there are differences, but telling me that facism is that vapid and just basically a framework that talks about how the state can shape culture, that reminds me too much of the communist rethoric that we are all blank slates and the party (or in this case the state) is the writer
To a National Socialist, the volk is everything. The state exists (if it exists) as a tool for promoting the interests of the nation. So the actual form of government is secondary, and in fact you would expect it to be as different for every nation as the national characters are themselves.
Whereas for fascists, the exact reverse is true. For them the state is prime. The nation, insofar as it exists, is simply a tool for the state. As Noyer said, a social construct.
sure the state is prime, but what does the state do? what is the stated goal of that state. for natsocs it's simple, preserve the nation, for communists it's the worker's (officially at least), and so on, what does fascism have?
But I think the larger point is neither National Socialism or Communism is *necessarily* totalitarian. Either one could be anything from Anarchic to Totalitarian.
