When Noam Chomsky wrote that the USA is a fascist nation, I was happy to read that because it meant I could now use that word, too.
But fascism in my dictionary is any kind of group claiming to be right while excluding any other perspective. Note therefore that for me this excluding aspect is the essential fascist aspect. As such, communism is the fascist version of socialism because communists are dictators and will not tolerate another idea next to their own idea. They exclude other options, they and they alone are right. Contrast this with social-democrats who embrace the same socialist ideals while accepting the larger setting of democracy in which other options have their own chance to exist.
Fascists combine power with declaring any other voice incorrect, and they will mute the other voices when given the chance.
I learned in school already how the extreme left and the extreme right end up looking like one another, engaged in very similar behaviors.
When I moved to the United States, within a year I realized the fascist nature of the United States, now some 30 years ago. So, wondering how fascism will look like in the future does not have a good start when fascism as it always existed in the United States is not recognized. Let me build this out.
We have a duopoly, a bipolar political system while at the same time we have a pluriform capitalist system. It means that we can buy almost anything in the store, just bring money. From our politicians, however, we can barely get anything at all. They mostly sit on their hands. The fascist part is that we are not able to get around the two parties; collectively they are our duopoly dictators.
It's like we are bound inside a straight-jacket but with one hand freed. That is American fascism. We have a society where folks can be themselves, but where the layer above them is really fully in control, telling the layer below that they are free but not handing out any true political freedom.
It is no surprise that folks are rising up against the two-party system. Yet, because we were not told who the real enemy is, we may rally against whatever we can rally against. Just look at Donald Trump's agenda, and there wasn't all that much for, and a whole lot against in his rhetoric, right? Meanwhile, once in power, the rich ended up getting richer.
As long as the folks are not told the truth, they will rally against whatever they see or think is not right. The footage of '1984' comes to mind of people going to their social meeting and seeing the enemies portrayed on the screen, all quickly rallying against them on the screen. That book is pretty much about the UK and the USA, how the two-party systems of the UK and the USA are controlling their own people. Both nations are politically restricted, both embrace that fascist element of not delivering political freedom to all.
The good parts of society, the ones we believe are All-American, were actually put in place after the 1929 Wall Street Crash. The political system did not come up with good social outcomes for our society until after the disaster, with the New Deal.
For about 40 years, everything was going well for the masses (not everyone benefited). For about another 40 years, things slowly got undone. We are now in the last 40 years in which we are working our way toward mayhem once again -- all because we did not change the system. The system itself did not establish the New Deal; it was the disaster that did it. The disaster is the ultimate goal of our current system (unless we steer and steer and steer and steer, and looking at our politicians they do not know how to steer well).
When folks believe they are the best, and when there are no other nations nearby that tell them the truth the way it really is, then folks are not going to change their ways.
So, the two-party system spins and spins. The word poverty means something different in the USA than in the EU. If the USA were to use the EU definition of poverty than more than one-in-three of us would be considered to be living in poverty. Of course we don't say that because we would have a revolution on our hands -- tomorrow. No, we rather have the poor line up behind the Republican party because the Democratic party does not care about these folks. If the Democratic party would care about people it would have provided free and fair elections at State and local levels a long time ago.
Why don't they?
Because they are fascist in their own mindset as well. They want to deliver things for society the way they believe is right for society. They don't want political freedom because that would undermine their own power. They do not want three or four parties; they want to be the best party themselves; they see themselves as the ones that are right, and they don’t want to break up the duopoly, the bipolar illness we have in place today.
As such, we have a fascist nation on our hands, and this was the case already as soon as the individual States decided to not hold free elections for their State representatives or for local representatives. They should have had free elections had they read the US Constitution correctly. No, they wanted to make themselves more powerful, and so the States turned the entire USA into a very deeply established fascist nation (but indeed with one hand free coming out of that straight-jacket).
Allow me to put an article here in which voting is shown to be a (partial) scam in the USA:
'Voting -- Is It a Scam?'
https://fred-rick.medium.com/voting-is-it-a-scam-415ced788288
