Hitler Was a Socialist: A comparison of NAZI-Socialism, Communism, Socialism, and the United States

Reviewers saying doesn't cite sources could not have read the book. It does throughout the text. If you do your own research, you'll see what he says is true. I've been researching Hitler for several years to find out how right wing he was. I was stunned to learn he was all socialist. Did not expect that. The 25 points of the NAZI party was the first info I found, most of which is reworded socialist principles. You can find it free on the internet, or read it in this book. This is the first place I have found where someone expounds on each of the 25 points. Amazing book! Great side by side comparison charts of different versions of socialism. Best book on the subject I have read!

Author Dumitru Sandru who grew up in communist Romania brilliantly clarifies the differences between fascism and Marxist Socialism. He makes his points in an original style of writing that is thoughtful and concise.The negative reviews are from not verified purchasers who probably never read it.This is an excellent well written book that should be read by everyone interested in the truth that is being distorted by the main stream media which is under the influence of anti American ownership.

A little disjointed but makes a good case to show Hitler was not a fascist, but rather a socialist not all that different than Stalin. Hitler was also a Nationalist and unlike Stalin was not interested in spreading his "Germanic" form of socialism throughout the world. Stalin's brand of socialism was international in it's intended scope..."Workers of the world unite".He goes into a lot of details comparing the many different types of socialism with fascism...Fascism is different!

Ignore the one-Star ratings from people who simply don't understand the concepts or simply disagree with ideology. Note that none of them had a verified purchase! What I found fascinating about this book was the author's real world experience having lived through socialism and communism then translating that into current events in America. Those who care about America and the liberties we are afforded, should take heed of this author's insights.

This makes a strong case that the head of the National Socialist German Worker’s Party was actually a socialist. That should have been obvious from the start, but, thanks to the disinformation spread from other socialists, it has been covered up. Hopefully this will help straighten things out.

Outstanding book to read for anyone regardless of their knowledge of Nazism or socialism. The author made a clear case, based on information from historical and expert books. NAZI, National-Socialism, was a socialist party no different than Marxism. I would definitely recommend to others who want to know the truth about socialism.

Hitler never said: “We are Socialists, enemies, mortal enemies of the present capitalist economic system with its exploitation of the economically weak, with its injustice in wages, with its immoral evaluation of individuals according to wealth and money instead of responsibility and achievement, and we are determined under all circumstances to abolish this system.”This quote is an excerpt from Hitler's one-time right-hand man in the early years of the Nazi movement, Gregor Strasser. These lines, that the author incorrectly attributes to Hitler, was penned in 1926 by Strasser, in a pamphlet titled "Thoughts about the Tasks of the Future."“Hitler angrily denounced Strasser’s socialism as ‘nothing but Marxism’. The mass of the working class, he went on, wanted only bread and circuses, and would never understand the meaning of an ideal. ‘There is only one possible kind of revolution, and it is not economic or political or social, but racial,’ he avowed.56 Pushed on his attitude towards big business, Hitler made plain that there could be no question for him of socialization or worker control. The only priority was for a strong state to ensure that production was carried out in the national interest” (Ian Kershaw "Hitler 1889–1936: Hubris" 1998, digital: p. 325).“Through members of the ‘Tat Circle’, Strasser had been introduced to General Schleicher in the summer of 1932. Schleicher was particularly interested in the possibility that Gregor Strasser could help bring the trade unions behind a ‘national’ – that is, authoritarian – government. This was something which the ‘Tat Circle’ had favoured. Unlike Hitler, whose dislike of trade unions had never wavered, Strasser was openly conciliatory towards the unions. Given his growing contacts with union leaders interested in a broad coalition to head off the dangers they saw on the far Right and far Left, the prospects of winning their support for a Schleicher cabinet that had Strasser in the government and offered an expansive work-creation programme could not be lightly dismissed. During the autumn, the rift between Hitler and Strasser widened. Already in September, Hitler distanced himself from Strasser’s economic ideas by dissolving the Political Economy Section (Wirtschaftspolitische Abteilung), which had been run by Otto Wagener, and banning further distribution of the Economic Emergency Programme (Wirtschaftliches Sofortprogramm), both of which Strasser had inspired. Then in October, Hitler had refused to endorse a speech Strasser made to the NSBO which contained pro-unionist sentiments. After the November election, Strasser lost his place in Hitler’s inner circle.…Hitler was unforgiving to those he felt had betrayed him. His final reckoning with Gregor Strasser came on 30 June 1934, when the former second man in the party was murdered in what came to be known as ‘the Night of the Long Knives.’…Gregor Strasser was taken to Gestapo headquarters and shot in one of the cells (Ian Kershaw "Hitler 1889–1936: Hubris" 1998, digital: pp. 397, 401, & 515).“Ian Kershaw, a major expert on Nazism” (Roger Griffin “International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus” ed. Roger Griffin ‘Arnold Readers in History Series’ 1998 p. 11)."[Read] Ian Kershaw's chapter 'The essence of Nazism: form of fascism, brand of totalitarianism, or unique phenomenon?' in his seminal work The Nazi Dictatorship (third edition: London, Edward Arnold, 1993)" (Roger Griffin “International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus” ed. Roger Griffin ‘Arnold Readers in History Series’ 1998 p. 325)."[A] world expert on the Third Reich [...] Ian Kershaw was now prepared not only to classify Nazism as a form of fascism but to assert that ‘The quest for national rebirth lay, of course, at the heart of all fascist movements’" (Roger Griffin "Fascism" 2018 digital: p. 54)."The preeminent biography of Hitler is now Ian Kershaw, Hitler, 1889–1936: Hubris (New York: Norton, 1999), and Hitler, 1936–1945: Nemesis (New York: Norton, 2000). Kershaw relates the dictator to the society that imagined him, and that 'worked toward' its leader without needing to be forced" (Robert O. Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" 2004 digital, loc. 4,302).(‘Remember This’ “The Most Compelling Biography of the German Dictator Yet Written (1999)” video [lecture by Ian Kershaw] ‘YouTube’ 03/30/2016)."Hitler was never a socialist. But although he upheld private property, individual entrepreneurship, and economic competition, and disapproved of trade unions and workers’ interference in the freedom of owners and managers to run their concerns, the state, not the market, would determine the shape of economic development. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place. But in operation it was turned into an adjunct of the state. There is little point in inventing terms to describe such an economic ‘system’. Neither ‘state capitalism’, nor a ‘third way’ between capitalism and socialism suffices. Certainly, Hitler entertained notions of a prosperous German society, in which old class privileges had disappeared, exploiting the benefits of modern technology and a higher standard of living. But he thought essentially in terms of race, not class, of conquest, not economic modernization. Everything was consistently predicated on war to establish dominion. The new society in Germany would come about through struggle, its high standard of living on the backs of the slavery of conquered peoples. It was an imperialist concept from the nineteenth century adapted to the technological potential of the twentieth" (Ian Kershaw "Hitler 1889–1936: Hubris" 1998, digital: p. 447).

Socialist ideologies blended with Fascism.

This book is quite small, almost pocket-sized but it is packed with easily digestable information. It gives compelling evidence that Hitler's National Socialism was in fact, socialism and compares it to the Marxist-Leninist-Socialism. Highly recommended for those want a concise easy to follow introduction to Hitler's socialism. For those who fancy a heavier reading of National Socialism, there are plenty of sources, citations and research provided. It is a well researched book.

Excellent book which explains with citations that Hitler and the national socialists, were in fact a socialist party.