And it remains specific in academics.

... no? Because there is more than just one axis to politics?

Hence why Hitler wanted to purge all the communists in his country and elsewhere in the globe eventually.

I disagree with how academics classified fascism as “right-wing”

It's not even defined as right wing.

You need to read some of the literature. You apparently don't know the definition, which is why they're going to laugh at you for calling them fascists.

Does it really matter what you call them? They blocked a legal proposal to move state borders that would benefit Oregon and California's small conservative farming population.

Then what is the definition? And what makes it fundamentally different? What difference between them is so great that it overcomes their authoritarian similarities?

Yes, it matters if you're going to actually try talking to them.

I've told you the definition, and it included nothing to do with right/left wing.

Nationalist and authoritarian regimes with potentially a focus on race superiority.

You realize that conservatives are called fascists because fascism is commonly referred to as the “far-right”, so they use it to discredit the movement?

Then correct them!

That's not the proper way to use the academic term.

I would rather make them realize they have more in common with fascists than we do so they should let it go.

Except they'll dismiss you as incorrect.

Effectively you'll talk your way to a brick wall.

And I dismiss them as incorrect.

And then nothing will be solved.

Congrats.

You've literally wasted your time at that point.

But nothing will be solved by "correcting" them either. They'll still call Republicans fascists.

Cool, tell them they're being authoritarian rather than fascists and you'll actually come out ahead in dialog.

To them, simply being incorrect is an unimportant nuance.

Not really true.

I prefer making the argument that fascists are alt-left, as opposed to far-right.

Do you disagree that fascism is placed on the right side of the political spectrum?

I've literally told you it's not respective of political leans.

It's an up/down aspect of authoritarianism and a focus on nationalism (which tends to be more right-leaning, but economically there is no left/right in fascism.)

Nazbols exist.

Well, did exist.

Unless you're trying to say Russia wasn't globalist in its USSR phase.

In which I'd just stare at you if you suggested they weren't.

You're classifying fascism strictly as a term to define the sociopolitical movements in Italy and Germany in the early 20th century, as opposed to the underlying sociopolitical concept that defines it.

It's literally a definition that Italy gave itself.

Fascismo.

It didn't exist prior.

Yes, but there are also different variants of communism and socialism (i.e. Marxism, Fabian socialism, etc.). You're hung up on the term as opposed to the concept. The term "fascism" is currently used to describe authoritarian nationalism.

And it's placed on the "far-right" of the spectrum.

I agree that the left/right dichotomy is too limited, but if we must use it, then authoritarianism should be placed on the same side.

Yes. Authoritarian nationalism, literally as I've already said 3 times.

The left is generally not nationalists, kinda antithetical to the whole ideology.

It's effectively the same thing as me calling the right wingers nazbols.