Conveniently neglects the fact that it is inherently a LEFT wing perspective too

The oldest definition of fascism as how I was taught was basically the merging of corporations and government into a totalitarian state. That's basically right out of Mussolini's own words or close to.

It really doesn't matter much. Fascism never really took form to a point it could be defined. Mussolini was just trying to emulate National Socialism while balancing the Catholic Church's influence, having an Italian flair and giving his government some sort of philosophical pioneering justification.

Mussolini and the Italians were nothing but a bit joke in both WWI and WWII. Arguably, Germany would have been better off without the Italians as allies. "Fascism" is a joke political ideology. The real ideology to come up with a definition for is National Socialism. Hitler arguably wanted less control over industry than Mussolini. National Socialism ironically was less totalitarianism than modern Western democracies and had more economic freedom as well.

the modern definition is "anything gay commies don't like"

Old Definition "A political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and opposition is not permitted"

This is not Fascism as "dictatorship" is a bit vague in Fascist systems, and this literally doesn't explain any ideological concept of Fascism, which is rabidly Socialist, and is almost exclusively Italian.

This definition is almost better labeled as "Autocracy".

New Definition "a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition"

This is basically a consequentialist definition of Fascism. "What does Fascism do?" It doesn't really tell you what Fascism is. Again, Fascism is not necessarily autocratic. Power is typically centralized, but it can often be centralized within the bureaucratic state. The bureaucracy (of either the party or the state) often give rise to a dictator from within it's bowels. While leading proponents of Fascism seemed to constantly harp on one strong-man or another, the Fascist leader of the state never had the kind of autocratic power that Ivan The Terrible, Joseph Stalin, or Xerxes had. In practice, the state apparatus had massive power. I'd say it seemed more like there was a kind of power sharing between the party and it's figure-head.

Also, Fascism explicitly doesn't focus heavily on Race. That's National Socialism. Fascism is much more in line with Civic Nationalism. It believes it has the power to create a Nation from various ethnic groups. Though, it may also espouse Ethno-Nationalism... but only in service to the Fascist State. The Fascist State is effectively a God. National Socialism focuses much more heavily on race, and German National Socialism, uniquely focuses on Aryanism (A crazy pseudo-science around the Aryan tribe, that regards them as a near magical, and biologically imposing, Hyperborean race that founded all known civilizations. Literally: we wuz frost giants and sheeeet).

I would define Fascism simply as: State Syndicalism.

Fascism has always been the most practical method of applying Socialism precisely because it is less autocratic than other forms of Socialism, while still maintaining a command economy. Fascism allows price discovery and the existence of businesses (rather than fully socializing all economic activity into the state), but mandates all ownership by The Party. Fascism, oligopolizes businesses into specific mega-corporations, socializes all unions into a single Trade Union, and then homogenizes the government into a single political institution with large bureaucratic powers. All of these structures are then populated from within the political party, as the political party acts as the real form of totalitarian enforcement mechanism. It defines all social conduct and controls all of the soft-power in society.

This was actually the "third way" in economic terms. Instead of the state fighting businesses, or the workers fighting the businesses, or the workers fighting the state; all 3 parties would be homogenized, and then synchronized" with The Party, which would then construct a literal "Ethical State" which would be the inter-temporal arbiter of the whole population forever.

Props to Tik History for having the insanity to try and drive to the core of what Fascism is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdY_IMZH2Ko

In other news, water is wet.

A fascist is any white person that is not interested in sucking black cock.

Old Definition "A political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and opposition is not permitted"

So, Ukraine?

New Definition "a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition"

So, the modern US?

you've only just noticed?

they call it fascism instead of the properly translated trade unionism to hide as well

"...that exalts nation and often race above the individual"

You know they added that in smirking to themselves that they'll make MAGA a fascist movement.

Guess what dingbats, if you put race above the individual with your dumbass progressive stack, you're doing a fascism THAT YOU INVENTED.

These fucking people...

The Fascist definition is one who follows the philosophy represented by and of the Fasces. Same as literally any -ist. Islam-ist. Sex-ist. Darwin-ist.

The Fasces is the concept that twigs apart are weak and easily broken, but though they are all individually the same, together, they are strong. It is very much a communist iconography.

Commune-ist.

Your "old definition" is already a definition redefined 4 or 5 times for political gains.