Each of the authors mentioned all had contrasting ideologies on what the future of design would look like. Filippo Tommaso Marinetti founded the idea of futurism. He believed that tearing down the norms of typical design and reinstating a new design quota would be the most beneficial to the design world. He states that he wants to “demolish museums and libraries”, believing the information fed to them was incorrect and they must start from the ground up and to pass the new knowledge for the future generations. Another of Marinetti’s points is that he wants futurists to express rashness and danger, to glorifying war, as he puts it
“the only cure to the world” in their works they create. If you looked at a futurist work, you would indeed see the rashness and almost chaotic layouts and design
choices. Marinetti imagined a world where the public would revolt against tradition and would promote beauty through intense struggle as he sought beauty to only be effective had it shown signs of suffering or aggression. However, Marinetti wanted the people to not remain in the past and insisted to climb towards the future by creating a society that was not bound by time or space, but instead to breach the impossible and emphasized speed to be one of the main goals, besides aggression, to make futurism successful. For those reasons, his ideology emphasized extreme violence, denial of tradition and intensive focus on the future.

Alexander Rodchenko and El Lissitzky , on the other hand were constructivists. Constructivism was the idea that design should be used for industrial society and the general public. In other words, it is a tool used to help a country prosper rather than art as an individual. Normally, constructivism was used to promote propaganda and was often shown in the work force to accelerate production. Constructivism promoted innovation, not only by industrial machinery but designs that focuses on geometric scaling, abstraction, and consistency. You will also find that red and photocollage were one of the common tropes used in Constructivist work. Rodchenko explains that “Previously, engineers relaxed with art. Now, artists relax with technology. What’s needed is no rest” He believes that rest is not needed for the name of progress and stresses that art must be constantly processed and organized. El Lissitzky thought in a similar manner except he enforced the idea that there is no such thing as individual belonging or as he puts it “The private property aspect of Creativity must be destroyed”. Lissitzky also thought that evolution must be constant in design for there always is a time to improve one’s design from his previous works and predecessors. With such an instance, he would then go on to explain how hieroglyphs and letters helped invent the writing and how Gutenberg’s printing press was revolutionary, only seeking more innovation. He continues to state why the printed sheets must transcend space and time and why they are so important. His ideas along with Rodchenko created a system of continuous demand of improvement and steady design.

All of these texts shared the desire for a better future of design and modern society, though in contrasting solutions to attain such a thing. Lissitzky and Rodchenko were both Communists that shared the same views in design where people needed to focus on design for the nation. They implemented communist views into their work and laid the foundation or uniformity in printed works. However, Lissitzky focused on learning from past examples in history and preserving prior works as a timeline for vast improvement. Marinetti,
on the other hand was more destructive in how he approached design and propaganda. Unlike the constructivists, he wanted to erase the current knowledge and discover/implement new knowledge for designers to use. Marinetti focused on the people designing for themselves while demolishing and reestablishing society while Rodchenko and Lissitzky wanted to improve society for the State and so the people worked as one. These ideologies mostly are problematic in the present as Modernism and Post-Modernism design are chaotic, abstract,
rash and only process propaganda. It is indeed a fusion of negative attributes that run wild with no organization. The good that did come from these ideas were the signs of expression, organization and fluidity that is only shown in a small hand full of work and not in Modernism / Post-Modernism pieces. In sum, Futurism and Constructivism are two clashing ideologies that suffer massive radical differences yet were able to mold new ideas for design.