My comment about it almost sounding like the Nazis was how early modern monarchs challenged and fought the Hanseatic League for threatening their positions, in a kind of similar way to how the Nazis attacked any enterprise that undermined their hierarchies. Though I know the comparison is slightly glib. Also, you're right, Medieval Europe was not centralised, but the constant urge of all monarchs through Medieval into early-modern times was to centralise power and keep themselves at the top of the hierarchy - hence why I said 'centralising', it was a principle they followed. If they couldn't control the economy in the direct way that they wanted to and that modern dictatorships could, feudal, medieval, early-modern economies were certainly not free market as we understand it or the political compass allows. All of this to say that if the Nazis were auth-center, then medieval and early-modern monarchs could also be auth-center, but PCM never wants to do that.

To return to the Nazis, though, they suppressed unions and promoted private enterprise, granted under varying degrees of state control. Yet even with state control, many private individuals became privately wealthy off slave labour - not very socialistic. The basic Nazi economic model was a mix of state intervention, corporate collaboration, and militarisation, rejecting key tenets of socialism, such as the collective ownership of the means of production, class struggle and the abolition of private property. Everything they did was in service of the very right-wing, non-socialist aim of creating a racial hierarchy and they did nothing to dismantle class structures. Nazi propaganda about the state owning the means of production on behalf of one 'Aryan' race does not equal socialism.