I agree that his argument is very thin in most cases. I linked to the original article more for the video of the students and professor being outraged than for

I agree that his argument is very thin in most cases. I linked to the original article more for the video of the students and professor being outraged than for the Harvard professor's analysis. His examples are all over the place. Boycotts most definitely aren't fascism. In fact, not allowing boycotts seems much closer to fascism than allowing them. The posters are a different story. I don't know if I'd call it "fascism" to tear down posters (neo-nazi, or gay rights... it doesn't matter -- decisions should be content agnostic). It's vandalism for sure. It's also super ineffective. There was recently a case where feminists defaced ads in the London tube that showed a model in a bikini and asked "Are you beach ready?". The end result was bringing international attention, support and sales for the company that made the ads. In short, speech including boycotts isn't fascism. Tearing down posters is vandalism, probably not fascism. Tearing down posters is ineffective whatever you call it.