Complete list of poor nations that adopted gov't socialism & became prosperous:

as a "negation of capitalism and its prize system" as v.Mises does according to the speaker in this video you have also to include the mercantilism of the 18th century or the allied regime after occupation of Germany post WW II because they knew prize and supply control too.
In the end you may label political and economical systems as you like, but it doesn't help in a political discusssion to put Mao's China, the English welfare system of the 70's, mercantilism, the EU and East Germany before 1989 into the same pidgeon-hole. People who don't know v.Mise's definition won't simply understand you.
On a sideline: I'm aware of and agree with the libertarian concept, that fascism and socialism aren't opposed extremes but are on the totalitarian side of the political spectrum opposed to a state of unrestrained personal and economical freedom on the other side. But nevertheless it is important to be aware and label the differences between systems that don't know neither (like China under Mao) that restricted political and econmical freedom for the benefit of certain groups (like fascism), systems that have economical but not personal freedom (hard to think of, perhabs nowadays China) and those systems that have personal liberty but no or restricted economical liberty (like the EU-states).

Fellowship of the White Rose

Why don't you just state your case without being belligerent?

you are wrong on some facts and on logic.

The means of production in Nazi Germany weren't publicly owned.
The Nazis took great care to make even the de facto confiscation of Jewish property look "free market", since they didn't nationalize it, but forced the Jewish owners to offer it for sale. Of course these were most the times bargains for Nazi cronies, but it was still private property.
Even those industries that took part in the war effort and the industrial killing of unwanted groups were privately owned and had strong links to international financial groups (that financed Hitler's rise to power - do some research on Prescott Bush or see the history of the FORD compagnie in Germany - no CT).

You fall prey to the self-labeled name National SOCIALIST German Worker's Party
There was no specific ideology behind the Party when Hitler joined the DAP (German Worker's Party) in 1920 as party member 555 (properly No 55). The founders resented the new republic but as well the old aristocratic upper-class establishment. If you see the 25-points programm of 1920 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program you may say it contained some socialist elements, but you should also notice, that Hitler later soon disallowed any discussion of this programme and hoped it will be forgotten. Of course the name appealed to workers and 'petite bourgeois' who otherwise may have voted for communist or socialist party. But all that was left of socialism in the pre-war Nazi Germany was a strong sense of egalitarianism (for true-bred German's) and denialof individualism ('You are nothing, your people is everything). After the outbreak of war central-planing of the economy became more and more important, but you can see this also for the economies of the UK and the US, that were 'coordinated' for the benefit of the war effort.

Your definition comes down to Socialism=Corporatism=Fascism=Communism0Totalitarianism

That goes back to the understanding that the extremes of the political spectre are not communism on the left v. fascism on the right, but a free society v. totalitarism. But it doesn't help to throw them together under the label totalitarism. Of course it is a factual big difference between a system where open opposition and dissent is largely possible (like in the states of the EU) or where it may be followed by certain death (like in Hitler's Germany).

Fellowship of the White Rose

Do you really think these European countries have a high degree of personal liberty? What if they want to grow orchids that are on the UN's ban list? What if they want to use corporal punishment to discipline their children? What if they want to home-school their children? What if they want to go shooting (Switzerland excepted)? What if they want to start living on a barter system with other like-minded people? What constitutes their freedom? Of course, if you do exactly as the government or society expects and requires of you, then you are perfectly free to do it.

The real test of freedom is seen in those who stand outside the mainstream of society. I wouldn't say the Europeans have a high degree of personal liberty because they have essentially eliminated anything outside the mainstream.

I'm sorry I haven't had much to write on the dp lately, but it's good to see you're still here.