Definitely not on the side of fascists.
The game's politics do not align with any single modern American political ideology. In American politics, armed resistance against state tyranny is often viewed as a very right wing thing. Defending and liberating political prisoners, refugees, detained immigrants, and marginalized peoples is often viewed as a very left wing thing. The game imagines a space that isn't "centrist", but simply a temporary overlap of interests between fictional groups forced into compromise because of an extreme emergency.
Writing the game was an exercise in empathy. I was forced to consider how political groups that I absolutely hate in real life were well-intentioned and even heroic in certain ways. However, I did not design a setting where these diverse groups are just going to "hug it out" and defend freedom. That's naive. I designed a setting where each of these groups are making strategic political decisions to get the outcomes they desire. The Receivers (players) will have to navigate this gray space strategically, not emotionally, if the want to defeat the enemy.
SIGMATA gamifies very heady, complex, and uncomfortable ideas to give you and your gaming group a truly exciting, challenging, and ambiguous gaming experience. It's totally OK to be uncomfortable with the materials. I certainly am! However, outrage itself is not enough to defeat the forces of hate, bigotry, and tyranny. SIGMATA's refusal to play ball in pop partisanship is an attempt to gamify and reinforce strategy, strategy, strategy as the key to victory. The core setting's provocative, even outrageous political pairings, are *intended* to disorientate and create discomfort, to reflect the difficultly of holding together a popular front.
The best part is that SIGMATA is being designed in a way where you can add or remove factions as you see fit, to tell *your* stories. If you are more interested in either a historically accurate 1980's or something different altogether, you can.