verified. https://archive.is/HDNPX#selection-1682.0-1807.5
alt text:
David Josef Volodzko @davidvolodzko In fact, while Hitler has become the great symbol of evil in history books, he too was less evil than Lenin because Hitler only targeted people he personally believed were harmful to society whereas Lenin targeted even those he himself did not believe were harmful in any way. 12:18 AM · Jul 8, 2023
I am guessing that the ‘financial assistance program for poor children and their families’ refers to the Winter Aid, which
— Richard J. Evans, The Third Reich in Power
Socialists educated on the topic can explain why this isn’t a point in the Fascists’ favour; a ‘charity’ that frequently extracts from the poor defeats the purpose of a charity. Unsurprisingly, the benefits that the Winter Aid offered (aside from making the Fascists look better) were ephemeral and minor at best.
Concerning the environmental legislation (which people were already proposing before the 1930s):
— How Green Were the Nazis? Nature, Environment, and Nation in the Third Reich
While this legislation may have been better than nothing, total war meant that the Fascists had to strain the environment for resources, so despite their conscious efforts at environmental conservation I would wager that the Fascists did more harm than good overall.
Regarding this:
The Fascists were quite infamous for their reprisals: if somebody (e.g. a partisan) killed a German, they would kill one hundred civilians in turn. The intention behind this was to discourage partisan activity and violence against Fascists in general. There was at least once instance where Schicklgruber personally ordered one of these:
— The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich
As for the comments on Lenin, unfortunately that lies outside of my area of expertise. Maybe consult InDefenseOfToucans for that. (Although you’ll have to put on a fake smile whenever she shares her anti‐Stalin accusations.) Alternatively there’s TheFinnishBolshevik, but, eh… I feel uneasy about him.