitalist bent, but their intent, egoism’s “me” versus communism’s “us,” marks the divide. In essence, they would mimic a communist, appearing anti-capitalist, pro-mutual aid, and revolutionary, but their self-serving core would render the label a misfit. As they're an anarchist, a libertarian, an anti-authoritian that opposes personal obligation and accountabilities.