socialism/fascism as simple as constant negative social pressures?

There's a lot of talk about what is socialism and what it isn't, and fascism is often considered separately. Socialism is usually thought of in economic terms, while fascism is understood more in terms of social-violence. Because the Nazi regime of WWII is considered as right-wing, i.e. as a movement against Bolshevism and the USSR (union of Soviet SOCIALIST republics), it may be confusing to some why the Nazi regime was called a national socialist workers party.

I propose that it helps to understand both concepts of socialism and fascism in terms of subjecting individuals to constant social pressures and threats if they fail to conform or otherwise submit to social authority.

To understand how social pressuring of individuals to drive them to collective cooperation becomes economic, we have only to think about the proverbial schoolyard bully who pressures his victim to give up his milk money.

In a market economy, socialism/fascism entails applying social pressures to individuals who fail to conform to economic norms, from the poorest homeless person to the richest investor. This explains why socialism/fascism involves everything from negativity toward the homeless to ridicule against certain brands of clothing, having old things, and even the systematic institutional harassment of a president who doesn't 'play the game' of facilitating trade, commerce, etc. according to a certain culture of collective norms/expectations.

What does it take to replace this culture with one of independent individuals working together across lines of difference that are always going to occur in a multiparty democracy where individuals have the right to think independently?

Further, what does it take to prevent individual freedom from being taken as a weakness that allows individuals to socially pressure each other into conformism, i.e. because people value the rewards of socialism over the responsibility of individual independence/liberty?

In short, at what point does the value of liberty become more important than the economic benefits of authoritarian submission?