I don't care for anything that is essentially a combination of nationalism+social democracy+(on some issues) social conservatism, all of which were all popular in Germany before 1933. There was nothing extraordinary in that sense about the NSDAP's rise in that most people falsely believe the NSDAP's ascension represented a dramatic change and that the NSDAP was very different from other parties. Instead, much of the groundwork for its rise was already in place.

In reality, practically all parties appealed to German nationalism. This even includes the Far-Left KPD, though they only used it instrumentally and would switch back and forth between supporting and opposing it based on Stalin's directives. In their own words: "It is essential that we exploit this sentiment to avoid it being used against us". There was even a time when the KPD were literally accusing the NSDAP of being insufficiently nationalistic. The KPD sent representatives to attend NSDAP events. There is, for example, one recorded instance in which a KPD representative implored the NSDAP not to fight with the KPD because they were both 'socialist organizations' (his words, translated). On another occasion, a KDP party leader at an NSDAP event referred to violence between the two sides as 'fraternal strife'. The KPD went so far in their attempt to co-opt nationalism that they even glorified a deceased German soldier, nationalist and early NSDAP member, Albert Leo Schlageter (1894-1923), who had been executed by the French government after being captured in France's invasion of the Ruhr. There was actual military cooperation between Communists and the Völkisch (effectively, German ethnonationalists) against the French in the Ruhr. KPD propaganda even went as far as to put the swastika alongside the Soviet star.

Karl Radek, in the famous 'Schlageter Speech', 1923:

[Schlageter was] a courageous soldier of the counter-revolution, he deserves to be sincerely honored by us, the soldiers of the revolution.

KPD newspapers, not merely printing the Schlageter Speech on their front pages, also included articles by prominent Völkisch such as Reventlow and van den Bruck. In short, there was nothing exceptional about NSDAP nationalism simply because nationalism was the norm at that time. Most parties also opposed Gesellschaft and were in favour of reconstructing Gemeinschaft. Here is an example of pro-Volksgemeinschaft propaganda from the centrist 'State Party': https://www.dhm.de/fileadmin/medien/lemo/images/xp991575_1.jpg The NSDAP did not pursue this once in power, au contraire, they were ardently modernistic (furthered the autobahns, mass produced the Volkswagen, etc.)

The KPD even had specific instructions for attempting to recruit Right-wing nationalists in the German military:

One has to speak with officers very courteously and amiably, to address them by the title 'Your Excellency.' References to Marx and party jargon are to be avoided.

As for social democracy, this ideology, particularly institutionalized in the SPD and completely Marxisant at its origins, was still immensely popular at the time. However, Marxists falsely predicted—as usual—that WWI would lead to proletarian revolution against the bourgeoisie all across of Europe. When this failed to materialize, with the SPD supporting Germany rather than the international proletariat, it bolstered Bolshevism which, distrusting of the gradualist approach taken by Social Democrats, decided that a different set of means—vanguard party, violent revolution—were required to realize socialism. The NSDAP was, of course, somewhere between social democratic to non-Marxist socialist.

My own views are very different from any of that. I have never found socialism appealing. I believe that problems in capitalism are solvable by subordinating capitalists to a powerful, 'totalitarian' (using the proper definition, i.e. the use of state power to improve man from top-down, and not the erroneous, simplistic definition of it merely as absolute state power) state. I reject the idea that this is an impossibility, i.e. that capitalism cannot be contained with nation states. I reject 'infinite growth' (I do not connect this to the economic system; that is, a successful Communist state would still believe in infinite growth) and believe that 'deindustrialization' is desirable. I believe that the transition from Gesellschaft to Gemeinschaft is reversable (but not necessarily that entire nations can do this, only that people splitting from society can reconstruct it).

On social issues I see fascism as far too Leftist. I don't care anything for universal suffrage or republicanism where a monarchy may still exist, as the Italian fascists did (noting, of course, that they compromised with the King later on), for example. Fascists are essentially egalitarians within the confines of the nation, only putting up a wall against foreigners. That the NSDAP Germany was more egalitarian (for Germans) than the Weimar Republic is undeniable; it is a frequently given reason in post-war studies asking Germans who supported the NSDAP their reasons for doing so. Numerous people like Heidegger and Evola rejected the NSDAP for these general reasons—it wasn't the serious counter-revolution that is required against modernity and degeneracy. There will be no true progress until after a successful counter-revolution (if possible) or until the beginning of the next cycle of civilization (the current one is well and truly screwed, and is in an accelerating freefall invisible to most in part because of the continuing persistence of economic prosperity).