3 ms·

There is an obvious mistake in the article that could be misleading for readers not well versed in 20th century Italian culture and politics. In the article, i

There is an obvious mistake in the article that could be misleading for readers not well versed in 20th century Italian culture and politics. In the article, it is written :"The essay [Manifesto della cucina futurista] was one of many fascist-leaning Futurist manifestos published in the early 20th century that called for the destruction of the old in favor of the new in fields such as poetry, painting, and cinema". It is important to keep in mind that Futurism as an artistic, much more than political, movement--but some might say that all art is political anyway--"officially" started in 1909 with the publication of the "Manifesto del Futurismo" in the Figaro, the French newspaper. Fascism, on the other hand, as an organized political movement, started in 1919, after the end of the First World War. The Manifesto della cucina Futurista was written in 1931, but it was, overall, forgettable: much more relevant for art and politics were the pre-WWI manifestos. Futurism, as a movement of some influence on the Italian cultural life, was already in decline in 1919, in part because some of the best known and liveliest futurist representatives were killed during WWI (Boccioni, Sant'Elia, Erba). Despite all the problems associated with some of their message--unfortunately those were the most visible and the signature of their political and artistic position--, Futurismo was an avant-garde that saw most of their prediction, or desires, come true. Not many artistic or political movements could say the same.

burkaman 4y ago
What is the mistake? After reading your comment I don't see anything wrong with that sentence.
- borroka 4y ago
  In the article, it is written: "many fascist-leaning Futurist manifestos published in the early 20th century that called for the destruction of the old in favor of the new in fields such as poetry, painting, and cinema" These Manifesti were not, and could not be, fascist or fascist-leaning because they were all written before the Fascist party was founded by Mussolini in 1919. Mussolini was a socialist until 1914; fascism did not exist as either a movement or a party when most of the Manifesti were published, which makes it impossible for them to be either fascist or fascist-leaning. The Manifesto della Pittura Futurista [Manifesto of Futurist Painting] was published in 1910. The Manifesto Tecnico della Letteratura Futurista [Technical Manifesto of Futurist Literature] was published in 1912. Etc., etc. You can find all the manifestos here https://futurismo.accademiadellacrusca.org/manifesti.asp https://futurismo.accademiadellacrusca.org/manifesti.asp Some of the Manifesti, a bit more than one year ago, were shown at the Center Pompidou in Paris.
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    So is Facism futurist?
  - ethbr0 4y ago
    The trapdoor from socialism to fascism is fascinating. From one ideological perspective: it's an impossible conversion. But from a practical perspective: once you've pledged allegiance to greater good absolutely, and set up coercive power structures to enforce same... it's not even a jump to go ahead and centralize management.
    - comte7092 4y ago
      > But from a practical perspective: once you've pledged allegiance to greater good absolutely, and set up coercive power structures to enforce same You’re making the same mistake that is being called out here in the thread. Mussolini left socialism before the Bolsheviks took power in Russia. There was no precedent for socialist governance at the time. To say that being a socialist in 1914 meant “pledging yourself to a greater power absolutely” greatly misses the actual historical context in which those parties developed.
      - ethbr0 4y ago
        My comment was ambivalent as to ultimate socialist governance, and was only opining on the surprisingly frequent path from socialist adherence (in ideals) to fascist government (in actuality). If you're taking issue with socialism being "pledged allegiance to greater good absolutely" (my words), then how would you characterize its primary beliefs?
        comte7092 4y ago
        Is it that frequent though? Outside of a few famous examples, eg mussolini, I am not aware of there being significant number of fascist movements/leaders that started out as socialists, outside of the interwar period. > If you're taking issue with socialism being "pledged allegiance to greater good absolutely" (my words), then how would you characterize its primary beliefs? Wikipedia has a fair standard definition: > Socialism is a political philosophy and movement encompassing a range of economic and social systems, which are characterised by social ownership of the means of production, with an emphasis on democratic control, such as workers' self-management, as opposed to private ownership. “Pledged allegiance to the greater good” really only applies to socialist parties that seized power through violent revolution, which is self selecting in a sense. Most of Western Europe has long traditions of socialist parties that entered electoral politics and didn’t advocate Stalinist dictatorship. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

burkaman 4y ago

What is the mistake? After reading your comment I don't see anything wrong with that sentence.

borroka 4y ago
In the article, it is written: "many fascist-leaning Futurist manifestos published in the early 20th century that called for the destruction of the old in favor of the new in fields such as poetry, painting, and cinema" These Manifesti were not, and could not be, fascist or fascist-leaning because they were all written before the Fascist party was founded by Mussolini in 1919. Mussolini was a socialist until 1914; fascism did not exist as either a movement or a party when most of the Manifesti were published, which makes it impossible for them to be either fascist or fascist-leaning. The Manifesto della Pittura Futurista [Manifesto of Futurist Painting] was published in 1910. The Manifesto Tecnico della Letteratura Futurista [Technical Manifesto of Futurist Literature] was published in 1912. Etc., etc. You can find all the manifestos here https://futurismo.accademiadellacrusca.org/manifesti.asp https://futurismo.accademiadellacrusca.org/manifesti.asp Some of the Manifesti, a bit more than one year ago, were shown at the Center Pompidou in Paris.
- panick21_ 4y ago
  So is Facism futurist?
- ethbr0 4y ago
  The trapdoor from socialism to fascism is fascinating. From one ideological perspective: it's an impossible conversion. But from a practical perspective: once you've pledged allegiance to greater good absolutely, and set up coercive power structures to enforce same... it's not even a jump to go ahead and centralize management.
  - comte7092 4y ago
    > But from a practical perspective: once you've pledged allegiance to greater good absolutely, and set up coercive power structures to enforce same You’re making the same mistake that is being called out here in the thread. Mussolini left socialism before the Bolsheviks took power in Russia. There was no precedent for socialist governance at the time. To say that being a socialist in 1914 meant “pledging yourself to a greater power absolutely” greatly misses the actual historical context in which those parties developed.
    - ethbr0 4y ago
      My comment was ambivalent as to ultimate socialist governance, and was only opining on the surprisingly frequent path from socialist adherence (in ideals) to fascist government (in actuality). If you're taking issue with socialism being "pledged allegiance to greater good absolutely" (my words), then how would you characterize its primary beliefs?
      - comte7092 4y ago
        Is it that frequent though? Outside of a few famous examples, eg mussolini, I am not aware of there being significant number of fascist movements/leaders that started out as socialists, outside of the interwar period. > If you're taking issue with socialism being "pledged allegiance to greater good absolutely" (my words), then how would you characterize its primary beliefs? Wikipedia has a fair standard definition: > Socialism is a political philosophy and movement encompassing a range of economic and social systems, which are characterised by social ownership of the means of production, with an emphasis on democratic control, such as workers' self-management, as opposed to private ownership. “Pledged allegiance to the greater good” really only applies to socialist parties that seized power through violent revolution, which is self selecting in a sense. Most of Western Europe has long traditions of socialist parties that entered electoral politics and didn’t advocate Stalinist dictatorship. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism