You never connected the concepts. Demanding structural rigor is not a "narrow view". This is the bare minimum required for a coherent framework.

Your examples are historical anecdotes of state violence that completely fail to differentiate fascism from standard capitalism or imperialism operating at the core of a liberal state. Every example you mentioned that is bad about the US can easily be explained without fascism. Flattening these distinct systems into a single category requires ignoring the core arguments of the very thinkers you are citing and renders the term meaningless.

Your interpretation of how corporations connect to fascism completely misunderstands Mussolini’s actual model of corporatism. I have pointed this out three times now, and you have yet to address it.

I have not provided my own definition of fascism because my view isn't the subject of the critique. I am challenging you to account for the internal consistency of yours. Yet another thing I have stated and you continue to fail to grasp.

Reducing a fundamental structural and temporal breakdown of political mechanics to a mere "disagreement over semantics" just confirms that you are unwilling to do the work to map your own thesis.

Your invective responses are just thin veneers for your rhetorical dodging and inability to wrestle with real structural mechanics in actual history.