I would respectfully disagree with your comment. Each party going to the extreme is “statism”. I collection of socialism, fascism, communism, and hybrids of more and more gov’t control.
The opposite of statism would be anarchy, i.e. no govt. A republic is much closer to anarchy that any of the aformentioned statist types of gov’t.
The founding fathers knew what they were doing when they created a republic and allowed the states to create a federal branch subject to many checks and balances.
Sadly, the “extremists” have usurped that goal to the point that we now find ourselves at a crossroads. We are forced into making our choices (republic or statist) and face the consequences of the necessary actions needed to choose a direction i.e. revolution or submission to statism.
I personally have chosen being a republic with a gov’t based on the constitution as written and interpreted by out founding fathers. I gave up my long standing membership in the Rep. party after Bush 43 was elected and proceeded to continue to create a more statist path for the USA.
I am a conservative, darn proud of it, and will do what is necessary to protect my country from becoming a statist gov’t.
Technically I beleive fascism is where there is a centralized control of the means of production, but without the government actually owning the means of production, such as with socialism.
With the recent power grabs from both parties, and even more so of late with Obama and friends, I don't think I see much actual ownership of the means of production, but I do see increasing centralized control.
So I would guess government growers from both fascist and neither are socialist.