It's very rare for some blanket rule like "violence never works" or "non-violence never works" to be accurate about this kind of thing.
The easiest way to resist fascism is for the existing conservative party that it's trying to hijack to vigorously reject it. It works well enough that you don't really hear about examples when it happened, because they didn't turn into fascism. Anyway, we already stumbled at that hurdle a long time ago, so it's irrelevant.
The second-easiest way is nonviolent resistance, or what Robert Helvey called "political defiance.". That stands a pretty good chance of undoing tyranny while also preserving the structures that will enable a decent society in the aftermath. It's historically by far the most reliable path (which sure as shit doesn't mean it is reliable.)
Violent revolution is the hardest way. There's obviously a lot of bloodshed by innocents and the guilty alike, and it also makes it more difficult to galvanize a resistance from "undecided" participants because they may see the resistance as terroristic or dangerous. You have to already have a critical mass of support in order to embark on this path, because you will gain relatively few supporters along the way, and a large number of previously unaligned people may galvanize against you in a big way. And, worst or all, it carries the added risk that the society that comes after the revolution may be even worse than the fascism you just overthrew. Violence that destroys important structures of civil society tends to beget more violence that destroys important structures of civil society.
Sometimes, you need violent revolution, it's definitely not "never" the answer. But it is a very hard and dangerous road.