Again so wrong - the extreme "right wing" is not fascism, it's anarchy. "Nazi" translates from the German as "National Socialist" - it's extreme left.
Also you can't "impose" liberty. Liberty is the default in the absence of tyranny.
And yes lots of things are done by force. Some good, some bad. That's irrelevant to the point that socialism is done by force, and charity is done by request and choice.
Anarchy is not right-wing. Anarchy, as you seem to agree, is the state in which there is no govt, ie the natural state. Anarchy is like pure libertarianism in a sense. I don't really care what "Nazi" translates to, it doesn't make it the definition of "national socialism".
I don't know about imposing liberty, but liberty is not the default of anything. Liberty does not really make perfect sense unless there is a govt, and all govts are going to restrict liberty of some things, eg murder.
As to your charity/socialism and done by force statements, I want to ask you: What exactly is your reason for socialism being bad compared to charity? You have major logical gaps in your conclusion.
If socialism is not bad because socialism is done by force and all things that are done by force are bad, then why is socialism bad? You just said some things done by force are good, can't socialism be one good thing done by force? You seem to then be saying that charity is done by choice, so it is preferred? Why are things done by choice preferred? Furthermore, although you think socialism affects charity, it wouldn't affect my decision to donate to charity. I want something that is across the board applied or nothing at all (since nothing at all would be across the board applied).
I just don't follow your argument here, most of your statements are "I want X" or "Y is true." You never bother to explain why just because you want X, I should want X also, or why Y is true. It just seems taken as given, unfortunately it is quite obvious that not everyone is taking it as given, so you should feel a bit compelled to explain yourself, otherwise you aren't even trying to engage in an actual conversation, and there is no point in talking.
So, WHY is it necessary to not have socialism, in order to have charity?