I used to think that, too. But truth is more nuanced than that. Your version is a simplton's version, because you have not looked beyond the labels.

By the time Hitler and the people who agreed with him were in a position to do something, the Jews had already infiltrated the German government, the courts, the media, and the universities (sound familiar?).

It was the Nazi's belief that they could not rely on the ideals of classic liberalism of free speech and pursuasion to vote the communists out of their positions of infiltration. They knew the bloody history of the communist Jews in Russia.

So, they took a different tactic. They chose an authoritarian tactic. You and I might judge that as immoral from the comfort of our armchairs, but right or wrong, that's how they saw it and that's why they did it.

This was a much different approach to "socialism" than we saw in the USSR then or in Venezuela today.

In theory, socialism is bad. But in reality, if the communists have already infiltrated to the point that elections don't matter and laws don't matter, what do you do? Wait for the militiary to come to the rescue? Germany was not allowed a military post-WW1. Hitler ignored that once he came to power, and built a dominant German military up from nothing.

But you have to be smarter about the big picture of things to understand it. You don't have to agree with it, but you should at least understand it from their perspective.