This is very wrong to the point that I have to question if it can be a good faith argument. Hitler was funded by capital. It is true that he employed anti-capi

This is very wrong to the point that I have to question if it can be a good faith argument. Hitler was funded by capital. It is true that he employed anti-capitalist rhetoric, but he was not concerned with capitalism per se, but with Jewish capitalism. The only companies that were dispossessed where Jewish companies. The German war machine was carried by corporations. It was a capitalist system through and through, and the state hired out forced labourers to companies. You also point to the German Labour Front. I guess you mean to imply it was somehow forced unionisation. That is incorrect. The German Labour front was the replacement for unions. It was not a union, because workers had no right in the labour front. Actual union leaders were thrown into concentration camps or killed. Essentially, you're either falling for or repeating Nazi propaganda. The Nazi party did not care for the worker. Whenever it stated it "cared" for some group of people that meant that it took control away from that group. You can't just take what the Nazis said about their organisations at face value. Social workers, caring for the physically disabled? Please, the Nazi state systematically murdered the disabled and who it deemed anti-social.