Futurism and Fascism.

Have you ever read Mussolini's writings? Long ago, I remember reading a few fiery passages from a politcal-lit book and being impressed by parts of his rhetoric— not the whole, but highlighted passages. Passages about the upsurge of energies and cult of Action. It reminded me of the passages, antics, and manifestoes of Marinetti, the chief theorist of Futurism. And, also of the passages, antics, and manifestoes of Tzara, Huelsenbeck, and the Dadaists. Most people talk about Futurism as having somewhat lapsed into Fascism — lending it its momentum and bristle-beard toughness — or as having been infected with it from the its very first manifesto and fistfight. I have another opinion, more recently arrived at. This opinion chimes in with Benjamin and Habermas, when they warn against "aestheticizing politics." By aestheticizing politics, by treating political necessity like personal fulfillment, we inevitably end up with something akin to fascism. Granted, fascism is isn't very aesthetic by some tastes, and it strikes us immediately as being stupid and wrong.

But the revolt of Futurism, the revolt of Dada, has the same form as the revolt of the black shirts, the brown shirts; the Italian and German fascists. It's just that the liberation from overdeliberative rationality is fine and okay— welcome, in fact— in aesthetic spheres and sharply individualized life-philosophies. But sudden, collective liberation from overdeliberative rationality in the political sphere, in the democratic process, especially in such tantrums, will probably always start or end as fascism. Any leap over the democratic process, however humanitarian or rightheaded, will still have the odor of tyranny. Whether it gets shelved as a putsch, coup, evolution, or an "emancipation," will be the decision of History.

The other reason I think fascism is linked with futurism and dadaism is that the liberatory aspects, aspects which both share with the extasis of drugs— is the intoxication from the suspension from overdeliberative rationality. I say "overdeliberative rationality" because I have never considered Dadaism or Futurism "irrational," nor did I ever have much venom against Enlightenment-era Reason (the Encyclopaedists and the Dadaists were both my highschool idols, simultaneously). The term "overdeliberative rationality" might even be better replaced with "undue restraint" or something more superegoistical sounding. The thing about politics is that this ecstasis, this clean sweep, this feeling of absolutes, cannot be accomplished without suppression, without the imposition of a stark, brutal authority. In the more personal and cultural spheres, it can— and very easily, with beautiful results. It even comes highly recommended. Political discourse will always be cumbersome, superegoistical, bureaucratic, and rather unphilosophical— but better this than vying for any kind of political ecstasis.