That would depend on your level of scholarship. Sure, common parlance does not provide deep political analysis. But even fascism wasn't an homogeneous beast and

That would depend on your level of scholarship. Sure, common parlance does not provide deep political analysis. But even fascism wasn't an homogeneous beast and its instances vary wherever it continues to spread, there are nonetheless a number of scholars who capture its essence and describe what its commonalities are. Of these, the most accessible may be that of Umberto Eco. [1] While it has many points in common with other totalitarianisms by its very nature, there are traits unique to fascism that situate it as ultra-conservative, promoting imperialism based on a glorified account of the past, and using racism and mass culture as a propaganda tool; characteristics that not all totalitarian states share, and that taken together make an identifying profile. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism#Umberto_Eco https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism#Umberto...