Your idea of "the greater good" and mine, are probably very different, which is a big part of the conflict with other schools of thought.
Discussion
Mine involves two precepts: cooperation is better than violence. And the truth can be known. The fascist doesn’t really care which one of these he needs to disabuse you of. It only takes one. He’s happy to talk the language of Capitalism (Putin) or Communism (Xi) to you. Whatever it takes to get you to take a knee, and admit there’s no point in fighting it.
None of that speaks against Austrian Economics, which is simply seeing the world as it is.
I agree broadly that cooperation is better than violence, however, as it's an economic decision to engage in violence or not, the truth of the statement lies with the individual. This lies at the heart of Austrian Economics; you can't know everything and you can't decide the desires of other people, people can only act in what they consider to be their best interests with the limits of the information available to them.
I'm not sure where you're at with the second statement that "a truth can be known", I'm not sure how that statement would speak against Austrian Economics.
None of your arguments could be seen to suggest that followers of Austrian Economics are more likely to be fascist.
If anything, every person I know who follows the Austrian School, largely wants to be left alone by authoritarians, whatever the colour of their tie.
Oh, I would argue that praxeology is complete epistemic nonsense. And thus, anything that rests upon its axioms, is not truth-reifying by definition.