"Also, that "we are socialists" quote? It was not even said by Hitler:"

wait hang on... are we now at the stage where we are denying that his party was the national socialist workers party?

have we really reached that depth of denial? lol

"Also, Nazi Germany privatized key industries too:"

which they controlled so what?

"Also, the unemployment number has some extreme caveats: women, Jews and men aged between 18 and 25 were not included in the statistics:"

the men 18 -25 were conscripted into the military

jews were unemployed for obvious reasons

and finally with regards to women yes initially women were encouraged to have families over taking jobs but this changed eventually

"The Nazis drive for women to be domesticated soon faded and shifted. As World War II started and began to escalate  more and more men left their homes and jobs. Facing job shortages the Nazis began to encourage women to fill the gap left by men. Young, especially single women, were eager to fill factory jobs even when faced with such blatant contradictions in policy. The Nazis were simultaneously promoting the idea of mother hood, and the ideal German woman whilst encouraging the filling of jobs to support the war effort. Because of this the Nazis were unable to bring an adequate number of female workers back into the labor force. Only about 30% of women returned to employment during the war."

the fact remains, however, that overall the policies of the nazis were socialist in nature and implementation

they are the same policies - state funded educatation, socialised health care, government control of businesses etc etc etc that are being pushed by the socialists of today

No, I didn't deny that, I was questioning your reliability when you list a quote attributed to Hitler that was not even said by Hitler. And I don't understand your so what, because that's a key part of socialism? You know, the elimination of private industry? And no, those are not policies that are being pushed by socialists, if they are it's only as a temporary measure, you're equating social democrats with socialists.

Just because it was named something, doesn't mean that's what it was.  

Like he said.  Is North Korea a democracy or a Republic?   They are called the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.  

Is Greenland, the land of green?  

Was the German Democratic Republic, not a communist state?

" You know, the elimination of private industry?"

how can industry be private when its under government control?

" And no, those are not policies that are being pushed by socialists"

wut?

socialists aren't pushing for socialised health care? state funded education? government control of services like water? gun control? employment for all (with caveats of course)

lets clarify something here first though socialism of the imaginary type where everyone is equal and no owns anything and there's no crime etc etc etc is just that - imaginary... if i proceed to ask you how you would put such a system in place your inevitable answer would have to be through government policies which obviously kind of destroys the whole everyone is equal part... so lets put that to the side

i'm talking about the practical real world policies that socialists of our era are pushing and i don't think anyone can seriously deny that its policies that fall in line with many of the policies hitler put into place

They privatized some industries, and retained others in government control.  So no, it's not really as simple as they took over all the industries.    

Even if you want to conflate Nazism with socialism, you have to accept that there are different varieties of socialism.  Otherwise you're being realistic.  

There's a difference between state-owned enterprises and privately-owned enterprises that are owned by people within the state. But if you don't want to include that, we can look at this:

https://www.adl.org/news/op-ed/german-businesses-and-nazis

Socialism cannot co-exist with private property.

As I said, socialists may be pushing for health care, education, etc. but that is not the end, it's a stepping stone. Gun control is generally not favoured by revolutionary socialists because it's pretty hard to have a revolution without guns.

And socialism isn't "nobody owns anything", personal property and private property are not considered to be the same things.

https://www.liberationnews.org/10-09-23-eight-myths-about-socialismand-html/

Also, what do you mean exactly by government? We might as well call every country socialist because every country has government, which renders that term meaningless. Of course I can understand saying that the policies Hitler implemented and the current policies in European countries and North America have similarities, but another thing that's similar between the two is that they're not socialist.

"Socialism cannot co-exist with private property."

well jesus christ you mean i can't even own a home and bed to sleep on? and you think this is a good idea?

" Gun control is generally not favoured by revolutionary socialists because it's pretty hard to have a revolution without guns."

but lets be honest here, revolutionary socialists are pushing imaginary concepts

how will you enact and enforce your policies without a government or hierarchy?

do you intend to go to every home in your country and tell the owners at gun point that they must give up their homes?

"And socialism isn't "nobody owns anything", personal property and private property"

more semantic games, suppose i choose to rent a room in my house for profit? will i then be expelled from my home?

suppose i grow some fruit on the land my home is on and choose to sell that for profit? will my home then be repossessed?

who decides on these policies and enforces them? you?

"Also, what do you mean exactly by government? We might as well call every country socialist because every country has government"

yes every government to some extent puts social policies in place but what matters is the extent to which government controls people

in your socialist dream world government (since government is the only way to put your policies in place and enforce them whether you accept that or not) would have to have an unbelievable amount of control over people

Your first sentence just shows that you write things without even reading my whole post first, because that's pretty embarrassing of you to make a statement of you not being able to have your own bed when I specifically referred later in my post that that's not the case. That makes your second point irrelevant too because once again you refer to homes. As for your questions, renting out yourself would make it considered private it property yes, but not the fruits if you do all of the work on your own and then sell it wouldn't count since you're only profiting off of your own labour. And yes, I agree that some form of government is needed to enforce it, but the state isn't the only form of government. In any case, I am a bit baffled by your insistence on the government aspect, since you're a capitalist I assume yet are trying to say that government is bad, yet how would capitalism exist without it? There'd be nobody to create or enforce property laws. Also, it's irrelevant too whether or not you think socialism is possible, fine you make say that it's impossible, but that doesn't just meant that anything can be called socialist.

"As for your questions, renting out yourself would make it considered private it property yes"

ok therefore people would not be able to use their possessions for profit

what about if a woman decides to sell her body(which arguably would be far more in demand than a man's body) for profit? would you regulate that as well?

" but not the fruits if you do all of the work on your own and then sell it wouldn't count since you're only profiting off of your own labour."

so how would you preserve equality? do you understand that people work at different rates of speed?

" I agree that some form of government is needed to enforce it, but the state isn't the only form of government."

ok how would your government be organised? and how would it operate without a hierarchy exsiting between it and the people?

"yet how would capitalism exist without it? There'd be nobody to create or enforce property laws. "

property laws are needed for people to protect their property?

do you understand why people possess guns?

"Also, it's irrelevant too whether or not you think socialism is possible"

to clarify the socialism you have described is full of gaping massive holes but i do acknowledge that there are others who are trying to put practical policies in place such as socialised healthcare

"but that doesn't just meant that anything can be called socialist."

which is not what i said... taking resources from the richer people of society and distributing those resources across the society is the goal behind policies like socialised healthcare and state funded education

that's socialism and it to some extent is the motivating influence behind the ideas you have put forward also

and wow i'm a capitalist now?

Gun control:  Nazi's actually loosened gun control for germans.  

State funded education is pretty much a bipartisan issue.  

Employment for all is also a bipartisan issue.  They achieved lower unemployment rates by privatizing state industries, and implementing tariffs on imports.

Socialized health care, Germany actually had their healthcare system decades before.  

1.)  A lot of people like to put Hitler as a moderate.  Because a lot of his policies were left wing, and a lot were right wing.  

2.)  No, not all of them are.  And one of them was completely the opposite of what happened in Germany.  The Nazi's advocated for less gun control and training for Germans.  They increased gun control on Jews only, but for everyone else, they got rid of many restrictions.