Which norms seem not to have been much reduced over the last ~100 years. Perhaps briefly and incompletely suppressed, but not really reduced.
It’s curious that discussion of German Nazism outside of Germany seems to be so very much focused on Hitler. Quite unlike the dicussion in Germany in the period that I personally witnessed (mid-1970s when the topic first loomed large in my history lessons, up to now).
Nowadays when in newspaper or magazine articles, or TV documentaries, the Nazi period is referenced this considers local/regional history (say, a permanent exhibition in the local Gestapo headquarters, or the role of a regional psychiatric hospital in murdering the mentally ill) or sectoral questions (e.g. the role of a certain ministry). Adolf Hitler’s name only comes up here he had an identifiable personal role (like in his order backdated 1 Sep 1939 on murdering mentally ill and handicapped people). With reference to crimes committed by the lower levels of the org charts without explicit orders by Hitler, Adolf Hitler’s name usually does not come up at all.
In contrast, when e.g. German papers write “the SS”, English language papers often write “Adolf Hitler’s Nazi SS”.
They may have legislated requirements that didn’t envisage this particular situation.
Or they just don’t want to be associated with the controversial speculations that will surely follow the results.
Perhaps one reason for that is that Germans don’t have to guess what the SS is, whereas English speakers might benefit from that context clue. I didn’t learn much at all about Hitler in secondary school - or the SS, for that matter. I’m sure we covered World War II, but only in the broadest strokes.