Wealth inequality is a consequence of the existence of markets, and long predates "fascism." I guess you are using that term in some kind of hyperbolic sense, but I don't think these type of word games are very constructive.
As it happens, inequality has been moderately successfully addressed since the advent of progressive taxation and welfare states, and some of the democracies we are talking about are among the most egalitarian societies in human history, certainly when it comes to post-neolithic times.
Even aside from oligarchs behind the scenes, it is no surprise that voters' interests and desires do not align very well with policy in the US, where a two-party system with legalized bribery is in place, and voting rights are unequally weighed and conditional. These factors are either not at all or to a much lesser extent relevant in top-tier democracies.