Why you think this kind of question makes any sense remains mysterious. Come on, dude.
It makes sense because it is taking the left wing position of replacing individual responsibility with responsibility taken on by the state.
Is fascism the first thing you think of when you think of paid vacations or food assistance programmes?.
When you use the power of the state to force people to do things, it is fascism.
Read the wiki, it describes everything you're confused about, including how it was developed in specific rejection of socialism (and Marxism's core premise) and how it was in specific opposition to the left everywhere it was encountered.
Like destroying labour unions, killing and persecuting the left, propagating imperialism, strongly advocating nationalism, rejecting internationalism, allying with right wing/conservative parties, rejecting class conflict, rejecting egalitarianism, pushing social darwinism etc.?
Labour unions:
During the not-proper-communism Stalinist era:
During the Great Terror, the distortion of interests, whereby unions fought for state production interests rather than workers' direct interests of compensation and safety, reached the point of absurdity, as no degree of unsafe working conditions or low pay could be countered by the unions if the party and state decided that the sacrifices must be made. .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_unions_in_the_Soviet_Union
killing and persecuting the left, rejecting egalitarianism
By 1936 the Gulag held a total of 5,000,000 prisoners, a number that was probably equaled or exceeded every subsequent year until Stalin died in 1953. Besides rich or resistant peasants arrested during collectivization, persons sent to the Gulag included purged Communist Party members and military officers, German and other Axis prisoners of war (during World War II), members of ethnic groups suspected of disloyalty, Soviet soldiers and other citizens who had been taken prisoner or used as slave labourers by the Germans during the war, suspected saboteurs and traitors, dissident intellectuals, ordinary criminals, and many utterly innocent people who were hapless victims of Stalin’s purges.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Gulag
If you project the wrong communism in a communist country, you are just as persecuted as anyone else. Also I would love to know how your definition of egalitarianism can exist when you can take away someone's property because they are perceived to be richer than you.
Of course you can. Anarchism and communism aim for stateless societies. .
Communism does this in the perfectly logical manner by building the largest state possible.
Your dichotomy of 'left = more government, right = less government' is a-historical and inaccurate.
That is not the dichotomy I am projecting.
What I am saying is:
Left = collective, right = individual. An ideal right wing government is one where the state exists to fulfil the individual (which in itself is an idea that comes from Christianity) . This is why most western governments are mostly centre right.
The ideal left wing government is one where the individual exists to fulfil the state. This describes every single totalitarian regime in the world.
Look at the two theories and tell me which one makes more predictions.
Your version where left wing = collectivism based around class conflict, now switched to identity politics. Whereas right wing = collectivism based around the state and identity politics.
It doesn't make coherent sense IMO since you see people who call themselves left wing willingly embrace racism and sexism. This describes the Democrats in the US and the ANC in this country. It also doesn't require bogus things like horseshoe theory to explain the glaring similarities between what you call right wing extremism and left wing extremism
If you look at what I define as left and right, everything falls into a much more cohesive framework. It explains the obvious racism and sexism that the left is displaying in the US and this country, as well as describing accurately what happened in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. It also locates actual right wing, anti-government terrorism into a more far more cohesive position. The Nazi's et al actually want a strong totalitarian government to fulfil their racist wishes, since it would be impossible to it without it. It also places something like gun ownership (which is an expression of individualism), in the correct place. A so called "right-wing" government like the Nazis according to you then would have a lot to do with the NRA with the right to own guns. This certainly wasn't the case:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_legislation_in_Germany#Gun_regulation_of_the_Third_Reich
It also explains the statistics that the FBI puts out by saying right-wing extremism is a larger threat than left wing extremism. It isn't the almost non-existing Neo-Nazis and KKK. It is people like the Oklahoma city bomber who are anti-government. Heck there was a recent attempt to repeat the bombings that was foiled. That guy wasn't a Nazi, he was anti-government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh
Nichols' anti-government views developed and grew over the years.[6] Nichols spent most of his adult life in the Lapeer and Sanilac County areas of Michigan where mistrust and resentment of the federal government was common, especially after bank repossessions of many farms in the 1980s.[25] Neighbors said he attended meetings of anti-government groups, experimented with explosives and got more radical as time went on.[14] In February 1992, he attempted to renounce his US citizenship by writing to the local county clerk in Michigan, stating that the political system was corrupt, and declaring himself a "non resident alien".[3][5] Several months later, he appeared in court and tried to avoid responsibility for some of his credit card bills (he owed approximately $40,000 altogether), refusing to come before the bench, and shouting at the judge that the government had no jurisdiction over him.[5][15] On October 19, 1992, he signed another document renouncing his US citizenship.[14] In May 1993 Nichols appeared before a county judge regarding an $8,421 unpaid credit card debt.[14] He also renounced his driver license.[15]
The right wing apartheid government was also heavily statist.
Another example where you are wrong. Apartheid's fundamental power initially started off with left wing Afrikaaner trade unions who felt they were being unfairly treated because black labourers were working at a lower rate then working class Afrikaaners, thus resorted to collectivism and the state to correct the injustice put upon them.
You look at the similarities between communism and Nazism and tell me which theory fits:
Both pathologically distort the truth through propaganda.
Both have a religious fervour for scientific progress.
Both required large totalitarian states.
Both practised discrimination based on arbitrary basies(be it class or race).
Both murdered millions.
Both went bankrupt.
Both were powered by mobilising the working class.
Both wanted to destroy religion.
Both had zero respect for private property and private liberty.
Both wanted to allocate resources from the "privileged" group to the "unprivileged" group.
It even works for this country with the ANC doing down exactly the same roads, using exactly the same tricks as the Nats did.
