Well, sort of. I'd say what you're describing is Marxist-Leninism. However, Marxist-Leninism is so crazy, so violent, kills so many people, and so divorced from reality that even Lenin had to come to some terms that it didn't work. Lenin always complained about the Socialist Intelligentsia who never seemed to have a real grasp of understanding power or how to wield it, and even worse, always sought to fulfill the Marxist prophecy rather than act with aggression to conquer anyone that stood in their way.

Fascism actually recognizes the limits of the Marxist Dialectical framework, and seeks to create the revolutionary outcomes of Rousseau and Socialism, while being encumbered by some amount of reality. You can't govern the economy from a single desk, so you intentionally create a ruling oligopoly between state, labor, and business; then you require each of them to be members of the party. You accept that dissent may exist, but you always keep it too terrorized to object. You accept that the "Socialist New Man" will not exist until you raise the children yourself, and indoctrinate them into war. Then, you recognize that your goal is conquest, not "something something and then the workers uprise, question mark, profit."

Fabian Socialism is the most explicitly inauthentic form of Socialism, but because it always seeks subversion, persuasion, and slow marching, it (again) limits itself to reality long enough to make Socialism seem practical. But it's inauthenticity (which is purely tactical) drives the revolutionaries up a wall.