Hello, I wonder what’s your POV on this? For me, someone might believe this due to weird definition (per example, some economics think that state controlling the company=socialism for some reason), or there’s ideological bias involved.
I think the main reason was that they sold themselves as Socialists. They called themselves in National Socialists In propaganda films, started Volkswagen = people’s car/voiture de Peuple. And Volksradios. Also they kind of where anti-Monarchy but as Wilhelm 2 was a rabid antisemite there were some discussions on reinstating the Kaiserreich at a later point. Source Jonn Rohl.
The problem with schoolbooks is that these plot politics on a one-dimensional line from very left to very right with The NSDAP being far right or far left Socialists.
This approach is nonsense, as parties have a complex set of opinions which also depend on the times they were in. E.g. the Socialist no longer want every labourer to have a car. Let alone an evil Herbie
I don’t really see how the nsdap isn’t a far right party considering that they banned worker union,it’s relation with many private business,the racism, the antisemitism, the whole hatred for marxism socialism and that the state controlling the economy isn’t really something only socialist country do. It is improtant to note that a lot of the time, the nsdap socialism part was more or less rhetorical/for propaganda purpose (I don’t think the purge against the somewhat more left wing element are a good argument, since they can still say “socialist infighting!!”)
Totally agree, magnifique point
The former Kaiser could never have tolerated being merely a figurehead for that Austrian corporal, and Hitler – having ridden himself of the necessity to pretend subservience to Hindenburg with the latter’s death – in no way, shape, or form would ever even in a token form allow a “superior” in the Nazi state. It was a total non-starter, and my suspicion is that it was talked about as a way to keep the monarchist remnant in line.
The NSDAP started as a clearly right-wing party, but it was one of dozens if not hundreds of similar groups of disaffected former soldiers, impoverished shopkeepers and petty bureaucrats. Hitler’s ability to convert the group (with covert funding and support from the army) into a viable political party was what separated the Nazis from all the others. He also persuaded/strong-armed the existing party leadership to adopt some of the rhetoric of the many left-wing groups without any real intent to pursue any kind of socialist program, except where socialist beliefs and his own desires happened to co-incide. The abolition of trade unions (to be “replaced” by a single, state-controlled “union”) was part and parcel of the abolition of all other political parties … it deprived potential opponents of funding and a platform to rally any kind of anti-Nazi support. (In today’s terms, it would be like the government “nationalizing” all social media platforms into a single, monolithic InstaTicFaceTwitRedd to ensure that any discussion of political matters could be monitored or suppressed at the state’s whim.) What they called it wouldn’t matter, but it would be “within the state” to borrow a term from Mussolini.