Obviously the Nazi’s used socialism in a different way then a Bernie Sanders supporter would intend to, but that doesn’t mean they were any less socialist.

Socialism, like any stridently believed in, quasi-religous ideology has been fractured into numerous groups, most of whom claim that they are the “real" socialists and that the other factions have abandoned the true principles of socialism. Throughout the twentieth century the Social Democrats, the Communists, and the Fascists were all socialist groups who were themselves split into even more fractious groups. You can’t use the no true Scotsman argument to dodge socialists you don’t like. A Protestant might say a Catholic is not a true Christian, and vice versa. Ditto for Shia’s and Sunni’s.

If you are going to refuse to accept labels people give themselves as being legitimate, and appoint yourself as supreme arbiter of who is a real member of any group, than you cannot complain if a Christian who blows up an abortion clinic with cries of how he is doing this for God is shrugged of by Christians because no Christian would do that. You would have no principled argument to counter that.

Also you didn’t really address my point. The only argument to censor White nationalists peacefully protesting is that some ideas are too dangerous to be allowed open space to propagate. And that argument when carried to its logical conclusion requires the censoring of Islamists and Communists. And that is just the start.

And finally, I don’t actually want to ban anyone, I was just carrying the arguments of the pro-censorship crowd on medium to their logical conclusion.