Any string of comments that get this confused must be because people aren’t applying good definitions. If Goldberg defines Fascism as “Collectivist AND Authoritarian” then authoritarian behaviors ALONE are not Fascist. Monarchies are often Authoritarian, but few people accuse them of being Collectivist.
The traits that you assign to Fascism on the American Right are Authoritarian. The Right are individualists combining reluctantly to defend themselves against the collective actions of the Left.
Worst, given the way politics is, you must start somewhere to effect change. That means if the political battleground has been the domain of the Left for seventy years, you must tolerate collectivist organizations, and sometime cooperate with them, before you can build a consensus to tear them down.
Defending borders and maintaining a military may be authoritarian. But, if the Founders of our country fought wars without becoming Fascists, so can we. Thomas Jefferson, in attacking the Barbary Pirates in 1803, was not acting as a Fascist. He was defending US commerce from Muslim tyrants. He had no autocratic authority; he had to go to Congress to get the funds to prosecute the war.
The point is that while Authoritarianism runs through both parties, collectivism tends to be the domain of the Left. It is the Left who says that individuals don’t matter, that only groups do.
Of course, individual politicians can muddy the waters by “triangulation” the way Bill Clinton stole conservative ideas to gain popularity with the electorate. Teddy Roosevelt was a “progressive” who pretended to be a Republican. And Hoover was an “interventionist” on the right.
The fact is that bad ideas can effect both parties, but ultimately, they get washed out if they are not in accord with the basic principals of the party.
There are many forms of group action which aren’t collectivist, because they are voluntary. Collectivism always assumes the right of the state to “force us” to do what is “good for us.” Collectivism assumes that decisions will be made “on high” rather than locally or personally.
