Hitler and the NSDAP were not Zionists; Zionists were not National Socialists. Having said that, there was a community of interest insofar as Hitler wanted Jews out of Germany and out of Europe, while the transnational Jew-Zionist lobby wanted as many Jews as possible to go to British Mandate Palestine in order to gradually colonize the territory and be able to confront the existing Arab inhabitants (and then to dispossess them).
The Zionists therefore treated with the 1933-1945 German Government and particularly (though not exclusively) the SS. Something that both sides prefer to forget these days. The SS and NSDAP no longer exist in their original form, but the Zionists and their post-1948 government, in what is now Israel, certainly do exist. For them, such history is better concealed or buried (or banned under the fake “international definition” of “antisemitism”).
Very true. Look at the self-described “Left” on Twitter etc. It puts forward no socialist or even social programme, no socialist policies to speak of, just “black lives matter” nonsense, “LGBTQXYZ” nonsense, pro-facemask and pro-lockdown nonsense.
What a contrast with the years 1917-1956, or 1956-1989!
The self-describing “Left” now has, as a main aim, “deplatforming” nationalist and other “influencers” on social media etc. In that world, getting someone expelled from Twitter (as happened to me in 2018, the expulsion procured by Jews, but applauded by the Twitter pseudo-socialists) counts as a major victory.
The “nationalist” and allied side of the house is little better. For the “alt-Right” and “Alt-lite” purported nationalists (in the UK), the UKIP/Brexit Party types, what matters is changing a red passport for a blue one, or fishing rights in the Channel, or at least pretending to support free speech. For many of the more solid nationalists, even social nationalists, what matters is trying to fight the social media “deplatforming” by complaining (mainly), or tweeting, blogging (yes, I do not exclude my own efforts), or vlogging.
What should matter to us is having a solid social-national programme; after which, having a solid socio-political movement; after which, having “boots on the ground”…
That tweeter understands.
This is not a “debate”. This is not a “disagreement”. This is the precursor to a civil war or (perhaps more accurately described) social war. Before the American Civil War started, in 1861, the cannon at Fort Sumter, South Carolina (in the harbour at Charleston, a lovely city which I myself, long ago, visited several times) opened fire. That signalled the conflict about to start.
Likewise, in 1917, a naval gun on the cruiser Aurora opened fire, signalling the start of the Bolshevik seizure of power in revolutionary Petrograd, and the effective start of the Russian Civil War.
What we see now, on social media, is the equivalent.
...but answer came there none…