The Nazis Were a Centre-Left Socialist Workers Party

In contemporary American politics, the left are commonly referred to as “liberals,” whilst the right are often branded “Nazis” (short for National Socialists). The result is a bizarre inversion: “liberals” on the left side of politics and supposedly “socialists” on the right. Americans even had to invent the term “libertarian” to describe liberals - because “liberal” had come to mean socialist.

The truth is, the Nazis were, by their own name and policies, a left of centre, socialist workers party.

When you step back, it’s absurd to think otherwise. From 1919 until Hitler’s takeover in 1933, Germany was a constitutional democracy - the Weimar Republic - with universal suffrage, a free press, multiple parties, free elections, a parliament, and a civil constitution. Once Hitler took power, he eliminated all rival parties, carried out a purge, and turned Germany into a one-party socialist state - following the same playbook used by every socialist despot who has ever seized absolute control. There was nothing even remotely “right-wing” about the Nazis, let alone “far-right.”

In fact, Hitler despised the right. In Mein Kampf and in his speeches, he attacked liberalism for putting the individual above the nation. He saw liberal societies as fragmented, decadent, and unable to act with unity or purpose. He also rejected democracy as a system of weakness. To Hitler, parliamentary democracy meant endless debate, compromise, and what he called “rule by the incompetent.” He believed it allowed “inferior” people and special interests to block decisive leadership. His ideal was the Führerprinzip - absolute authority vested in a single leader who embodied the will of the people.

If the Nazis aren’t “far right,” then who actually is far right?

If the left generally favors big government and limited individual freedom, and the right favors small government and individual freedom, then “far right” would logically mean even smaller government and even more individual freedom—something closer to anarchists or sovereign citizens, not totalitarian states.

People often explain the similarities between Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia by claiming the left–right political spectrum is “horseshoe-shaped,” with the far left and far right converging. But the simpler explanation is that the spectrum itself breaks down when Nazis are placed on the far right—because they don’t belong there in the first place.

A look at the Nazi Party’s own 25-point program shows something very different from modern “far-right” stereotypes. Short of outright communism, it reads like a radically leftist, state-directed, anti-capitalist platform. Key planks included:

7. We demand that the State shall make it its primary duty to provide a livelihood for its citizens.

9. All citizens shall have equal rights and duties.

10. It must be the first duty of every citizen to perform physical or mental work. The activities of the individual must not clash with the general interest, but must proceed within the framework of the community and be for the general good.

11. We demand the abolition of incomes unearned by work, breaking the slavery of interest.

13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).

14. We demand profit-sharing in large industrial enterprises.

15. We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a cheap rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all small traders in the placing of State and municipal orders.

17. We demand a land reform suitable to our national requirements, the passing of a law for the expropriation of land for communal purposes without compensation; the abolition of ground rent, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

It’s striking to compare Hitler’s hostility to land rent and land speculation with Australia’s current housing model, where property rent-seeking and speculative gains are not only tolerated but actively encouraged by tax and planning policy. Even the Greens don't call for the abolition of rent.

18. We demand the ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. Common criminals,  usurers,  profiteers, etc., must be punished with death, whatever their creed or race.

19. We demand that Roman Law, which serves a materialistic world order, be replaced by a German common law.

20. The State must consider a thorough reconstruction of our national system of education (with the aim of opening up to every able and hard-working German the possibility of higher education and of thus obtaining advancement). ... We demand the education of gifted children of poor parents, whatever their class or occupation, at the expense of the State.

Yet if you publicly point out that the National Socialist German Workers’ Party were in fact socialists, you’re likely to be met with scorn and derision. Often coming from people whose only basis for calling the Nazis “far-right” is that that’s what they’ve always been told. If they offer any argument at all, it’s usually just one of the stock rationalisations invented by socialists to distance themselves from the Nazis. These include:

The Nazis began as a socialist movement, then purged the socialists and became far-right.

It strains credulity to claim a party simply jumped from socialism to “far-right.” Did it pass through centrism first? Or spend time as conventionally right-wing before radicalising? Unlikely—Hitler openly despised the right, liberalism, and democracy.

Some socialists left the party (e.g. Otto Strasser) and others were forced out or eliminated (Gregor Strasser), as happens in any political movement. But the departure of some socialists doesn’t mean those who remained weren't also socialists. If anything, one of the party’s most committed socialists was Goebbels, Hitler’s closest ally to the end. His own words make that clear:

“The bourgeoisie has to yield to the working class … Whatever is about to fall should be pushed. We are all soldiers of the revolution. We want the workers’ victory over filthy lucre. That is socialism.”
— Doctor Goebbels: His Life and Death

“We are not a charitable institution but a Party of revolutionary socialists.” -Der Angriff editorial, May 27, 1929

“England is a capitalist democracy. Germany is a socialist people’s state.” – “Englands Schuld” 1939

Nazis can't have been socialists because they hated communists and banned the Communist Party.

This is a classic lie by omission. The Nazis didn’t just ban communists - they banned every other political party. They tolerated no rivals of any kind.

And the deeper context is usually ignored. In the chaos after World War I, Germany had already been convulsed by communist uprisings, with Hitler’s home state of Bavaria briefly becoming a Soviet republic. Those experiences shaped Nazi hostility toward Marxist movements, not toward socialism as such.

They only used the word ‘socialist’ in their name to win over the left

This is both historically inaccurate and logically incoherent. It was the right the Nazis needed to win over - not the left. And in any case, the party’s original name - the German Workers’ Party - was already unmistakably left-leaning.

They banned the trade unions

Of course they did. Independent unions are a feature of liberal democracies, not socialist systems. In a socialist state, the government claims to represent the workers directly, so separate unions become redundant - and politically dangerous.

They didn't "seize the means of production".

This is a Marxist yardstick. Nazism wasn’t Marxism, but it was still a form of state-directed socialism built on different premises. There are numerous similar arguments - all basically saying the same thing - that the Nazis weren't Marxists and therefore must have been far-right. Of course this would only be true if Marxism was the only form of socialism (it isn't) and the only alternative to Marxism is the far-right (it isn't).

Everyone says they were far-right / the Encyclopedia Britannica says they were far-right / you're a dumbass...

These are not arguments. They're logical fallacies. It means they have run out of arguments and you have won the debate.

They weren't socialists - they were fascists

In reality, they were both. Fascism is not the opposite of socialism; it grew out of it. Mussolini himself came straight from the socialist movement as editor of the socialist newspaper, 'Avanti!' and serving on the National Directorate of the Italian Socialist Party (PSI) before founding fascism.

They were nationalists / national socialists

Nationalism isn’t the same thing as patriotism; it’s a form of collectivism where the individual is subordinate to the state. “National Socialism” simply meant socialism organised within a nation, not the internationalist model of the Soviets.

They were militaristic

So were most socialist states. The Soviet Union was heavily militarised too and was actively pushing to expand its influence across Europe.

They were racists - they hated Jews

Racism isn’t unique to either the right or the left. Hitler’s hatred of Jews was tied to his belief that they represented capitalism, finance, profiteering, and betrayal during the First World War - a war he had personally fought in.

And seriously? It's pretty obvious now which side of politics hates Jews.

If you're still not convinced, ask ChatGPT - but you have to tell it to ignore all the existing mass of incorrect information on the internet and to think for itself:

So, why does any of this matter? As Spanish-American philosopher George Santayana said in his 1905 book The Life of Reason...

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

We are witnessing the rise of a more militant left: attacks on Jewish shops, firebombings of synagogues, the spread of anti-Semitic tropes about Jews controlling government, business, and media, and calls to boycott Jewish-owned businesses.

Yet while everyone searches for Nazism on the right, the real threat will likely - as they say - come out of left field.