It's not. She is oversimplifying to a extreme as if she is talking to children.

All states revolve around violence. That is what the state is; If you don't do what we tell you we will fine you and if you resist we will take your stuff and throw you in prison and destroy your life. If you resist strongly then we will kill you.

That is, very literally, the function of the state. It is something that all states have in common.

So it is hardly a defining characteristic of Fascism. It is a defining characteristic of all central state governments everywhere. It is legal for them to lie and use violence and gang up and hurt people. It is not legal for you to do that.

When politicians vote to pass new laws or raise taxes or whatever... they are voting on whether or not the state should have the authority to go out and enforce things. That is aggressively go after people and threaten and hurt them somewhat until they comply.

This is what the income tax does, this is how drug prohibition works, this is what seatbelt laws do.

So maybe it is what Fascism does with the violence inherent in the system is different?

She mentioned "other-ing" that is the state identifies a group of people they want to target and uses propaganda try to cause public to identify them as a threat as a way to unit people against a common enemy.

But, again, this is also something every state does when going to war. There is always going to be a "other" and there is always going to be a "threat" and that is why it is justified to spend the money and go out and force young people to kill and die. The USA itself has done this to Germans, Italians, Chinese, Japanese, Russians, Vietnamese, Iraqi, Iranians, Native Americans and so on and so forth at different times in our history.

So, again, it can't be a defining characterization of Fascism since it is a character that is present in most western developed Countries. Otherwise you'd have to throw France, England, US, China, and a bunch of other countries into the "Fascist" camp.

She brings up that Fascism has a charismatic leader as the center of a political movement. A man who embodies the values of said political movement.

Well then that also then includes people like Roosevelt and the new deal, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, and a bunch of other governments and political movements big and small.

Maybe FAscist dictatorships are anti-communist?

Well communists killed a lot more communists then Fascism did. In fact this is a defining characterization of all forms of Socialism that actually reach power. Doing political purges against "the wrong type of socialists" and rooting out counter revolutionaries and so on so forth are both characteristics of Fascism and Communism.

And the urge to grow and spread out... that is very much not unique to Fascism either. That should go without saying.

etc etc.

The reality is what defines Fascism as Fascism as it actually existed requires looking at Italy and Mussolini in a very specific historical context with a understanding of what these people actually stood for, their goals, and how they hoped to accomplish it.

If you want to stop Fascism from happening again you have to take the time to actually understand why people supported it and why the voted for it.

Because they did. Mussolini didn't get in because he beat up people. He got in because the people loved what he was selling.

Where as the Popular non-historical idea of fascism is meaningless. It just means "Governments that do things I don't like". It is a pejorative. It is impossible to define it beyond "Generalized evil that is usually at least somewhat racist" becuase that is what literally the term means in popular discourse.

However it has almost nothing to do with Fascism as it actually existed and what makes it distinct and different from other forms of socialism.

What really separates "left socialism" from "right socialism" is:

The left wingers focus on egalitarianism and erasing differences between individuals. They want everybody to be equalized. Same quality of life, same responsibilities, same obligations, same thoughts, same beliefs. All lead by a elite group of socialist philosophers and their functionaries until communism can be achieved.

Were as right wing socialism believes in elitism. They believe in exceptionalism of a groups of people, not individuals. That it is the state role to rise the betters up and there is no end state of communism. Only perpetual struggle and evolution as humanity moves onto higher and higher levels.

THAT is really what separates things like Fascism and Nazism from other types of socialism.

When dealing with educators it is important to realize that they need to simplify subjects when introducing them. And by simplifying them they are going to be factually wrong and know they are factually wrong. But how are you going to talk about extremely complex subjects without starting off by presenting a cartoon version of them that is easy to understand?

This is a significant challenge and if people kinda remain at the sort of elementary level understanding of these things when they start to examine history and other subjects on their own it is natural and expected that they start to realize that everything they were taught is just wrong.

Well... yes. That is how it works. Schools lie to you about history and a lot of other subjects. If they tried to give you the full truth right from the beginning it would of been overwelming.

Unfortunately giving over simplified versions of the truth to the point were it is distorted into lies is also how propaganda works.

It is very hard to tell the difference.

I think that with this video it is more of the latter then the former.