I was having a conversation with dad earlier about communism vs. facism, but I had a hard time doing so because I really wasn’t sure what the difference was myself.
I basically know the following.
Both are Authoritarian in nature. Both prize the state above all else(yes, I understand in pure communism that the state and people are the same, but there’s never been a pure communist government so the point is moot).
Communism is extreme left and Facism is extreme right.
Interestingly enough, there seems to be little difference between the two when you get far enough to either extreme.
Under “communism” (extreme socialism), the state actively organizes production nd distribution of materials. Under the fascist regimes, there was an active capitalism–although with serious constraints placed upon the operators. There was never an effort in Nazi Germany (or Italy, or Spain) for the government to direct which products could be manufactured or grown or how they were to be distributed. Products required to supply the military were controlled more closely, of course, and some products were forbidden, as were unions, but there was not overall control of all production and distribution as there was in the “communist” societies.
The fascists differed from the communists in allowing relative freedom of religion. The state certainly censored religious publications and controlled religious gatherings, but people were not denied employment simply for expressing religious faith. (Spain was a bit of an exception in tying itself closely to the Catholic Church, but there was still less harrassment of religious believers than is typical in communist states.)
Fascism tended to carry two themes that are not inherent in communism (and are nominally opposed in communist countries, although the exceptions are striking): the cult of the leader and the cult of the tribe and land.
While Stalin and Mao each developed a personality cult (and the rulers of North Korea have carried it to ridiculous extremes), there is nothing inherent in the communist organization to support the cult of the leader. Lenin never established that cult status and when Stalin and Mao died, their nations rolled on without significant change. On the other hand, without Mussolini, Hitler, or Franco, fascism disappeared (often with violent outside help) from Italy, Germany, and Spain.
Fascism also appeals to the “people” associating them (typically using past legendary glory) with the country while communism attempts to appeal to the world-wide movement for the “revolution.” (Which, of course, does not preclude lots of nationalist sentiments within the communist nations, but the rhetoric and propaganda is not geared toward establishing the “master race” or the “new Roman empire.”)
That comparision doesn’t fly. Mussolini and Hitler didn’t just just die in their sleep. There was this little thing called WWII, which destroyed their nations at the same time. Had a total war been fought (and won) against USSR or China instead, there would have been significant changes there.
Another difference is in the propoganda/outlook of either type of regime.
A communist regime is forward looking, promising to bring a new type of greatness to the world - namely, a “worker’s paradise” where the proletariat have revolted and destroyed class distinctions, thereby making the world wonderful (at least in the Marxist view of communism).
Fascists look backward to a glorious past. Both Italy and Germany did this in the lead-up to WW II. Hitler wanted to create the Third Reich (after the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire), Mussolini wanted to recreate the glory that was Rome.
Either type of outlook can be helpful in creating or motivating a nation-state. “Hey, we can do this thing better, let’s try.” “Hey, remember how this used to be? Wasn’t that so much better than now?” The problem lies in the extreme application where your way is the only way.