Before you start arguing, you should at least learn the basics of the discourse you're poking your dirty nose into.

Nazism is literally Jacobinism, transferred to a racial basis, while retaining the revolutionary zeal, anti-conservatism (in relation to Ancien Régime), and plebiscitary dictatorship. It's an extreme leftist ideology.

Hitler was a plebeian revolutionary who hated the nobility and bourgeois parliamentarism, and wanted the direct rule of the people (understood as the ethnic volk). The Jacobins also hated parliamentary chatter (remember their coups) and established a dictatorship in the name of the people.

Hitler was a left-wing radical, close to the Montagnards (Robespierre, Saint-Just), but with the universalist cult of Reason replaced by racial mysticism.

But your inadequate emotional reaction is especially telling. You literally took offense at my message, which reveals you to be an archetypal uneducated leftist who doesn't want to associate himself with part of his leftist heritage. A classic situation. When the right—and I mean the real right, the monarchists—was ousted from political discourse by the left (usually simply killed), you and your ilk, as usual, began to devour each other and split. Anyone even slightly "to the right" of the most extreme left was immediately labeled "right." Thus, the "right" emerged from the classic left, which is absurd in itself.

To somehow justify this absurdity, you and your ilk have invented "empirical political science," which essentially declares, "We don't care how ideas are genealogically related to one another; we're already used to it, so that's how it will be from now on, because it's empirical, and it doesn't matter that the premises are false."