Formulating the question that way is a poor choice. Also, you're mixing fascists with nazis which is sloppy.
2. Why did powerful conservatives help the fascists into power as King Victor Emmanuelle invited Mussolini and Hindenburg invited Hitler ?
Hindenburg hated "the little corporal". It was politically expedient to form a coalition with the national socialists. Hindenburg resisted this for quite a time, but ultimately had to acquiesce or lose his own position of power.
3. Why did facsists never suppress the right, allowing it to survive intact ?
You don't define any of your terms. Did the Nazis suppress the Right? What is the Right? Perhaps it's "The-People-Hitler-Did-Not-Suppress". In which case the statement is worthless.
The Nazis had strong government control of the means of production. Didn't own it (they were not Marxists), but they sure controlled the national economy. Also, the Nazis did not respect private property. They were atheists. They supported gun control. They had huge government welfare programs. Stop me when I hit something that the Democrats wouldn't support ...
Last but not least, the US has NEVER gone to war much less begun hostilities for 'gain'. Any military conflict that the US has endeavored, ended with the US troops evacuating the combat area (empty handed). We do not negotiate from stolen turf and we have never had any material, concrete benefit from fighting against, with or for any other nation. This record is UNMATCHED in world history.
Whether Hindenberg personally hated Hitler is immaterial. He and the entire monarchist conservative right never once saw the Nazis as "socialists". They never thought the Nazis were "left wing". They were the most powerful party of the right, which is why Hindenberg allied with them. And why the Italian monarchy saw the fascisti as allies.
People who consider the fascists, "socialist", ignore where they came from. The roots of fascism were not in Marxism. They were in the elite raider units that were formed in WW1 to raid opposing trenches. In Germany they were called stormtroops and in Italy Arditi. Mussolini was an Arditi. The "socialism" of fascism was just trying to transpose "band of brother" comradeship of an elite assault unit on the nation at large.
Under fascism, the traditonal power centers of the conservative right (Big Business, the Army High Command, the aristocracy, High Society, the Italian monarchy, the traditional churches, etc) survived intact. The power centers of the left were completely destroyed. The right survived so well, that the old boy network was the base for the anti-Hitler plot.
Sam is a Sham all right. Must be a leftist of some sort. What is his ilk doing on this board? DU would eat his stuff up.
That is the fundamental question. Was a 1930s German Conservative the same as a 1930s or 2000 American Conservative? I would say they aren't even close to being the same animal.
Conservative in Europe in the 1930s meant conserving their historical position in society -- the old titled and landed aristocracy -- the High churches, and the industrial Moguls --- all were targets for the "Communists" who's platform was to completely gut the existing society and rebuild a new society that would have totally excluded the old order. The only thing conservative about those people was the desire to 'conserve' their own positions in society --- and possibly their lives at the hands of the "Bolsheviks".
Unlike the American Conservative of the 1930s or today, the European Conservative had no particular ideology on the size and scope of government or the concept of Natural Law that defined the limits of government authority. If anything, they were likely to favor larger government intervention in the economy and social organization since they were paternalistic in nature. Hitler gave them the best of both worlds -- a "socialist" economy that preserved their position far more securely than possible under Capitalism and a paternalist society where they were the "uber" parents.