(.. without the HTML stuff-up at the end -)

Publius posted some good working definitions of fascism and socialism. A lot of discussion possible here .. but for now just some comments -

The Left has been using the word "fascism" a lot more loosely in my experience. Usually it is defined as "anyone who disagrees with us."

I've also noticed this, for years. Usually applied to vocal and active right-wing conservatives, eg. Reagan, Thatcher. The 'practitioners' are usually inactive, non-vocal armchair leftists, who really have nothing better to do but gripe. The harder left - for which I maintain a certain respect - reject that sort of labelling. Fascism to them is strictly defined, something to do with a totalitarian police state pursuing the aggressive destruction of the union movement, for the benefit of an industrial oligarchy. So that's Hitler, Mussolini and co. - Reagan (even with PATCO) and Thatcher (even with the coalminers strike) don't come near the fascist end of the spectrum. Maybe the hard left would argue that while they aren't fascists, their actions promote the possibility of fascism.

You can label it whatever you like. The point is that state control over the individual is a bad thing, and frankly, I don't give a rat's ass what label you put on it.

It is irrelevant what the textbook definition of a philosophy is. Results are what count.

I'm in complete agreement with that. But coming from a previous leftist background (umm .. as distinct from you ..) I was always interested in how this could be possible in a genuine 'people's democracy' - socialization, not nationalization, of heavy industry, so an absolute minimum of beaurocracy with its little and giant tinpot jerkoff dictators. Small and medium-scale capitalism could be encouraged, but major resources & policy could socially owned & formulated. No power brokers behind closed doors ..

Remember the beginnings of Solidarnosc in Poland in the early 80s? As far as I know, all high-level negotiations and discussions were broadcast live through a PA system, to the rank and file unionists outside. - now that was a real workers democracy ..

Sounds like a pipedream doesn't it .. I'm giving it till the 24th century or whenever the moneyless society of Star Trek is supposed to eventuate ..