From a Historical perspective, my learning makes me disagree with your statement - that fascism is in essence anti-capitalist.
> At the moment that the "normal" police and military resources of the bourgeois dictatorship, together
with their parliamentary screens, no longer suffice to hold society in a state of equilibrium – the turn of
the fascist regime arrives. Through the fascist agency, capitalism sets in motion the masses of the crazed petty bourgeoisie and the bands of declassed and demoralized lumpenproletariat – all the countless human beings whom finance capital itself has brought to desperation and frenzy.
> The social democracy hoped that the docile conduct of the workers would restore the "public opinion" of the bourgeoisie against the fascists.
“Fascism: what is it and how to fight it”, Leon Trotsky
https://www.marxists.org/ebooks/trotsky/fascism-how-to-fight...
Mussolini, after political defeat as a socialist and editor of “Avanti!”, pivoted, started calling himself a “libertarian”, and courted capitalists (industrialists, oligarchs) to fund his newspaper “Il popolo d’Italia” (1914).
Ultimately, in Fascism, the only thing that truly matters is the regime itself, as demonstrated by fascist regimes that don’t fit so cleanly in our definition of Capitalism (like Argentina’s 1950s union based, military Peronist movement). From this perspective, I concede that Fascism is anti-capitalist in the sense that it is anti-everything that is not the regime.
However looking at the historical European, and contemporary American evidence, capitalistic mechanics and actors (ie. the oligarchy), seem to be the preferred route to it.