> Fascism, at least as the Nazi's defined and implemented it, is the belief that a socialist economy will work when the people have a similar genetic likeness.

> Fascism, at least as the Nazi's defined and implemented it, is the belief that a socialist economy will work when the people have a similar genetic likeness. I have seen many arguments supporting the destructionists (aka trumpists) from that exact vein. From the longstanding abstract "immigrants come here and sit on welfare" and "we need to take care of our own" to specifically supporting the recent pogroms as necessary before we can do things like fix healthcare or restore employees' negotiating power. So even by your definition, it seems eminently reasonable to describe the destructionist movement as fascist. And the point isn't to use the label, drop the mic, and consider the topic solved. But rather it's to have a basic dialogue so that we can discuss constructive solutions for opposing it - and that's basically how it's being used in the original post, regardless of your tone policing. (On the idea itself, I'd say it's preposterous to think that the corpos that drive our politics are going to suddenly switch to supporting socialism if only we racially purify our society, but there are unfortunately a lot of true believers. I'd say the dynamic is more like the only point of the socialist aspect is to assuage people's consciences for having rejected their empathy here and now)