The World War II-era “Simple Sabotage Field Manual” is full of steps that office workers can take to resist leadership.
The Encyclopaedia Britannica definition?
“Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from one another, they had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites, and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”), in which individual interests would be subordinated to the good of the nation.”
Or maybe the Webster’s Dictionary definition?
"a populist political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual, that is associated with a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, and that is characterized by severe economic and social regimentation and by forcible suppression of opposition”
Because by those definitions “fascism” is not being used incorrectly.
If you have an alternate definition which supports your claim, you’ll need to provide it yourself.
You said people were using the word wrong. I asked you what the word means. You said it means the definition, so I provided the definition. You still have not provided a meaning that demonstrates that the word is being used incorrectly.
We’re not calling people fascists because we don’t like them, we don’t like them because they fit the definition of a fascist. You have cause and effect reversed.
Again, if you would like to provide a definition for “fascism” that supports your claim, feel free to do so. Until then, the rest of us will continue to refer to the dictionary definition, and call the people who meet that definition “fascists”.