It’s interesting that fascism and communism are two sides of the same coin. One lets you have your non-collective property but tells you what to make and the other owns all the property, collectively, and tells you what to make. The supposedly freedom- loving anti fascists will still be serfs controlled by their betters or tyrants, just the name of the -ism is different.
China has become the best example of the hybrid socialist government. We’re they want innovation and new directions they allow private ownership and investment but place a political officer on the board to oversee the direction of the company. In critical infrastructure they control the manufacture and distribution and land. NORINCO is a prime example of this mentality and the uyghur situation just shows the lengths they will go to protect their investment.
Both Communism and Fascism - and all of their sister and allied ideologies - share a very basic commonality that, ultimately, makes their effects indistinguishable: they are collectivist in nature. That means, fundamentally, that individual rights are either non-existent by design or practice, or they are available but completely (and easily) subservient to the collective (which can be the nation, the empire, the proletariat or workers, the race, or whatever false god that society worships). Most political ideologies throughout History, in every imaginable culture, have been collectivist. When and where those systems and their leaders are enemies (as with the Nazi-Communist conflict during WW2), it is because they are competitors - and with the stakes being rule over a large area, a continent or possibly the world, that competition rapidly devolves into a vicious military conflict. They will present themselves to be the opposite of their enemy to motivate their population and to gain allies in that struggle but, again, they are fundamentally the same - and they are lying.
Only the rare ideology (or political system), like democracy in general, is individualist in nature. Ours, with extremely strong safeguards for individual liberties, has resulted in the richest, most powerful and most technologically-advanced nation that the world has ever seen.
It should also be noted that the very reason for collectivist systems is to effectively enslave an entire population, and to concentrate all meaningful power in the hands of one man, or a small group of leaders. What titles these leaders have had, now have or will ever have is as irrelevant as their system’s symbols, the cut and color of their uniforms, their flag, their rituals, or the name of their system - because they are all based upon the same core idea.
Some background: I had family murdered and otherwise severely victimized by both Russian Communists and German Nazis (though the latter were far more efficient, thankfully for a much shorter period). As a result, I have studied both systems intensively for roughly 45 years. Early on, I found both systems to be remarkably similar at base, and that led me to study other systems to see if they were really any different...and they weren’t, except for the irrelevant factors mentioned above.
Don’t let anyone convince you that things are different than this - they simply aren’t. Socialism is effectively the same as Communism, except that Socialists generally don’t have the discipline or fortitude to wantonly murder individuals by the millions...yet. The cancel culture foisted on our once-tolerant political system in the last few years, and the attempt to coerce 100% vaccination on pain of job loss, travel restrictions. etc. are but the first step. Next come “re-education “ camps and gulags and, finally, death camps or the mass murder of actual or perceived enemies. Don’t take my word for it; Bill Ayres said in the late 1960s that as many as 25 million people who could not be re-educated would need to be a executed to bring about the “paradise” that he and his comrades wanted to bring about (and that was about 1/8 of the population then; scaled up to today’s population, that would be 40-45 million).