[vga1]

Funny how well these fit into the terminally online far leftist framing too.

1. Mythic past and rebirth: dreaming of the lost socialist utopia of USSR etc. which was taken from us all by force and deception.

2. Victimhood and humiliation: working class is the victim of a rigged system, exploited by capital elite.

3. Hierarchy and dehumanization: world is split into oppressors (landlords, rich people, etc) and oppressed (workers).

4. Contempt for weakness: "liberals" let this happen due to their limp-wristedness.

5. Cult of action: revolts, strikes, protests, even violence against oppressors.

6. The leader as savior: Mamdani, Sanders, AOC? This admittedly doesn't quite work in the same way as in fascism.

7. Purification of institutions: Universities, media, and governments must be purged of "reactionaries" or "liberals" who resist the revolution.

8. Propaganda and assault on truth: dissent is violently suppressed. Various kinds of Big Lies (e.g. "the genocide") are spread as absolute truths and are repeated at every possible point.

9. Merger of state and corporate power: seizing both the corporations and state for the proletariat.

10. Violence and terror: glorifying murderers when they murder those "who deserve it".

[mindslight]

I've long described the bureaucratic authoritarian corporatist state as building fascism from the other direction, ala inverted totalitarianism. But your list is a conflation of a lot of things - some valid critiques, straightforward responses to the open fascism of the Republican party, and some flat out straw men (eg there are no significant numbers of people "dreaming of the lost socialist utopia of USSR"). And right from the start you've set up a motte and bailey with "terminally online far leftist". So this list reads more as partisan flamebait/rationalization of the current open fascist dynamics rather than a serious critique aimed at any kind of reform.

[ArtemZ]

There is no "fascism" in 21st century because there are no fascist movements or parties. The term "fascism" doesn't mean much, it is just a word used by certains movements back in the past to self describe. Therefore if a party or movement doesn't self describe as fascist then it isn't. Every attempt to define it becomes way too broad and could be easily applied to almost every country in the world.

The term is recently became heavily recycled by left wing activists to label everything they disagree with (and sometimes even used by more radical lefties aka tankies to label less radical ones).

[mindslight]

We can analyze Fascism, summarize its general aspects, and apply the definition to other movements. Hence why we can call Nazism fascism, even though they were separate parties. Trumpism is fascist. This is the point the article is making, and it has been made thoroughly elsewhere as well. At this point, it's is just basic table stakes discussion context for anybody who loves individual liberty or believes in the Constitution and limited government. If you're still unable to even entertain the idea, then you're part of the problem. Based on your touchstone strawmen of "leftists", "radical", and "activists", it sounds like you've got a heavy case of TDS - the real TDS, not the accusation-in-a-mirror version.

[tomhow]

Please don't comment like this, especially given your own appeal. I've replied here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48197114.

[vga1]

>eg. there are no significant numbers of people "dreaming of the lost socialist utopia of USSR"

You seem to be in the happy group of people who have never visited the Lemmy main site. Although you may be right about "significant numbers" even if that site seems to be full of them. They might literally all be there.

[mindslight]

Sure, X exists and has a discussion forum isn't particularly interesting in the context of the modern Internet.

You didn't really address the crux of my point though. I don't think it's worthwhile to discuss the proto-fascist aspects of a small group without political power, in the context of open fascism with significant political power. It would seem to be hollow both-sidesism.