So the onset of War made them socialist? How does that make them not socialist?
Directing a nation's economy during wartime often involves nationalization of industries or coercion of enterprises into producing war material. Nazi Germany did this, but so did every other major power in WW2. (With the exception of Italy, but this actually hurt them.) You can call this socialism if you like, but at that point you're stretching the definition to the point the word means nothing.
The Workers Party represents the workers. And they absolutely owned means of production if the so-called "private owners" had no autonomy they don't own anything.
The Nazis certainly did not represent the workers.
Also the idea that it's the workers that own it and they don't have any representation through Democratic means or any other form of unionization. Such a thing cannot exist how do you split up a title or a deed between all your workers and if you don't and they don't own it.
Because that's a concept of private property versus collective ownership. That's a whole nother ball game of socialism, private, public and personal property.
As far as posts claiming that Nazi Germany was not socialist which of those have I ignored? Because that's the real point I'm making that's the one that stuck in your craw.
You've ignored repeated points I've made explaining how the Nazis weren't socialist. I'll repeat them here for brevity's sake:
According to Marxist theory socialism is
a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism. Socialism is defined by collective ownership of the workplace by the people who work there. This was certainly not the case in Nazi Germany, where trade unions were banned and in many cases large businesses remained in control of their owners, who in turned were loyal to the Nazi Party. Because these owners were still subservient to national interests this cannot be called a capitalist state, but nor can it be called a socialist state. It is neither. National Socialism, like Mussolini's Fascism, presented itself as a 'third way' alternative to both capitalism and Marxist socialism. Unlike the adversarial worker-owner relationship of capitalism (best represented by the union movement), or the worker-ownership model proposed by socialism, the National-Socialist/Fascist model proposed government through the collaborative participation of workers' unions, executives, and the state organization. In principle, this is a kind of organic conception of society, in which class struggle is replaced by the integration of disparate parts into a unified whole. Everyone would know their place, and stick to it (or else). As Karl Popper famously claims, it is an ideal not far removed from Plato's own ideal state in the
Republic.
In practice, the integration preached by the Nazis demands a sovereign with absolute authority: in other words, the
Fuhrerprinzip. It's not clear that National Socialism really developed at all in accordance with the ideal described above, though of course the Nazi state did have close ties with any number of large German and foreign enterprises. And so ultimately I think the 'socialism' part just functioned as branding: socialism was the in thing among workers in the early 20th century, so if you want to lure them to your budding political movement, why not just put the word in your name? Who cares if you don't have anything in common with the other incarnations of that ideology? There was in fact a significant left-wing contingent in the early Nazi party, lured by this branding and by antisemitism, but openly opposed to the
Fuhrerprinzip and socialist in the more traditional sense (known as Strasserism), yet its leadership was eliminated in a series of purges culminating with the Night of the Long Knives. Their masses of followers were simply assimilated, willingly or not, into the conservative, Hitlerite party ideology.
Discussion of economics at this point as arguments in favor of socialist leanings of the Nazis is frankly pointless. The entire Nazi ideology was structured around race, the concept of the master Aryan race, which defined the collectivist nature of Nazism. In sharp contrast to socialism class-based struggle roots, rallied the cause of a specific race and nationality in contrast to left wing tendencies towards globalism and elimination of national and racial identity. Nazism was an ideology heavily based on Mussolini's fascism but tuned to a specific racial outlook that would illustrate the cornerstone of Nazi ideology during it's rule; the expressed hatred and dehumanization of those deemed to be be racially impure.
