" Hitler actively sought to gain the support of business leaders by arguing that private enterprise is incompatible with democracy."

I think you misunderstand this sentence. Hitler's conclusion was not that private enterprises was a problem for democracy, but that democracy was a problem for private enterprises, hence he overthrew the democracy, not the private enterprises.

On the contrary he privatised a lot of the public sector, this was in contrast to the politics of the Weimar Republic and the vast majority of other western nations at the time.

http://www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf

This is the opposite of socialism. Sure he also made some regulations, all capitalist states have that, even the US. But you are not gonna get more control through regulations compared to actually owning the businesses. 

You are right about the SA though, that was essentially the socialist branch of the Nazi party, that's why Hitler got the SA leadership exterminated.

 I don't believe you can have a society without a state. I'm not a socialist (in this form) myself because I believe that ideal situation wouldn't work.

The companies in Nazi Germany were not state-run companies. These companies colluded with the state, but saying they're run by the state is counterfactual.

And one could say that Nazi's were Keynesian in their economic views, which is a total stretch, just as lumping Nazism and Socialism is a total stretch.

If Hitler was a socialist someone should really tell those racist rednecks that worship him.

Nazism was not a left-wing or socialist ideology, it was a far right-wing fascist ideology. The only things they have in common is that they have the word "social" and that they are used in the title of a political movement. The problem comes from the direct translation of a political party name from 1930s and 40s Germany, and equating it to an economic movement and the 21st century understanding of it; but these are two completely different things.

In short:
Socialism - refers to leftist movements which strive to give greater ownership of resources to everyone as opposed to specific groups or individuals.
National Socialism - is the branding of the fascist German party of Adolf Hitler, and associated the far-right political ideology of the supremacy of the Aryan Master Race.


In many ways, the two are complete polar opposites to one another; and this is unsurprising considering one is leftist and the other is far right. It would be wrong to say the Nazis were pro-capitalism - as capitalism advocates for competition and Nazism did not - but it would be flat out the opposite of true to say the Nazis were pro-socialist, as the party built itself on opposing Marxist socialism and social democracy; and in the later periods supporting either of these ideologies would earn slavery or a death sentence. There are core areas where socialism and Nazism are completely at odds, some examples include:

Socialism - particularly according to Marx and Engels - advocates a class-free society
Nazism - advocates the supremacy of the German race

Socialism - is counter-traditionalist
Nazism - is pro-German traditionalist

Socialism - is anti-nationalist
Nazism - is nationalist extremism, advocating for the extermination of "inferior" races.

Socialism - is primarily grounded in class and economics.
Nazism - is primarily grounded in race and German supremacy.


On the economic side, to say that the Nazis practiced socialist economics is not only misleading the point, but also the complete opposite of the truth. Socialist economics give to each according to their need, which often translates to support of minority groups with a lack of opportunity - in Nazism benefits go to those who most closely represent the Aryan ideal - those who are of minority groups were enslaved and/or exterminated. Hitler opposed capitalism because he saw it as a "Jew" economy - and also because he believed that if the Aryan Master Race controlled the economics that competition would only serve to undermine the economy. Unlike socialism, the Nazis did not strive for public ownership, but rather private ownership based on their Aryanism -

So, for example, in socialism, the video game industry would be publically owned by the people as a whole; the profits would go to everyone. In Nazism, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony would not be allowed to compete against each other; they would be run by Germans and people would be paid based on their level of Germanness, and "inferior" races would work as slaves or face death.

To me, it seems like the guy in the video who is trying to equate Nazism to Liberalism and Socialism is either purposely trying to be dishonest in order to make current day American socialists look like Nazis, or he is horribly ignorant on a great number of topics - perhaps both.

I don't think I even need to delve into the liberal party, the mere fact that Hitler was an authoritarian who killed people based on race is the most extreme opposite of liberalism possible.

Have you ever seen buffalos with wings? Of course not because they're cut off sold as food. Think!

Be careful not to conflate Nationalist policies with Socialism.  Socialism is basically the government working for the people.  if you start rounding up people and killing them, that isn't 'for the people'.  Real socialism, isn't about hatred.  Its about crowdfunding programs to benefit the people that live there. 

You are correct.  It is known as "Night of the Long Knives"

" Socialism is basically the government working for the people"

wrong, socialism is defined as the seizure of the means of production from private entities and redistribution to the public/state

obviously it wouldn't be working for those people who wish to maintain ownership over their property

"I think you misunderstand this sentence. Hitler's conclusion was not that private enterprises was a problem for democracy, but that democracy was a problem for private enterprises, hence he overthrew the democracy, not the private enterprises.

On the contrary he privatised a lot of the public sector, this was in contrast to the politics of the Weimar Republic and the vast majority of other western nations at the time."

privitize : "transfer (a business, industry, or service) from public to private ownership and control"

who owned and controlled the "privatized" businesses in germany?

"This is the opposite of socialism."

it would be if the state did not control the businesses... but the historical fact remains that they did

" But you are not gonna get more control through regulations compared to actually owning the businesses. "

which means what exactly? the business owners had to comply with the dictates of the nazi party or they would be shutdown, most likely exterminated and substituted with more compliant replacements so i'm not really getting your point here

"The companies in Nazi Germany were not state-run companies"

well its a historical fact that they were so...

"hese companies colluded with the state, but saying they're run by the state is counterfactual."

ok ok, lets say instead of running the steel company, for example, i decided as its owner to liquidate my assets and instead open a businesses selling shoe laces against the policies set in place for me, what do you think would happen?