Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei translates to English as the National Socialist German Workers' Party. This is the official long-form name of a German political movement commonly known today as Nazis.
I would like to draw the reader's attention to two things: Socialist and Workers'. These two identifiers are clearly and without dispute descriptions of left-wing causes. Socialism favors State ownership of production, as opposed to private ownership under Capitalist and Mercantilist systems, as a means of protecting the common man (workers) from exploitation that enriches the elite few.
I think few if anyone would deny that the Nazis were Fascists, as well. Fascists are described as being wildly nationalist to the point of institutionalizing racism and bigotry in order to preserve a "pure" culture and/or bloodline, etc.
Let's forget for a moment that the origin of the word "fascist" is the Latin word "fasces," meaning a bundle of sticks (it is also the root of "faggot" in English, which means the same thing). Let's also forget that the symbol of the "fasces" - a bundle of sticks with an protruding ax head - is meant to imply "power from diversity." From where have we heard this in the past few decades?
Thus, at least in the 20th century, Nazism and Fascism are co-equal philosophies and are inseparable. This clearly identifies the two movements with left-wing politics.
Cut to today's nonsensical headline: Italian Leftists rally to warn us that fascism could return (https://www.yahoo.com/news/italys-left-rallies-warn-danger-fascism-comeback-134012300.html). In other words, they intend to reassert their deadly and discredited political movement?
For the better part of a century, the political Left in the West has tried to hang Fascism on the political Right. They have so obfuscated the language that meanings and origins are no longer clear, and definitions have been changed to hide guilt.
Fascism takes its name from the concept of "strength in diversity," which is undoubtedly a left-wing mantra. The Nazi party was, by definition, a Socialist movement, which is also a left-wing philosophy. They then blame the Right for these ideologies to skirt blame for their failings, and thus lure unwitting new generations into these errors by constantly redefining and hiding real meanings and origins.
In the US alone, it was the Democratic Party that protected slavery and gave that country the horrific Dred Scott laws https://www.britannica.com/event/Dred-Scott-decision) and set up the oppressive conditions which led to the Southern States seceding from the Union and the bloody Civil War under Democrat James Buchanan (https://www.google.co.id/search?q=who+was+president+in+1859&oq=who+was+president+in+1859&aqs=chrome..69i57.8955j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)
It was also the Democratic Party that led the US into both World Wars, established the Central Banking system and created an individual income tax under Woodrow Wilson, and today wants to force everyone to accept their ideology at gun-point in defiance of the word "liberal", which comes from the Latin "liber" meaning "free".
In other words, the Left has, for more than a century, been the source of the most horrendous, bloody and incapacitating political agendas, while at the same time mucking with linguistic meaning and definition in order to hide their guilt.
This is, by its very definition, Orwellian. Changing the language in order to make it impossible to think clearly was the foundation of Newspeak in "Nineteen Eighty-Four," and the very root of IngSoc (English Socialism) in that same novel. In fact, the Left are the very embodiment of Orwell's warnings.
So, when the Italian Left rally to warn of the re-emergence of Fascism, they are telling us that they intend to once again spread their error on the world.
The word "liberal" has become so polluted that it was necessary to invent the word "libertarian" in order to distinguish forced conformity from real freedom.
It is time to reclaim real definitions and prevent the Left from re-assertting its errors. This is not meant to absolve the political Right, as it has plenty of horrors to its name, as well. However, when it comes to outright lies and obfuscations, the Left are masters.
The Left has enslaved entire groups of people (Dred Scott), yet claimed innocence. They have destroyed nations, yet wash their hands of sin. They have impoverished entire populations (Central Banking and income tax), yet claim to champion the down-trodden. They force "diversity" down our throats, yet deny that it is the very definition of Fascism.
At least the Right is unabashed in its espousal of greed, wealth and power.
We, as rational thinking human beings, must hold the Left responsible for their destruction and obfuscation. We must return to real definitions and take back the language and the rhetoric from those who seek to muddle our brains. The Leftist agenda is truly horrific and it can never be corrected until the language is cleared up. Only then will it make sense that one can be a social liberal and a political conservative, wanting maximum freedom for the populace and putting government in shackles.
For far too long, it has been the other way.
Fascism has more to do with unity than diversity. Why would a regime bent on keeping bloodlines pure then muddle it with what they consider non-pure. Socialism has always been more a right wing ideal. It is only the Marxists, the Leninists, and Stalinists that have used it to promote class unity. The Democrats wanted to use blacks as slaves, while the Republicans wanted to rid themselves of blacks by resettling them in Africa. The funny thing about Libertarianism is the fundamentally it will not work. No left wing ideology works because they are all founded on the basis of Utopianism and Egalitarianism. These things do not work within the real world because they are not designed to. While something like having a free market would be considered right wing on the basis that follows the natural ordering of things. While egalitarianism is left wing because it imposes the ideal that everyone is fundamentally equal. When that is simply not true.
I would refine it a bit. Capitalism is the theory that humanity is best served by private ownership of the means of production and distribution. This of course leads to monopolies and market rigging, so some amount of regulation is required, although (as is being seen with Google, Amazon, et al.) the market eventually has enough and will find ways to circumvent the monompoly.
Socialism states that the State should own the means of production and distribution, and must regulate everything down to the last iota. This naturally leads to widespread systemic corruption - as seen in the US and USSR - with collapse as the result.
Fascism says that corporations are the ultimate power and should own both production and the powers of the State. This is where diversity comes into the equation, as corporations are artificial persons (single entity) created out of many parts. This concept was created by the Roman Catholic Church in the Middle Ages as a concept for the Body of the Church - a prime reason the Church supported the Nazis and Ustase.
The racial purity aspect of Nazism grew out of both the occult elements of the Party, as well as the need to justify ridding the nation of Jews and other immigrants. Some 'entity' is attempting to resurrect these forces now in the EU and US with uncontrolled immigration. It is not a fundamental aspect of Fascism, but was over-laid on it due to socio-economic conditions of the time.
Marxism and Communism has never been tried on a mass scale, but would likely fail miserably, as they require small, tight-knit communities bound by a single focus, such as religion or other ideal. This could never exist in groups larger than a few hundred to a thousand. Marxism was an attempt to create an economic system based on Communism using classism and economic goals as the cohesive element.