I feel like it's a very ill-defined term in the imperial core, but also there seems to be no coherent agreement on the left. Many thinkers have different definitions that often overlap.
Lenin called fascism "capitalism in decay"
Fanon called it "colonialism at home"
Umberto Eco offers his own incoherent mess of a definition
Roger Griffin defines it as a "palingenetic ultranationalism" that imagine a mythical "rebirth" of some previous glory (Rome, the volk, MAGA), and in doing so seek the "dominance of the insiders of the ultra-nation over those outside of it."
Parenti states that fascism "offers a beguiling mix of revolutionary-sounding mass appeals and reactionary class politics", adding that if fascism means anything "it means all-out government support for business and severe repression of anti-business, pro- labour forces."
Andreas Malm adapts Griffin's definition in White Skin, Black Fuel to a "palindefenIve, palingenetic ultranationalism", etc, adding that in addition to the sense of rebirth to some mythical glory time, there is also a mythical defense of the ultra-nation from those who are defined as foreign, be they Muslims, central American refugees, judeo-bolsheviks, etc.
I find the most functionally useful definition of fascism is Parenti's: the violent oppression of the left to maintain the dominance of the ownership class. However I feel like it lacks the element of violent chauvinism against arbitrarily defined others in society. That is to say I suppose I also lack a coherent definition.
What say you comrades?
I think the problem is that defining fascism requires 5-6 sentences and at that point people stop paying attention and think that you didn't even give them a definition. Like others here are saying, those are all (except maybe Eco's) informative. Fascism is a reaction to the left. It marries the government to business in order to do so, trying to distinguish a form of good capitalism from bad capitalism and saying that the left is the bad capitalism that must be destroyed. It plays off of a false class consciousness that takes contradictions that could lead to left radicalization and redirects them at "others", which chiefly means a set of scapegoats aligning with a concept of traditional values or restoration. Fundamentally, all of this happens opportunistically, it's another face of capitalism: capitalism under threat by the just, i.e. capitalism in decay.
Chuds don't have to correctly identify communists, socialists, or even leftist in general and they can still rally in hate against them. :jordan-eboy-peterson: :solidarity: :frothingfash:
The common chud only needs to be told that everything that's wrong is the left's fault and they're gonna destroy your family and culture if you don't stop terrorizing anyone that falls outside of normative patriarchical capitalism. This is enough for them.