No, Hitler himself said that the cooptation of "socialism" was on purpose[0], don't get fooled by simple naming, it's the easiest way one can be manipulated (e.g.: "Democratic People's Republic of Korea"):<p>> "Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?"<p>> "Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.<p>> "Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.<p>> "We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one."<p>[0] <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2007/sep/17/greatinterviews1" rel="nofollow">https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2007/sep/17/greatint...</a>