1. The Cold Irony of History
A fascist, a tourist, and a consumer walk into a tavern. The waiter asks: “Table for one?” Indeed, the three characters in this not-very-funny joke are the same person. This quip isn’t meant to amuse — its purpose is to open the way to the even colder irony of History. The second of them wears a cap from the famous brand The North Face; the first wears one emblazoned with the slogan Chi Osa Vince (“Who Dares Wins”); the last, the one we associate with the “consumer” (naturally drawn to brands), exclaims while looking at his friends: “What a nice cap you have!” But we have already said that the three men are, in fact, the same person. The joke now turns into a riddle: how is it possible that the fascist and the tourist personalities wear the same hat if it bears two different “brands”? The answer is simple: https://mussolini.net/it/berretti/2369-berretti-n156.html (this link leads to a page on the Predappio Tricolore website, where one can see the improbable fusion between the The North Face logo and the phrase Chi Osa Vince). I show you this hat not to mock the hypothetical fascist who has accompanied us so far, but rather to clarify what I mean by the “cold irony of History.” Another reason for presenting this object immediately is to provide the reader with a visual example of the mindset that is beneficial to maintain while reading this article. This is a souvenir for sale, like many others, available in the Predappio Tricolore and Ferlandia shops, both located in Predappio. The first, as if in a joke gone wrong (or very right, depending on one’s perspective), is located on Via Matteotti; the second, ironically enough, stands on Via Roma. (If we wanted to delve even deeper into what might be called the “irony — or cynicism — of fate,” we could recall that both stores are only a few kilometers away from the Anna Frank Elementary School.) Although one can find just about anything in these shops, what I want to focus on in this first part of my research is one of the most iconic symbols of “international fascism”: the swastika (1). A highly complex symbol, it survives today — here in the West — tightly bound to its most recent history. Steven Heller writes in his book The Swastika: Symbol Beyond Redemption?, in a chapter aptly titled What Does Hate Look Like?: “The Nazi swastika is a visual obscenity. Once a sign of good fortune, during the twentieth century it was distorted and corrupted, reversed into the graphic embodiment of intolerance. If you want to know what the logo of hate looks like, look no further.” (2) Even though today the symbol alone would be enough to evoke the historical period to which it is condemned, its meaning nonetheless depends on its context — which, from now on, we will call the “site.” By “site,” I do not refer only to the place where something appears, but to the entire circumstance (3) (social, cultural, political, etc.). Since the swastika, as a sign, has existed for centuries, its form, colors, and orientation are key elements for its correct interpretation — and thus integral parts of its “site.” To speak specifically of the Nazi swastika, it must conform to the original design. Its official form was defined by Hitler himself, who wrote in Mein Kampf: “After countless attempts, I arrived at the final form: a red flag with a white disk, in the center of which stood a black hooked cross. After many trials, I also found a specific ratio between the size of the flag and that of the white disk, as well as between the form and intensity of the painted hooked cross. And we adhered to my design. (…) And it is indeed a symbol! Not only because the colors — which we all fervently love and which once brought such honor to the German people — attest to our reverence for the past, but also because they embody the will of the movement. As National Socialists, we see in the flag our program” (4). The program that the symbol was meant to represent is as follows: “In red we see the social idea of the movement, in white the nationalist idea, and in the hooked cross the mission of fighting for the victory of the antisemitic Aryan man” (5). Hitler repeatedly emphasized the importance of the colors: “I have always been in favor of preserving the old colors (6), not only because for me, as a soldier, they are the most sacred thing I know, but also because their aesthetic effect corresponds to my taste” (7). Thus, when adorned with these “sacred” colors, the message is unequivocal. Nor could there be any misunderstanding if the symbol were scrawled on the walls of a Jewish cemetery — because, according to the words of its “creator,” the hooked cross itself is antisemitic. However, another crucial element in activating the latent symbolism of the sign — which otherwise would be nothing more than a simple interlacing of lines — is precisely its supposed sacredness. This requires several factors that go beyond color; its appearance in “unsuitable” contexts could result in incoherence or, as we will see, a kind of own goal.To protect its purity and proper use, two years before the hooked cross officially became the national flag through the Nuremberg Laws, on May 19, 1933, the Nazi government prohibited “the public use of symbols of German history, of the German state, and of the national revolution in any way that would corrupt the feeling of dignity inherent in those symbols.” This legislation aimed to prevent private entrepreneurs, companies, and others from using the swastika or other Nazi symbols and images to market their goods and services without the regime’s approval. At that time, the German market was full of products — including coffee, cigarettes, and cake molds — decorated with swastikas, reproductions of Hitler’s face, and other symbols. The new law made producers of unauthorized merchandise subject to legal prosecution” (8). This was called the “Law for the Protection of National Symbols” (9), issued by Joseph Goebbels to “protect the transcendence of the swastika by preventing its commercial use” (10). I chose to introduce the reflection on objects starting with the swastika only because its story is a more striking and extreme — and therefore more effective — example than others. Yet the same reasoning applies to every object found within the shops of Predappio. The history of the swastika should thus be understood as a kind of synecdoche.
2. The Play of Roles
Let us now return to our shops. Imagine being inside one of the two stores where the Chi Osa Vince (“Who Dares Wins”) cap was purchased. Here we stand before socks bearing Mussolini’s face, bottles of Hitlerbier – The Beer of the Nostalgic, and, among them, an armband featuring the swastika. In light of what has been said, how should we interpret such an object in this context? The price is five euros; the material is cheap — as befits a proper souvenir — and the patch with the symbol generally shows manufacturing defects. The whole thing is held together by two very weak elastic bands. Finally, the business itself is officially registered as a souvenir shop.
Today, the souvenir is an “object of memory for tourists,” (11) where the tourist is nothing more than a function within the system of consumerism that has turned tourism into a mass phenomenon. The material product, therefore, reflects its target audience. What, then, is the site in which this swastika now appears? Could the reality just described be defined as a guardian of historical memory and a vehicle for the reactivation of a latent sacredness? Or are those shops instead temples of kitsch — like so many others — where base material profit reigns supreme? It is precisely within this narrow gap that the joke begins. Mary Douglas describes joking as something that unites “fields which differ widely,” whose “connection destroys hierarchy and order. They do not affirm dominant values but denigrate and devalue them; a joke is essentially an anti-ritual” (12). The three colors and the shop’s context make clear — if not an explicit adherence, at least a certain sympathy — toward that “nostalgia” that fuels the entire enterprise. Yet in practice, the fact that this armband has been reduced to a souvenir makes it — and the intellectual property of the Nazi swastika — one of the many legitimate offspring of capitalism, which on paper stands as the regime’s ideological enemy. Thus, the site of the object resembles a carnival more than a new propaganda apparatus. This seemingly paradoxical coexistence between fascism and capitalism raises two questions. The first: “Isn’t this way of ‘remembering’ a bit like scoring an own goal, shooting oneself in the foot?” Indeed, by doing so, all the limits that once allowed the symbol and the objects bearing it to convey any sense of spirituality are transgressed. The second question: “Why are these objects, despite all this, still being bought?” Reducing everything to the idea that fascists are ignorant seems to me to trivialize the issue, and it’s a very superficial approach besides. A starting point for answering these questions can be found in the TV report Nel centenario della marcia su Roma i nostalgici del Duce tornano in piazza (“On the Centenary of the March on Rome, the Duce’s Nostalgics Return to the Square”). This segment aired on LA7 during a live broadcast where footage from reporters was watched and commented on by guests in the studio. The report is available on YouTube, and the most interesting moment comes at 5:02 (13). The screen is split in two: on the left, a man appears (curiously present in nearly every on-site report year after year) wearing a black shirt and a fez while giving the Roman salute. On the right is the disgusted yet amused face of a female guest in the LA7 studio. The woman looks horrified at the images shown by the reporters, but, as seen at 5:08, disgust quickly gives way to an ironic remark. This, I believe, is the key to interpreting not only the function of these objects but also their true target audience. In all the on-site reports, the protagonists are the objects — from Amaro del Duce (a liquor) to T-shirts, and so on. The objects — the swastika among them, though it actually appears quite rarely — seem to serve precisely the purpose of transgressing, for a limited time, the political and moral constraints that contemporary followers of the former Duce perceive as tyrannical. In a RAI report for an episode of Agorà Extra (01/11/2021), a man interviewed during the march declared: “Because you’re the dictatorship — you don’t want to understand that the real dictatorship is you?” (14) Returning now to the initial report, we can see how some nostalgics proudly seek contact with the cameras, confidently displaying their symbols (both gestural and iconographic) while addressing directly those who will later see the images, as if certain to provoke reactions of outrage. The Commemoration is therefore an essential site for understanding the cultural dimension of these objects — a dimension that our earlier discussion of the swastika has helped to problematize. Composed of three different actors — two present on site and one participating from a distance — the Commemoration functions as an anti-ritual and as a game of seduction among all three parties. The first two are, respectively, the nostalgics (15) and the television crews sent by various networks or newspapers. The courtship begins precisely between these two groups: on one side, the nostalgic already knows he will be filmed and probably interviewed; on the other, the reporter already knows where to go to find exactly what will feed our curiosity. We, in fact, are the third participant in this triangular dynamic. The image of the contemporary fascist did not emerge by chance. In fact, most nostalgics, during the day of the commemoration, wear accessories — or clothing in general — that only serve to reinforce this stereotype. One might ask: “But don’t they realize it?” Yet the matter may not be so simple. Once there is the awareness of being filmed — willingly or not — some individuals’ choice to appear according to “the fascist imaginary” may not be because they like dressing that way, but rather because they are certain that others do not like it. In the certainty of the discomfort that such clothing will provoke, they launch a clear and concise message: “We are not like you.” The use-value of the object is therefore reactivated during the days of Commemoration, transforming these occasions into opportunities to send a message — to “transgress,” to step outside, for a day, the cycle of a daily life perceived as dictatorial. The day of the Commemoration is the ideal site for shooting that arrow, since the audience is guaranteed — and so is the condemnation. In short, adorning oneself with such objects may not be a response to “because I like it this way,” but rather to “because you don’t like it this way.” The true and ultimate target of the souvenirs might therefore not be only the fascist, but also those who “consume” the image of the fascist — those who every year need to see and denounce the same scenes. These objects might be aimed as much at fascists as at their detractors. If historical fascism has today been reduced to a set of symbols, and if the joke — as Douglas clarifies — is based on the symbol (16), then the commemoration becomes the final prank: like any other joke, it ultimately produces no real change, but in its unfolding it asserts itself as an anti-ritual that attacks and undermines the status quo of a daily life perceived by the nostalgic as tyrannical: “Remember that the joke both connects and disorganizes; it attacks common sense and hierarchy: the ritual of the joke must therefore express a comparable situation. If it devalues the social structure, perhaps it celebrates something else” (17). What is celebrated in this way, however, is not the past historical period itself, but rather a way of feeling — one that, through images (which belong to a very broad imaginary), intensifies its own existence for a single day. The nostalgic is aware of the disgust and horror he provokes; on the other hand, the reporter — as much as the viewer — is hungry for that horror. Their union therefore both creates and deconstructs, ridiculing yet reinforcing, the image of contemporary fascism as desired by both sides — something that is everything and its opposite at once. This kind of shared disgust and mutual reproach between the two sides is, in its grotesque way, what sustains the dichotomy so necessary to the everyday moral system. It is as if the nostalgic needed a cage from which to escape at least once a year, and the anti-fascist needed a site where they could declare that there is still much work to be done. The object thus becomes the materialization of a kind of “necessity.” In the nostalgic vs. anti-fascist relationship, there is an echo of Baudrillard’s thought when he says that we are all victims and all executioners — or all terrorists. These objects, like junk food, satisfy the appetite of the consumer who wants to carve out an image of themselves: “People want to take everything, to bite into everything, to gorge themselves on everything, to handle everything. Seeing, deciphering, and learning no longer excite them. The only massive (mass) emotion is that of manipulation. Organizers (and artists and intellectuals) are dismayed by this uncontrollable urge, since they always anticipate only the acculturation of the masses to the spectacle of culture. They never anticipate this active, destructive fascination — a brutal and original response to the gift of an incomprehensible culture, an attraction that has all the features of a break-in, of a profanation of a sanctuary. (…) People come to touch; they look as if they were touching — their gaze is only one aspect of tactile manipulation. It is, in fact, a tactile universe, no longer visual or discursive, and people are directly involved in a process: to manipulate/be manipulated, to circulate/make circulate — a process that no longer belongs to the order of representation, nor of distance, nor of reflection” (18). However, this reasoning applies equally to both the fascist and the anti-fascist — both depend on the souvenirs: the former, to portray himself as the necessary and visible continuation of a past he believes unjustly dead; the latter, because he needs those objects as sites of condemnation against which to oppose his own equally conspicuous symbols, thus continuing the historical and traditional struggle between fascism and anti-fascism — this time, however, without real commitment from either side. The struggle, the resistance, and even the public display of adherence to fascism no longer produce — given the way they are enacted today — any new perspective or concrete resolution. Like a joke, these manifestations and reality “do not fuse to form a new, total vision of life, but remain disorganized as a result of the technique that produces them” (19). The objects, with their symbols, define the teams in a game where, like cops and robbers, the goal is to provoke and be condemned by the opposing side through annual, ritualized events. This relationship of necessity and consumption raises two questions.
If, as we have said, these objects are everything and their opposite, why are they fascist? In other words, what is not the degree but the principle of fascism that defines them?
The second question will follow after analyzing the first. In his 1974 documentary The Form of the City, Pier Paolo Pasolini aligned the goals and perspectives of historical fascism with those of modern consumer civilization, identifying the latter as the realization of what the fascist regimes had only tried — and failed — to achieve: “That acculturation, that homogenization, which fascism absolutely failed to obtain, today’s power — the power of consumer civilization — has succeeded in achieving perfectly, by destroying the various local realities, by stripping away the authenticity of the diverse ways of being human that Italy had historically produced in such differentiated forms. And so this acculturation is, in fact, destroying Italy. And I can therefore say without hesitation that the true fascism is precisely this power of the consumer civilization that is destroying Italy. And this has happened so rapidly that, in the end, we have not even realized it — it has all taken place over the last five, six, or seven years; it has been a kind of nightmare in which we have watched Italy being destroyed and disappear around us. And now, awakening perhaps from this nightmare and looking around, we realize there is nothing left to be done” (20). So then, can these objects be called “fascist” simply because they display a fascist image (like Mussolini’s face or a swastika)?
Or are they “fascist” because, as souvenirs, they belong to the capitalist system which — according to Pasolini’s words — has, in practice, fulfilled the ambitions of historical fascism: the consumer civilization that he calls “the true fascism”? Within these objects, historical fascism and true fascism seem to coexist perfectly — not to fight one another, but to complement each other.
It is as though they were two parts of the same whole, which, like in an examination of conscience — where one divides into two only to become one again — question their own essence, asking: “What, in fact, is fascism today? What are we really talking about when we talk about fascism?”
3. Everything and Its Opposite
We live in an increasingly complex world — yet one where everything is within reach — and although the centers of geopolitical power are gradually shifting from the West toward more heterogeneous poles, the influence of that heavy actor remains. The word “fascism” is now one of the many souvenirs that have been globally purchased to define, today, any generic violent or anti-democratic attitude. In the war between Putin’s Russia and Zelensky’s Ukraine, neither leader has spared words in their struggle. Each has accused the other of being a fascist. Headlines across the globalized world have portrayed the Russian head of state as a fascist, who, in turn, has done the same with the other side, declaring that one of the reasons for the “special military operation” was to liberate Ukraine from its Nazi government. The same dynamic appears in the conflict between Israel and Palestine: there have been direct references portraying the Jewish state as a follower of Nazi Germany’s model. Netanyahu, for his part, has responded to all detractors with accusations of antisemitism and fascism. The list is long — even in a documentary produced by the Franco-German network Arte, one can see, in an episode filmed in Afghanistan (21), a young woman shouting “fascists!” at the Taliban during a protest. Even the Ayatollah, according to certain commentators (and some of my Iranian friends), is labeled as fascist. And as for the United States, opening that discussion would be like opening Pandora’s box. Can such culturally distant situations all truly be fascist? Can fascism really encompass the entire world and, like that souvenir swastika, be “everything and its opposite”? I believe the situation resembles the dynamic described by Göttke in his book Burning Effigies, where he devotes a chapter to explaining how certain protests in the Middle East are not addressed so much to those physically present as to the Visual Empire (that is, to us) once the events are translated into digital images. For a Western audience to understand what is happening, it is common to resort to gestures or words that resonate with familiarity in the viewer's mind. The word fascism, functioning today more as an object than as a concept, can thus be grasped and manipulated by anyone. Its function is that of a souvenir — meant to recall a specific yet indefinable evil — which, by branding the recipient of the insult, relegates them to the “wrong side of History.” The dynamic, however, is the same as that of the Hitlerbier or the souvenir swastika; these are nothing more than details — consequences — of the broader objectification of fascism. Fascist souvenirs exist because souvenir-fascism exists: they are the “micro” belonging to a larger, more nebulous “macro.” Souvenir-fascism, just like its visual counterparts, occupies the crack of the joke — and “because a joke implies that anything is possible,” (22) there are two main consequences: the loss of sense and meaning of the original concept, but also the possibility of its necessary (if problematic) re-signification. This disengaged chaos — which does not, in fact, produce new fascisms each time the word is used or an object is bought — nevertheless demands our attention, asking us, in its post-Babelic language, the ultimate question: “What is fascism today?” The joke, with its lack of seriousness, asks us not to be superficial; it asks us to take things seriously in its place. It asks us not to succumb to the easy allure of its symbols that dispense simple answers. Knowing how to recognize jokes allows us to give them their proper weight; knowing how to joke well allows us to create and read images that, in unexpected ways, might turn out to be more eloquent than we could have imagined. As essential fragments of the mosaic that defines contemporary fascism, these phenomena are like tiles that, if properly placed, can offer a clearer view of the whole picture. The joke is like a very thin and sharp thread that marks the boundary between banality and responsibility, reminding us — through its own chaotic premises — that everything can be a joke, but every joke carries consequences and responsibilities from which one cannot escape. Derision and condemnation may not be the most suitable solutions. “What is fascism today?” — the question is more serious and necessary than one might think. Irony belongs to History; the difficult part, however, is ours.
Note
1) I would like to open a brief parenthesis here: I have chosen to use the swastika as a pretext to talk about “fascist” objects in general, because among them it is perhaps the most iconic and international. The presence of objects bearing swastikas in the shops of Predappio, in my view, makes clear the current state of how fascism is perceived. Fascism was not a single, unified movement; as we know, depending on the region where the phenomenon took root, it took on very different local forms and interpretations. However, this situation is useful for beginning to reflect on the ontological “flattening” within the phenomenology of contemporary fascism. During some interviews conducted in Predappio, I did notice a certain reluctance among some people to accept the National Socialist symbol as part of the visual universe of the fascism celebrated during commemorations. The town itself, moreover, is clear in its stance of not wanting its name to be associated with the swastika. What follows in this text, therefore, should not be understood as an attack on the municipality or as something that implicates it as an entity, but rather as a reflection on events that take place within the town of Predappio (as well as in other Italian and European cities). The focus is on the commercial activities and commemorative events mentioned — not on the city administration.
2) S.Heller, Storia universale della svastica, Turin. UTET, 2020, p.11. (original book, The Swastika: Symbol Beyond Redemption?, New York, Allworth Press, 2000)
3) cfr. M.Kwon, One Place after Another, 2002
4) A.Hitler, Mein Kampf, Santarcangelo di Romagna, Rusconi Libri, 2022, p.110
5) Ibidem
6) By “conservation,” Hitler refers to the fact that the three colors, in their chromatic combination, were not new: “Bismarck established that the new flag should be black, white, and red. (...) In 1871, when German unification was complete, these became the official colors of the Second Reich.”
T. Marshall, Le 100 bandiere che raccontano il mondo, Milan, Garzanti, 2021, p. 88. (original title, Worth Dying For: The Power and Politics of Flags, Elliott & Thompson, U.K. ,2016)
7) A.Hitler, Mein Kampf, Santarcangelo di Romagna, Rusconi Libri, 2022, p.109-110
8) «on May 19, 1933, the Nazi government prohibited the “symbols of German history, of the German state, and of the national revolution from being publicly used in a way that was likely to damage the feeling of dignity of these symbols.” The legislation was aimed at preventing private advertisers, companies, and others from using the swastika and other Nazi symbols or images in marketing their commercial goods and services without the approval of the regime. At that point the German market was flooded with products—including coffee, cigarettes, and cake pans—emblazoned with swastikas, Hitler’s face, or other symbols. The new law made the producers of unauthorized products subject to criminal proceedings». The History of the Swastika, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Holocaust Encyclopedia.
9) S.Heller, Storia universale della svastica, Turin. UTET, 2020, p.96
10) Ibidem
11) Oxford Vocabulary’s Definition.
12) Mary Douglas, Antropologia e simbolismo, Bologna, Il Mulino, 1985, p.85 (original title, Implicit meanings, Routledge, London, 1975)
13) Predappio (3’oo), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W-f1NyTQHQ&t=109s
14) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REJSBOU1nL8
15) The term “nostalgic” is highly problematic: within their loosely defined community, not all fascists agree to be called nostalgics. It’s possible to find reports in which interviewees proudly refer to themselves using that term; in the souvenir shops, the word “nostalgia” is almost exaggerated (a perfume—the “Duce’s Perfume”—is even called NOSTALGIA). Nevertheless, not everyone agrees with this label.Following interviews I conducted on site, I observed that a recurring argument concerns precisely the anachronism inherent in the word. Some of the fascists interviewed argued that it is impossible to speak of nostalgia in their case, since they were not alive during the time of the regime. These individuals prefer to refer to themselves as “History enthusiasts.”
16) «il rito dello scherzo è prima e soprattutto un insieme di simboli». M.Douglas, Antropologia e Simbolismo.
Bologna, Il Mulino, 1985, p.87
17) Ibidem
18) J.Baudrillard, Simulacri e impostura. Bologna, Cappelli editore, 1980, p.26
19) M.Douglas, Antropologia e Simbolismo. Bologna, Il Mulino, 1985, p.92
20) P.P.Pasolini in Pasolini e...”La forma della città”, 1974. https://www.raiplay.it/programmi/pasolinielaformadellacitta
21) It is a private video at the moment, however I leave here the link if in the future Arte decides to make it open. https://youtu.be/nLQ9eF_2rLo?si=IHZy83ziD1mGYzni
22) M.Douglas, Antropologia e Simbolismo. Bologna, Il Mulino, 1985, p.92
Bibliografy:
- Arendt H., La banalità del male, Milano, Feltrinelli, 2023
- Arendt H., Le origini del totalitarismo, Torino, Einaudi, 2019
- Arendt H., Responsabilità e giudizio, Torino, Einaudi, 2010
- Attia K., Franke A., Teixeira Pinto A., The White West: Fascism, Unreason, and the Paradox of Modernity,
Londra, Sternberg Press, 2023
- Baudrillard J., Per una critica dell’economia politica del segno, Milano, Mimesis Edizioni, 2010
- id., Pornografia del terrorismo, Milano, FrancoAngeli, 2017
- id., Power Inferno: Requiem per le Twin Towers; Ipotesi sul terrorismo; La violenza del globale, Milano,
Raffaele Cortina Editore, 2003
- id., Simulacri e Impostura: bestie, Beaubourg, apparenze e altri oggetti, Bologna, Cappelli Editore, 1980
- Butler J., Perdita e rigenerazione. Ambiente, arte, politica, Venezia, Marsilio Editori, 2023
- Canetti E., Massa e potere. Milano, Adelphi, 2023
- Consigliere S., Materialismo magico: Magia e rivoluzione, Bologna, DeriveApprodi, 2023
- Cosmelli A. & Mathieu M., Oltrenero. Nuovi.Fascisti.Italiani., Roma, Contrasto due, 2009
- Debord G., La società dello spettacolo, Milano, Baldini+Castoldi, 2021
- Douglas M., Antropologia e Simbolismo, Bologna, Il Mulino, 1985 (original title, Implicit meanings, Routledge, London, 1975)
- Foucault M., Sorvegliare e punire, Torino, Einaudi, 2019
- Foster H., Il ritorno del reale, Milano, Postmedia books, 2006
- Gaglianò P., Memento: L'ossessione del visibile. Milano, Postmedia Books, 2020
- Galli G., Esoterismo e politica, Soveria Mannelli, Rubbettino, 2010
- id., La magia e il potere, Torino, Lindau, 2023
- Gallini C., Croce e delizia. Usi abusi e disusi di un simbolo, Torino, Bollati Boringhieri, 2007
- Geertz C., Antropologia interpretativa, Bologna, il Mulino, 2001
- Golino E., Parola di Duce: Il linguaggio totalitario del fascismo e del nazismo, Bologna, Rizzoli, 2011
- Göttke F., Burning Images: A history of Effigy Protests, Amsterdam, Valiz, 2022
- Halberstam J., L’arte queer del fallimento, Roma, Minimum Fax, 2022
- Heller S., Storia universale della svastica, Torino, UTET, 2020 (original book, The Swastika: Symbol Beyond Redemption?, New York, Allworth Press, 2000)
- Hitler A., Mein Kampf, Santarcangelo di R., Rusconi Libri, 2022
- Kershaw I., Il «mito di Hitler», Torino, Bollati Boringhieri, 2019,
- Kwon M., Un luogo dopo l’altro, Milano, Postmedia books, 2020
- ManWoman, Hitler non ha inventato la svastica, Roma, Coniglio Editore, 2008
- Marshall T., Le 100 bandiere che raccontano il mondo, Milano, Garzanti, 2021. (original title, Worth Dying For: The Power and Politics of Flags, Elliott & Thompson, U.K.,2016)
- Mirzoeff N., come vedere il mondo, un’introduzione alle immagini: dall’autoritratto al selfie, dalle mappe ai
film (e altro ancora), Milano, Johan & Levi, 2018
- id., Guardare la guerra. Immagini del potere globale, Roma, Meltemi Melusine, 2004
- Mitchell W.J.T., Scienza delle immagini, Monza, Johan & Levi, 2018
- Mosse G.L., La nazionalizzazione delle masse. Simbolismo politico e movimenti di massa in Germania
(1812-1933), Bologna, il Mulino, 1975
- Pasquinelli C., Potere senza stato, Roma, Editori Riuniti, 1985
- Picker H., Conversazioni di Hitler a tavola 1941-1942, Milano, Longanesi & C., 1969
- Rechtman R., Le vite ordinarie dei carnefici, Torino, Einaudi, 2022
- Signorelli A., Antropologia culturale, Milano, McGraw Hill, 2011
- Warhol A., La filosofia di Andy Warhol, Milano, Abscondita, 2009
Sitografy:
- Alanews, Arditi d’Italia sulla tomba di Mussolini in ricordo della Marcia su Roma:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3SE95vOWno (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., Predappio: anniversario della Marcia su Roma: “Oggi la parola fascista è un’offesa”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm0UZ75yyZI (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., Tornano i fascisti a Predappio, gli organizzatori chiedono: “Niente saluto romano”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-S0qN1f4Es (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- Coulwell A., COTW, 2019, Surf Nazis:
https://clubofthewaves.com/feature/surf-nazis/ (last consultation 19/03/2025)
-DI.TV, Predappio: A VILLA MUSSOLINI SI CELEBRA IL 29 LUGLIO L’ANNIVERSARIO DELLA NASCITA DEL DUCE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tNFiMXtt48 (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., Villa Carpena - Predappio: 99° ANNIVERSARIO MARCIA SU ROMA E VISITA A VILLA MUSSOLINI:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pD48jzG6Lsw (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- Duane D., The New York Times, 2019, The Long, Strange Tale of California’s Surf Nazis:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/28/opinion/sunday/surf-racism.html (last consultation 19/03/2025)
. Fanpage.it: Il museo su Mussolini a Predappio è ancora un caso: centro studi o spazio celebrativo?:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZ3TzWlvpr4 (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., La sfilata dei neonazisti a Varese per le foibe: “Il saluto romano lo facciamo quando vogliamo”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZV7BbohE-I (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., Saluti romani, svastiche e selfie con bambini: l’estrema destra ricorda Mussolini a Como:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgkKMkJxN5E (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- Il Fatto Quotidiano, Predappio, il sindaco Pd: “Museo Mussolini? Vogliamo uscire dal folclore fascista”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-BA7wGsR9U (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- Kim & Pat Messier’s Blog, 2017, The use of the Swastika Symbol in American Indian Art:
https://messieraz.com/the-use-of-the-swastika-symbol-in-american-indian-art/ (last consultation
19/03/2025)
- LA7 Attualità, A Predappio la marcia della nostalgia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccyV_d0-ckI (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., Che fine faranno i gadget fascisti: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s5M9rIKbbU (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., Emilia Romagna, vendere cimeli fascisti sarà reato: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWyKzwPcSs0 (last consultation 19/03/2025)
-id., Estrema destra e sovranismo: cosa ci lega?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_geW1lq5yS8&t=77s (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., I fascisti in piazza. “Il vero dittatore è l’Europa”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mV-JhMMrEU&t=318s (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., Il weekend dei nostalgici a Predappio: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFsv7_5yagA (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., In Onda, Predappio people (F.Carrini): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8eYTaW3LFs (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., La galassia nera, il servizio di Danilo Lupo nei luoghi della estrema destra:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPonD8BGcmk (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., Nel centenario della marcia su Roma i nostalgici del duce tornano in piazza:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W-f1NyTQHQ&t=183s (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., “Siamo camerati!” Le diverse anime che sostengono il generale Vannacci si riuniscono a Viterbo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uROqKp7B5dU&t=13s (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., Skinhead, i volti dell’estrema destra: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06UmzALYKxE (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., Tornano le camicie nere: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRE5XUu43Bc (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- La Repubblica, Predappio, la cerimonia per il compleanno di Mussolini: “Il saluto romano solo per chi se la
sente”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zQxKCKwbTA (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- Rai, A cena dal “Federale” con Mussolini -Agorà Estate 14/07/2017:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlAvXon5vfU (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- Rai, Gli “Arditi” sfilano a Predappio -Cartabianca- 01/11/2022:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voZvhE8lkx4&t=135s (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- id., La marcetta nera su Predappio - Agorà Extra 01/11/2021:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REJSBOU1nL8&t=3s (last consultation 19/03/2025)
- United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Holocaust Encyclopedia, Adolf Hitler:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/it/article/adolf-hitler (last consultation 19/03/2025)
-id, La cultura nel Terzo Reich: sintesi:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/it/article/culture-in-the-third-reich-overview?parent=it%2F10948 (last consultation 01/04/2024).
-id, La propaganda nazista:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/it/article/nazi-propaganda?series=81 (last consultation 19/03/2025)
-id, L’indottrinamento della gioventù:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/it/article/indoctrinating-youth?series=81 (last consultation 19/03/2025)
-id, Nazismo e Propaganda, come si crea un leader:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/it/article/making-a-leader?parent=it%2F43
(last consultation 19/03/2025)
-id, Storia della svastica:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/it/article/history-of-the-swastika (last consultation 19/03/2025)
-id, The History of the Swastika:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/history-of-the-swastika (last consultation 19/03/2025)
-id, Trovare i colpevoli:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/it/article/assessing-guilt?parent=it%2F11344 (last consultation 19/03/2025)
-id, Unire una nazione:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/it/article/rallying-the-nation?series=81 (last consultation
19/03/2025)
- VD, Raduno neofascista a Predappio: celebrazioni annuali e omaggi a Mussolini per la Marcia su Roma:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_U04Fmyat8 (last consultation 19/03/2025)