The problem with your analysis is that you engage in lowest-common-denominator reasoning.
Different types of the same thing can have materially important distinguishing features which make them incompatible with one another. For example: All humans have blood, but if you are given the wrong blood type, you die.
It is important for us to recognize materially important distinctions if we want to understand ourselves and human history correctly.
All political extremists may share common attitudes and may suffer from the same type of intellectual and moral deficiencies – but, nevertheless, they do have unique distinguishing features which render them incompatible with each other.
Consequently, they cannot be grouped together upon a political spectrum if you want to truly understand what motivates people to gravitate toward their candidates, their ideas, and their proposals and if you want to understand why a specific targeted audience becomes receptive to such candidates, ideas, and proposals.
The JBS is not (as you claim) some sort of incubator for anti-semitism. They are not “posing” as an anti- anti-semitism organization. But it IS true that an unusual number of persons who ARE anti-semitic have attached themselves to the JBS because they agree with JBS interpretations of postwar U.S. history.
You claim that there is some affinity between anti-semites and neo-nazis and the JBS — i.e. what you describe as “a commonality of views, sources, etc.”
If THAT is the single most important criterion — then YOU shall be judged by the same principle. Consequently, if I find ANY “commonality” (i.e. lowest common denominator) in something you write which links you to some noxious individual, group, or publication — then it is entirely reasonable and permissible to associate you with them.
ACTUAL prominent neo-nazi and anti-semitic individuals and organizations have a long history of denouncing the JBS as worthless and amounting to a “false flag” operation designed to “neutralize” genuine anti-communist activities. See, for example, the articles which excoriate the JBS and its leadership by Elizabeth Dilling, Eustace Mullins and Revilo Oliver (both of whom claimed that Jews ran the JBS!!), William Pierce (National Alliance and formerly American Nazi Party), George Lincoln Rockwell (founder of American Nazi Party), and many more.
Yes it is.
They are not “posing” as an anti- anti-semitism organization.
Yes they are.
But it IS true that an unusual number of persons who ARE anti-semitic have attached themselves to the JBS because they agree with JBS interpretations of postwar U.S. history.
Yes they have. And the JBS doesn't give a darn how anti-Semitic they are so long as they don't embarrass them publicly (influencing the membership is another thing altogether).
The JBS regards anyone who believes in "the conspiracy" as an ideological comrade, no matter how anti-Semitic they are. Their magazine has lauded people like Charles Lindbergh and Henry Ford, even excusing Ford for building truck plants in the USSR. Obviously, anyone who hates the Jews has his heart in the right place so far as they're concerned.
The JBS is the American section of the same right wing that gave us Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, Salazar, etc. And with only the exception of the first two (who were discredited by history) and for some strange reason Juan Peron they identify with them. They regard totalitarian collectivists like Franco and Salazar as heroes. No, I'm not equating Franco and Salazar with Communists because they were not Communists and as imperfect as their regimes were, they were far preferable to Communism. However, the ideology of Franco and Salazar (and Chiang Kai-shek and George Papadopoulos) was very very different from the Thomas Jefferson/Jefferson Davis libertarianism and localism the Birch Society advocates. I used to wonder about how they could regard Abraham Lincoln as a tyrant while praising Franco and Papadopoulos to the skies, but I now understand that this is part and parcel of the palaeoright ideology: radical relativism based on local beliefs. European right wingers advocate a totalitarian "organic" collectivism and the American palaeoright advocates the Jeffersonian "compact theory," and each is the "true position" for that particular culture. Palaeoconservatives at bottom are rejecters of universals, so naturally what is right for Greece isn't going to be right for America.
I was a member of the Birch Society. It is poison.