Let me simplify. You used the example of Democrats believing in haves and have nots. Observing that some people are more wealthy than others is reality, not belief in a hierarchy. Believing that rich people are rich because they are innately better and poor people are poor because they are innately worse is a belief in a natural social hierarchy.
Close but not quite. Every human society has social stratification, even if it's only things like the jocks and nerds in high school. That makes it fascistic is the belief that those strata are innate and not social constructs. That is, the poor are inferior while the rich are superior, or whites are superior while blacks are inferior.
i don't think you know anything about theories of hierarchy or even the natural world. what you've written here is incoherent.
Let me simplify. You used the example of Democrats believing in haves and have nots. Observing that some people are more wealthy than others is reality, not belief in a hierarchy. Believing that rich people are rich because they are innately better and poor people are poor because they are innately worse is a belief in a natural social hierarchy.
they don't simply observe the disparity, they actively enforce it.
That's not the same thing as believe by it is an inmate quality.
regardless of belief, enforcing the unjust hierarchy is what is wrong
That is certainly an argument you can make, but it does not qualify for the definition of fascism.
it does because social stratification is an aspect of fascism
Close but not quite. Every human society has social stratification, even if it's only things like the jocks and nerds in high school. That makes it fascistic is the belief that those strata are innate and not social constructs. That is, the poor are inferior while the rich are superior, or whites are superior while blacks are inferior.
you're making this up. all that is necessary is enforcement of the stratification to meet this bar.