Fascism is what happens when the mask of liberalism drops and the ruling capitalist class has to resort to naked repression to keep their power.

This I can agree with, and the whole mask exists because the ruling class doesn't have all the power and the "has to resort" is also an other part of the fact that it (ruling class) is taking more power than before. So the ruling class do not need all the power all the time, hence it likes to bring a mask of "democracy" by giving some to the proletariat. Like the justice system is not run by the bourgeois directly, much like proletariat aristocracy (aka bosses, managers, etc) and if/when the system is not acting as they should it takes back this power.

You can see such power dynamic before, during feudalism, where not everything was centralized but it "eventually" went there (at different places at different time).

And other bad consequences of this very specific 10-points analysis is that many are highly subjective and are used from right-wing to attack socialism so...

All of this is still very anti-marxist in essence to me, not that is is made from bad faith, but it is not made from the analysis for the systems in motion, the power dynamics nor grounded in science. If sociologist would step up and make scientific evidence of those points being specific to such concept to define the limit between fascism and anything else (and I don't mean "1 American study" science but international consensus) I would revise my line, not that this is 100% disconnected from reality, more that it doesn't describes current phenomena.

Also to push for such an analysis on fascism it would be nice to have other "content" to illustrate how this definition applies correctly, both to describes what is happening now but also how robust it is as it is not describing other political movements.