The socialist part of the name comes from the time of the early years of the party before Hitler joined.
I `m guessing you are not a historian yourself bloke - Doh ! Oi fink not. He joined the Party after the war when it was still the German workers something or other you have kind of given yourself away there. Well if you are going to pontificate you really have to get it right matey.
That the Nazi party slaughter it rivals does not show they are right wing in itself Stalin was also an energetic murderer of Bolsheviks in fact it is pretty much the MO of the left to conduct insanely bitter wars amongst themselves and generally denounce each other as Fascists ( a practice started by Lenin).
I do take your point would be truer to say that Nazism emerged from the revolutionary left and became something else .Its use of Capitalism was just as superficial though and you cannot simply discount the period up to 1934
To quote Green intellectual( oh my sides shall split ) ) Alfie Stirling -“We are socialists . We are enemies of, deadly enemies of today’s capitalist economic system with its exploitation of the economically weak its unfair, its unfair wages system its immoral way olf judging human beings in terms of their wealth and their , instead of their responsibility and their performance”..nah it was Gregory Strasser but it’s the sort of bull crap he would spout . Is Strasser one of those heroic socialists ..or not ? He shared Hitler`s ethnic Nationalism which , remember, was associated with revolutionary Liberalism.
Anyway Starsser co -existed with Hitler until ,as you say 1934, that’s not a foot note Bloke not a little warm up act , that’s most of the peacetime history of the Party !
In 1936 Germany began to re-arm and it is my opinion that it was directed purely at war and simply used whatever came to hand . That this was private industry is true Capitalism works better than socialism and you know how single minded the Germans are.
.My remark” Its easy to read history backwards “ was made self deprecatingly, and precisely because I am well aware of the popularity of Mussolini who was seen as a “Progressive “ and was certainly emerged from the left. As he said ....
"Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato" (Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State) . In fact his admirers were legion as we agree after all the Fascist manifesto of 1919 contains many things progressives still support. A minimum wage The participation of workers' representatives in the functions of industry commissions and so on . Mosley in Brtian wanted a State run bank… an idea with currency now. Mosley left the Labourt Party because it was insufficiently left wing ..I could go on.
So I do not judge fans of The Duce of Italian Socialists ( as he was first known) unduly harshly myself and the year is important . Nonetheless it is a side of Irish nationalism that for some strange reason gets little attention( ho ho) and the salute looks kinda bad J .The enthusiasm of the left for eugenic policies itself is the subject of a book by uber trendy left Jonathan Friedland
That is also why I glanced at the glib judgement of Rothermere frequently trotted out by Ken Livingstone .There is some justice in it but it looks quite different viewed through the prism of the war , or the “Emergency” as the “Neutral” Irish Free State called
Since you ask …Hitler's racist rules for keeping out the Jew were still being used in Eire 8 years after his death.30 European Jews fleeing persecution were given asylum before the war, none during it, and only a handful afterwards, and that there was consistent government opposition to granting any asylum. In August 1946, the Minister of Justice refused to admit 100 Jewish orphans found at the Bergen-Belsen death camp. As I said I don’t mean to imply any sort of judgement overall , but it is not exactly a proud record is it .
Some sources ..but not all