I'd have to do a proper nerdout to give you a more intelligible answer. It's hard to talk about this stuff without slipping into boring political rants. The gist of the matter seems to come down to these bits:
1. A schema of the world as an unfair arrangement of oppression and coercion
2. The claim to a correct understanding of how this system operates and perpetuates istelf
3. The belief that contrary thoughts and beliefs, however sophisticated they sound, are a simple product of these more fundamental power relations, which must be unmasked
4. A plan for how to make everything better through transformative change, which includes a radical remodeling of the self to expunge wrong belief and wrong thinking
5. A totalizing belief that everything falls within this ideological universe of discourse. You can't go off and study butterflies or Taylor series and tap out of the battle.
This is the shape of the "thing" that makes people see a similarity between modern elite belief and Marxism. I'm not familiar enough with fascist ideology to answer your question, but consider that fascism was a pretty incoherent and fast-changing target, while the core beliefs of Marxism have shown remarkable staying power despite a body count that would have doomed lesser belief systems (like fascism!). Note also that, with small changes, the schema I gave above is a religious schema; part of the power of totalizing ideology is that it plugs into the mental and spiritual machinery of religious faith.
That's a real phenomenon! Obviously it is. I only dispute that you can:
(a) Trace it back to Gramsci, call it neo-Marxist, and then accuse anyone who ever bought an Robin DiAngelo book and performatively left it on their desk at work of being a neo-Marxist, and
(b) Seriously argue that the phenomenon is not only a religion, but is simultaneously the result and cause of the ordination of women in the Episcopalian church --- which is absolutely part of Rufo's subtext.
I do not want to get in the line of fire between anybody and Ibram X Kendi. I get that there's lots to criticize. It's not that I think there isn't a lot of frankly silly Marxist stuff happening in, like, the "institutional" Black Lives Matter movement. I just dispute that Chris Rufo knows what he's talking about, or cares, and that his summary of "wokeism", the one quoted above, makes sense.
Prepared to be wrong about all of this, but don't need to nerd out about it any more than you want to.
I confess that I do not know who Rufo is or his opinions on any topic, and only jumped in to this thread because you seemed honestly at a loss about why people were being accused of Marxism despite having comfortably bourgeois beliefs about who should own the means of production.
I endorse your not knowing who Rufo is. I am retreating from the bailey of my claim that there is no such thing as neo-Marxism (though I will go to the mattresses for the claim that Jordan Peterson doesn't know that it means) and retrenching in my motte of none of this having the slightest bit to do with the collapse of mainline protestantism.
1. A schema of the world as an unfair arrangement of oppression and coercion
2. The claim to a correct understanding of how this system operates and perpetuates istelf
3. The belief that contrary thoughts and beliefs, however sophisticated they sound, are a simple product of these more fundamental power relations, which must be unmasked
4. A plan for how to make everything better through transformative change, which includes a radical remodeling of the self to expunge wrong belief and wrong thinking
5. A totalizing belief that everything falls within this ideological universe of discourse. You can't go off and study butterflies or Taylor series and tap out of the battle.
This is the shape of the "thing" that makes people see a similarity between modern elite belief and Marxism. I'm not familiar enough with fascist ideology to answer your question, but consider that fascism was a pretty incoherent and fast-changing target, while the core beliefs of Marxism have shown remarkable staying power despite a body count that would have doomed lesser belief systems (like fascism!). Note also that, with small changes, the schema I gave above is a religious schema; part of the power of totalizing ideology is that it plugs into the mental and spiritual machinery of religious faith.