You keep bringing up the broader Futurist movement, but I am discussing mostly one specific Futurist founder who was also an early member of the Italian Fascist party and lifelong supporter of Mussolini, and whom Andreesen quotes and considers a "saint" in his newest manifesto. Even though the broader movement was more complex and politically diverse, Andreesen is specifically praising the fascist, not the movement (without even something like "even though he later became a fascist, in the beginning [...]").
Also, while I don't think Ayn Rand saw it that way, I think it's pretty clear that her objectivism has the same Great Men ideology as much of fascist thought, and the same disdain for democracy, religion, and the needs of the people. It's true that objectivism is more individualistic while fascism is more collectivist, but they amount to the same observation in the end: the Great Men naturally rule over the unwashed masses.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistory/comments/10to92r/how_did...
> Also, both Ayn Rand and fascism - particularly the Futurist fascists - are very much on the same side of the political compass on most issues.
No, not really, and other than being labeled "right wing," which is itself a useless designation, they really have nothing in common at all on any significant level. A world run by Randians is very different from one run by fascists. This is...a basic fact.
In any case, my overall point was merely that Andreesen et al are mostly just marketers who almost certainly don't understand/know the complex history of the people they're quoting – nor do the people using these quotes to tar them with an oversimplified label.