magicbeans

But no, none of that matters. You've already figured out what I believe, and you'll tell me about it at length, whatever I have to say about it.

total lack of self-awareness

this might be a more accurate way to see it, but if the obscenely wealthy require the state and its trappings to maintain power, then functionally it is no different: the state is still primary, and all other institutions must be brought in line with its interests (which are to serve the obscenely wealthy).

I am not intimately familiar with the institutions in every corner of the earth, but I live in the USA, and I certainly feel that the interests of the state have subsumed all other institutions.

personally, I prefer anarchism. without a state, a state cannot coopt all of society.

mussolini specifically wanted to shift away from individualism, whereas (at least in lip service) chiangs plan was to teach democracy to the Chinese. a military dictatorship does have a lot of similarity to fascism, though. I suppose I can see where, in this one case, an agrarian societies emergence from warlordism may have been fascist.