Home / Reviving Mazzinianism / Why Mazzinianism?
Why Mazzinianism?
Written by David Tait | Last Updated on Dec 13, 2025
The principal project of the New Mazzinian is to help construct and inspire a revival of Mazzinianism as a political movement. While Mazzini has been gone for over 150 years, his thought still has resonance today.
Though Mazzini left behind a great deal of political thought, principles, and ideas, there has never been a Mazzinian school of thought or a defined "Mazzinianism" that has been a major force in politics, either in Italy or beyond.
My task here is to try and change that since much of what Mazzini wrote and believed in is applicable to our modern political context, albeit with a little updating. And maybe it could do some good.
Mazzinianism is derived from the political thought of Giuseppe Mazzini. Mazzini, a 19th century Italian revolutionary, was a political activist who worked to achieve a united Italy which was still divided up by the European imperial powers at the time. Mazzini’s chief principle was that individuals were assigned a nationality in order to complete a divine mission.
Table of Contents ▼
What Is Mazzinianism?
Mazzinianism is a different way of looking at nationality. While the world seems to be moving away from pointless national divisions, Mazzinians believe that nationalities and nations still have their part to play.
As we watch the populist backlash to an overbearing populism, it becomes plainer that nationality is the optimal form of human association. Nationality is an undeniable reality of our connectedness through language and culture, and nothing has been able to surpass it since.
Mazzinians don’t just stop at the organic reality of nationalities as authentic human social expression. Nationality is a principle that assigns a specific duty, or "mission," to each nation.
This mission, according to Mazzini, is not to conquer or dominate (as in nationalism), but to contribute its own unique abilities and character to the collective progress of all humanity. In this view, a nation is not an end in itself but the "workshop" through which its people can fulfill their higher moral obligations to the entire human family.
Mazzinianism is based on the following principles:
Duties: The primary moral and spiritual obligations we have, first to humanity, then to our nation which Mazzini believed must come before any claim of individual rights.
Nationality: The natural grouping of people based on shared language, culture, and history, which serves also as the essential principle for fulfilling one duty to humanity and collective mission.
Humanity: The ultimate association of all peoples, seen as a single, unified project which every nation has a divine duty to serve and advance. Humanity is the Mazzinian concept of Progress.
Democracy: The democratic form of self-government that frees a nation from tyranny, allowing its people to unite and work together to achieve their national mission.
Why the Neglect?
The reason for the neglect of Mazzini's political thought is mostly down to the way history ended up playing out for him. Though he did rise to international fame at the height of the revolutions that swept through Europe in 1848, which saw him as the triumvir of the brief Roman Republic, the failure of the republic at the hands of the French also saw Mazzini's influence in the European democracy movement falter.
Waning Success
Despite this political failure, Mazzini had other problems that precluded his eventual vanishment and confinement to Italy political history. His style of romantic nationalism was quickly losing ground to the growing communist and socialist movements that were better articulating the grievances of the working classes experienced by the masses. Mazzini's movement, though consistently in favor of the working classes and their emancipation, drew most of its support from the educated middle-classes.
But it was also Mazzini's own anti-communism that would ensure his future political insignificance. Implacably opposed to class conflict (or any sectarianism of the sort), Mazzini emphasized the need to class collaboration through duty, that would enforce his concept of association through the nation. Mazzini was also strongly opposed to (Marx's) materialism, which he regarded as the erasure of noble and religious principle to wants, condemning it as "the worship of Interest, [that] would inevitably bring you down to egotism and anarchy." (The Duties of Man).
Communism and Fascism
Mazzini's anti-communism reached its crescendo in his harsh criticism towards the Paris Commune of 1871. Horrified by the "“the orgy of anger, vendetta, and bloodshed”, Mazzini wrote a scathing essay attacking the commune from emerging from a narrow, Parisian self-interest (The Commune and the Assembly, 1871). He called on the democratic movement to distance itself from associating itself with the Commune and desired Italy to show the world an alternative. However, this sentiment was not shared by the rest of the pro-democratic community, who were mostly in favor of the action in the Commune, and were puzzled by Mazzini's outrage. This ultimately marked a further step towards Mazzini's irrelevance today in the realm of ideas.
The more significant reason for Mazzini's neglect would come during the 1920s when the Partito Nazionale Fascista, led by Benito Mussolini, would come to power in Italy, ending the short-lived liberal(ish) democracy Italy had managed to form. The Fascists, particularly the self-proclaimed "philosopher of fascism", Giovanni Gentile, actively set about to mischaracterize and twist Mazzini's deeply held principle of national mission to support aggressive Italian chauvinism and imperialism. The revanchism of an even more vicious form of monarchism in Il Duce was so incompatible with what Mazzini believed when it can to democratic republicanism, that it is surprising that Mazzini could ever been credibly associated. Indeed, one of the most consistent opponents and activists against the Fascist regime, Carlo Rosselli, was himself inspired by Mazzini in his action against Mussolini.
The Man
Yet the most damning reason for Mazzini's obscurity today is down to his own qualities as a thinker. Mazzini was not a systematic theoretician who created complex philosophical explanations for history or his own political values. His writing is occasionally inconsistent, and his ideas sometimes lack the vigor that a Marx, a Mises, a Hegel, might have. Mazzini's faith was his philosophical system, and his devout Christian belief, given to him by his mother, influenced his fierce belief in his principles and his devotion to good and duty. But it's also true that it makes almost impossible for his ideas to attain any mass appeal today.
Why Mazzinianism Matters Today
It is clear that we are currently going through a political interregnum on a grand scale in our politics. The old paradigm that we have been used to—conservatism vs. socialism, capitalism vs. communism, and the dominant liberal international order—is collapsing around us, and the repercussions of this collapse are felt all around the world as many different political and demagogic forces are emerging to succeed it.
From Material to Belonging
While the character of this new political age is still up for grabs, it’s clear we are moving away from economically dominant politics to a politics where the question of home and belonging will become the main concern. The question of maximum individualism—on a global scale—has been met with fierce blowback by movements that are putting communal feeling first, even before economic efficiency. The first and clearest example of this was the Brexit referendum in 2016, where the primary case for leaving was not about economics, but sovereignty. COVID-19 also marked an important and organic expression of social solidarity, as when lockdowns commenced, many people sang their national anthems in support and comfort for one another.
Since then, many political movements have been springing up during this period of political turbulence. From left-wing and right-wing populism, to feeble conservatism, to nostalgic libertarianism and classical liberalism, to strongman vulgarism, to neoreactionary and alt-right ideologies, to radical intersectionalism, to liberal reactionaries, and all manners of racialist politics. It is clear that the debate over capitalism and socialism is over, with many economic questions now becoming subordinate to the question of home.
The Paradigm Shift
As this is a paradigm shift, it is difficult to see how this will look on the other side. To use the phrasing of Thomas S. Kuhn from his Structure of Scientific Revolutions, "ducks will look like rabbits" after the shift has finished. For example, the question of nationalism has never fit well in the collapsing paradigm, as there have been left-wing nationalists and patriots just as much as there have been right-wing ones. But it simply hasn’t fit well with the prism through which we see politics. However, this shift could bring us to a point in which the nation becomes a rabbit and economics, a duck.
Already some political ideas are doing this, from postliberal conservatism to Maurice Glasman’s Blue Labour movement in the UK; all of these are proposals for the theme of the next paradigm.
Where Mazzinianism Comes In
An interregnum, as Antonio Gramsci described, is a period where all sorts of morbid symptoms can appear. Many of the proposals for the next paradigm have appeared from resentment and anger as society has become more sectarianized, though it is only because a viable idea is yet to come to replace it. The danger is that it is replaced by an idea that might destroy all the progress we have made in the previous one.
Mazzinianism is another political proposal that seeks to play along the theme of belonging and consolidate a revolutionary doctrine that keeps us progressing. The old individual and rights-based paradigm is dying, but what replaces it should integrate the good while mitigating the bad. Mazzinianism, by promoting a system of harnessing the individual with their nationality for the benefit of humanity, hopes to be an agent for the future and for the good. We want to follow and expand that feeling of national and internationalist solidarity that we’ve seen emerge in times of crisis and make it the primary driver of social, economic, and political change.
Making Mazzinianism Modern
One of the biggest challenges for me has been the task of developing a modern form of Mazzinianism. The reason why this is difficult is trying to satisfy the two needs of making Mazzinianism relevant and useful for today's political context while at the same time, not removing it completely from the thought and ideas of the Italian revolutionary.
The Need for Rigor
The former demands a rigorous and systematic philosophy capable of standing up to intense scrutiny, whereas the other requires me to keep Mazzini—who was generally no systematic—at the heart of it. In other words, turning Mazzinianism into something apart from Mazzini without it being completely divorced from his beliefs
This site is my attempt to do just that: to make a Mazzinian school of thought for the first time that pulls Mazzini's political ideas together into a robust system for political action, given it the moral and practical foundations that all political philosophies should aspire to.
"Standardizing Mazzini"
Since the idea is to build Mazzinianism for today, there is a degree of "standardization" that is required to transform it from the idiosyncratic writings of Mazzini into something that is more democratized. In order to do this, I have spent a lot of time researching and finding other thinkers, politicians, activists, philosophers who have either had direct, indirect, or no influence on or from him, trying to put it all together to make a coherent philosophy. These have included:
Johann Gottfried Herder: the German romantic philosopher
Sun Yat-sen: founding father of the Republic of Chinese and author of the Three Principles of the People.
Ahad Ha'am: the Jewish writer and activist who founded spiritual Zionism
Aristotle: the well-known Greek philosopher
Cicero: the Roman lawyer, politician, and philosopher who wrote extensively on Roman republican values and virtue ethics.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau: the Genevan political philosopher and author of The Social Contact
Leo Strauss: the American political philosopher
Hannah Arendt: the German-American heterodox philosopher
Carlo Rosselli: the Italian anti-fascist leader and founder of liberal socialism
Maurice Glasman: member of the British House of Lords and founder of Blue Labour
Francisc Pi y Margall: the Spanish federalist revolutionary who was president of the First Spanish Republic (1873-74)
Francisco Morazán: Honduran politician who championed a federal Central American republic
Simone Weil: French spiritual philosopher and anti-fascist activist during the Spanish Civil War and WWII
George Orwell: Famed British anti-totalitarian novelist
This is, but no means, an exhaustive list of those whose thought have played a central role in developing modern Mazzinianism, but they are important characters who have been involved in shaping my own personal thought, and so through making connections with their thought and Mazzini's, I have managed to create something relatively detailed and, I hope, interesting.
Differences Between Mazzini and Modern Mazzinianism
Since we are adapting Mazzini’s thought for the modern day, it is inevitable that there will be differences between Mazzini’s original ideas and the movement today. Here’s a table comparing the key differences between Mazzini’s ideas and today’s intepretation:
| Key Idea | Mazzini’s Thought | Modern Mazzinianism |
|---|---|---|
| Nationality | Nationality was the principle that bonded groups of individuals together and served as the bridge toward progress and humanity. Mazzini regarded nationality as transient and transitory, believing that nationalities working together would eventually lead to international governance. | Nationality remains a core principle and the bridge toward progress and humanity, allowing individuals to connect with others globally. However, there is general skepticism that nationalities will ever be superseded; they will likely always exist. |
| Democracy | Democracy was synonymous with republicanism, relying on a Rousseauvian interpretation that sometimes overlooked pluralism for the sake of unity. | Democracy can manifest in many different valid systems. There is a strong belief in representative democracy and political pluralism as essential for progress. The nation is the common ground upon which this pluralism can exist without becoming sectarianism. |
| God | Strong theism. God provided the entire ethical framework and was the main source of nationalities and duties. Occasionally theocratic in tone. | Belief in God is helpful but inessential. The ethical frameworks of Mazzinianism can be understood with or without God. It is open to other religious and non-religious lines of thought that share the same principles. |
| Economics | Early social democratic thinker with a belief in some state involvement. He remained liberal regarding market mechanisms but believed the rich should help the poor out of duty. Guided by the principle of the “union of labor and capital in the same hands,” with a strong focus on the middle and working classes. | Guided also by the principle of the “union of labor and capital in the same hands,” with a focus on middle-class consciousness. Open to multiple economic schools of thought that advocate for strong macroeconomics and microeconomics without relying exclusively on one or the other. |
| International Relations | Early proponent of liberal internationalism and a principled foreign policy. Justified intervention on the basis of deterring despots and promoting democracy. Skeptical of cynical non-interventionism and pure cosmopolitanism. | Represents a spectrum between liberal internationalism and democratic realism. Intervention based on the principle of promoting democracy is seen as both a moral and strategic imperative for fighting totalitarianism. |
| Revolution | Violent revolution was necessary for fighting despotic regimes; however, he was strongly against terrorism, providing a strict set of rules for conducting guerrilla warfare. Revolution needed to be accompanied by social change, not just a change in government. True revolution could only be achieved on principle. | Revolution is contingent on the political situation. In the face of tyrannical regimes, a violent revolution—unless change is otherwise achievable—is often justified. Strongly anti-terrorism and against any attacks on civilians. Where existing democratic methods are available, violence can never be justified, and democratic revolutions (i.e., through the ballot box) are preferred. |
Left, Right or Center?
Mazzinianism does not fit neatly into our left-to-right political spectrum that we are used to today. We are still accustomed to thinking about politics in materialist and economic terms, i.e., socialism on the left and capitalism on the right. Although this is changing in the ongoing politico-cultural war, Mazzinianism is still not easy to place.
Left-Wing Traits
Mazzinianism shares many traits with left-wing movements, especially since Mazzini was technically considered on the left at the time of his activism. Indeed, Mazzinians generally support revolutionary action against despotic governments and strongly support the global democracy movement, human rights, and equality. They also strongly condemn atrocities by governments anywhere they are perpetrated.
Mazzinians also share the support for more interventionist economics along the style of social democracy, believing that social policy and government-led programs are vital for development and a strong middle class.
However, Mazzinians are generally opposed to Marxism and communism and completely reject both the materialist conception of history and class conflict.
Right-Wing Traits
Mazzinianism also has a number of traits that we would classify as right-wing today. Mazzinians share the conservative focus on civic duties and on cultural education, as well as a strong belief in both family and the country. Mazzinians are open to the free market as a way of emancipating individuals materialistically and are in favor of economics that promote small businesses (low income tax, low startup costs).
Mazzinians are also not averse to defending and promoting democratic values, even if that requires military force. This also means that Mazzinians are comfortable with a considerable amount of realism in foreign affairs and understand that some alliance-making, though not ideal, is context-based.
On the other hand, Mazzinians reject any authoritarian style of government or Machiavellian maneuvering and are strongly opposed to anything that might violate equality (i.e., racialist policies or other forms of discrimination). Mazzinians are generally suspicious of overly patriotic rhetoric and dislike appeals to the sectarian.
Mazzinianism and the Center
Mazzinianism perhaps could be best defined, therefore, as on the radical (or even revolutionary) center.
The center has become a by-word for the Third Way movement, which represented an attempt at a non-ideological approach to policymaking (in other words, Pragmatism). However, much of this centrism has resulted in rejecting ideas on both sides of the political spectrum and has become relatively ineffective; this Pragmatism has been more accommodative rather than active.
Mazzinianism is not Pragmatist but rather pragmatic. It is not a rejection of the left and right, but a creative combination of ideas from both sides with a desire for radical change in the political and economic system. Mazzinians can be influenced by both sides and look at an idea's relation to truth, rather than its ideological origins.
Mazzinians should channel both their right-wing and left-wing values in an effective and principled way to artfully design policy based on both reality and on vision. For the Mazzinian, this is the true meaning of being on the radical center.