The french revolution had US support, if not materially, then at least with the sympathies of Thomas Jefferson as Secretary of State giving them legitimacy.
In any case, the material realities of the french revolution are not comparable to the situation in the US today. The proletariat isn't unified, and the technological disparities are too immense.
Your paragraph is so vaguely worded that I can't even figure out what point you're trying to make, so if anyone's arguing in bad faith it's you. Besides, who's only been around for a century? The US has been around for two and a half centuries; trumpism has only been around a little over a decade. The deplorable slurry of McCarthyism and Reaganomics that composes the modern Republican Party hasn't been around for quite a century.
I suppose you mean fascism? Fascism has been around about a century now. Is that what you mean? Because this is a unique variant of fascism; it definitely has all the fundamental characteristics, but with about a century of careful planning, implementation, propagandization, and indoctrination, along with some considerable leaps in technological development which can't be ignored.
They can be overthrown like any other dictator.
You mean like Hitler and Mussolini? Because it took an alliance of the world's biggest military superpowers attacking from multiple fronts to depose them, which still might not have been successful if they hadn't made a few critical strategic miscalculations such as overextending their own capabilities while underestimating the capabilities of the Allied powers.