Against the backdrop of the ceasefire in the north and the possibility of renewed escalation with Hezbollah and the Axis of Resistance, public discourse has focused mainly on the balance of power, Israel’s deterrence capabilities, and the question of timing. Yet beyond all these considerations, it is essential to understand the deep ideological foundation that shapes the enemy’s patterns of behavior and defines the boundaries of what is possible. Examining this foundation through a historical lens broadens our understanding of the threat beyond its military dimension, which itself should be derived from that understanding.
Between Goebbels’ propaganda machine and Al-Manar TV, between the Hitler Youth and the Al-Mahdi Scouts, a comparative analysis of a shared ideological infrastructure reveals what led to the October 7 massacre and illustrates the narrow gap between genocidal rhetoric and its implementation. Comparisons between contemporary political and religious movements and the Nazi movement are considered among the most sensitive and complex issues in modern academic discourse. Many scholars reject such comparisons, and rightly so, out of concern that they may trivialize the Holocaust, an event unprecedented in its scope, nature, and systematic execution. At the same time, structural and comparative analyses of ideological, organizational, and propagandistic characteristics constitute a legitimate research tool that enables the identification of recurring patterns among extremist movements throughout history.
At the center of this discussion stands the “Axis of Resistance,” an ideological-military coalition led by the Islamic Republic of Iran, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip, as well as affiliated groups in Iraq and Yemen. Despite the profound theological divisions between the Shiite and Sunni branches of Islam, these entities share a common ideological foundation rooted in extreme antisemitism, the aspiration to destroy Israel, and the desire to establish an alternative world order in which fundamentalist Islam replaces the liberal Western order.
We will briefly examine the similarities and differences between these organizations and the Nazi movement through four dimensions: propaganda mechanisms, youth indoctrination, the totalitarian military-state structure, and the culture of death and sacrifice. Without obscuring the fundamental differences, foremost among them the Nazis’ systematic industrialization of mass murder, we will critically assess what history can teach us about the threat posed by the Islamist axis in the 21st century, particularly after the October 7, 2023 massacre demonstrated how genocidal rhetoric can become reality.
The Roots of Antisemitism
The connection between Nazism and modern fundamentalist Islam is not merely ideological; it rests on a tangible and well-documented historical foundation. The central figure embodying this connection is Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who acted as an open ally of Adolf Hitler. During his stay in Nazi Germany as a guest of the Reich, al-Husseini not only disseminated antisemitic propaganda in Arabic but also actively assisted in recruiting Muslim units for the Waffen-SS and supported Nazi extermination policies.
This ideological genealogy underscores that the antisemitism of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran is a blend of ancient Islamic anti-Jewish traditions and radical Nazi ideology. Scholars Jeffrey Herf and Matthias Küntzel point to a clear continuity between the two movements, arguing that modern Islamism fuses European antisemitism, including ideas drawn from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, with local religious elements. Much like Nazism, which grounded its hatred in a racist-biological doctrine, the Islamist axis promotes a discourse portraying Jews as “enemies of humanity” engaged in sinister conspiracies.
The centrality of antisemitism within this axis finds clear rhetorical and governmental expression. Hassan Nasrallah described Jews as “the descendants of apes and pigs” and echoed Nazi patterns of thinking by arguing that their concentration in Israel would make their destruction easier. In Iran, this hatred is institutionalized at the state level, beginning with Ayatollah Khomeini, who portrayed Jews as opponents of Islam seeking global domination, and continuing with Ali Khamenei, who disseminates conspiracy theories and Holocaust denial while placing a countdown clock to Israel’s destruction in the heart of Tehran. These findings demonstrate that antisemitism is not a byproduct of the conflict but rather a core ideological pillar that binds together the “Axis of Resistance.”
Youth Indoctrination
The mechanisms of control and influence employed by the Islamist axis closely reflect the propaganda model developed by Joseph Goebbels’ Nazi regime. Much like the propaganda machine of the Third Reich, which systematically dehumanized Jews in order to justify violence as “self-defense,” the organizations of the axis operate extensive media networks for the same purpose. Hezbollah’s Al-Manar television channel and Hamas’s Al-Aqsa network broadcast overtly antisemitic content, including drama series based on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and children’s programs that promote hatred of Jews from an early age.
A particularly troubling aspect is the systematic indoctrination of the younger generation, which serves as a structural equivalent to the Hitler Youth organization. Hezbollah operates the Al-Mahdi Scouts, an organization numbering tens of thousands of boys who receive military training alongside the inculcation of the values of shahada (martyrdom) and absolute loyalty to the Supreme Leader. At the same time, Hamas has built an educational system and military summer camps in the Gaza Strip where children train with firearms and practice kidnapping scenarios, while Iran operates the Basij militia, which is present throughout educational institutions and society at large. The purpose of these mechanisms is to create a generation of fighters disconnected from alternative values and imbued with a willingness for self-sacrifice.
This process leads to the emergence of a distinctive “culture of death,” one that sanctifies death for the sake of the cause, not as a tragedy but as the highest fulfillment. Whereas Nazism glorified death for the Reich and the Führer through ceremonies and myths of “total war,” this Islamist axis wraps its ideology in a theology promising paradise. In Iran, this cult reached its peak during the Iran-Iraq War, when boys were sent into minefields wearing “keys to paradise” around their necks. Today, the axis continues to sustain an entire industry dedicated to glorifying “martyrs” through monuments, films, and financial stipends for the families of suicide attackers. This pattern produces a society in which death becomes a central component of collective identity, resembling the macabre aesthetic that characterized the SS units and Nazi torchlight ceremonies.
The Cult of the Supreme Leader
The organizational structure of the “Axis of Resistance” reflects the Nazi totalitarian model of the party-state (Parteistaat), in which the party apparatus penetrates every layer of government and society. Just as the SS functioned as a “state within a state” in the Third Reich, with its own economic, judicial, and security systems, the organizations of the axis have built entities that parallel state sovereignty. Hezbollah operates an independent military force in Lebanon that is stronger than the regular army, alongside a separate welfare and judicial system; Hamas established a sovereign governing structure in the Gaza Strip based on institutionalized mechanisms of violence. In Iran, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) controls significant sectors of the economy and maintains a military force parallel to the national army, directly subordinate to the ideological leadership.
At the center of this structure stands a cult of personality that constitutes a clear parallel to the Nazi Führerprinzip (Leader Principle), according to which Hitler’s decisions were regarded as the supreme source of authority, above parliament, the courts, and the government.
Similarly, the loyalty of members of the axis is directed not toward a constitution or democratic institutions, but rather toward a personal allegiance that is almost religious in nature. Iran embodies this through the doctrine of Velayat-e Faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist), which grants the Supreme Leader unquestioned divine and political authority.
Until his elimination, Hassan Nasrallah enjoyed the status of a charismatic leader whose fate was intertwined with that of the community and the nation, much as Hitler was portrayed as the embodiment of the will of the German people. In both cases, the leader is perceived as inherently infallible, and any challenge to him is considered a metaphysical transgression. This hierarchical structure enables the axis to mobilize masses for an uncompromising existential struggle, fueled by aspirations for global hegemony and the eradication of the Jewish and Western “enemy.”
October 7: Rhetoric Translated into Action
The October 7, 2023 massacre constitutes a critical milestone demonstrating the potential of hate-filled rhetoric to become murderous reality. On that day, approximately 3,000 Hamas operatives crossed into Israel and carried out the mass murder of roughly 1,200 people, most of them civilians, displaying extreme sadism that included systematic sexual crimes, torture, and the burning of families in their homes. Leading Holocaust scholars, including Deborah Lipstadt and Yehuda Bauer, have pointed to clear similarities between Hamas’s methods and those of the Nazis, particularly in the dehumanization of victims and the deliberate documentation of atrocities for purposes of propaganda and terror.
The event was not accidental but rather the direct result of the prolonged indoctrination of an entire generation raised under Hamas rule in the Gaza Strip. Under this framework, an ideology calling for the destruction of Jews, rooted in Hamas’s original charter, was transformed into an operational plan of action. This similarity is reflected in the declared objective of genocide, even if its scale was limited compared to the Holocaust, but only because of Israel’s military capabilities and the operational limitations of its enemies. As Nazi history demonstrated, however, the distance between genocidal declarations and their implementation can be remarkably short when they are backed by military and state power.
The massacre illustrated how a totalitarian movement that cultivates a culture of death and hatred is capable of carrying out atrocities reminiscent of the actions of the Einsatzgruppen. It exposed the danger of dismissing the extremist rhetoric of the “Axis of Resistance,” which is driven by global ambitions and a perception of the struggle as existential and absolute, leaving no room for dialogue or political compromise. October 7 was therefore an eruption of raw hatred that had been nurtured and cultivated for decades under Iranian patronage and the ideology of radical Islam.
The Historical Lesson
The comparative analysis between the Islamist axis and Nazism reveals profound structural parallels, while also requiring recognition of fundamental differences. Nazism was a secular racist movement that carried out genocide on an unprecedented industrial scale, whereas the Islamist axis is grounded in religious theology and operates within a different geopolitical environment. Nazism was driven by a racial doctrine that viewed the Aryan race as superior and the Jewish race as inferior and destined for destruction. By contrast, the hatred of the Islamist axis is based on religious belief and seeks to justify itself, ostensibly, through reference to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or the broader Arab-Israeli conflict. Nevertheless, the direct historical connection and the similarities in propaganda mechanisms, indoctrination, and leader worship point to a shared ideological threat and a common objective: the destruction of Israel and of Jews as Jews.
The central lesson of the twentieth century, as demonstrated by the October 7 massacre, is that declarations advocating genocide must never be dismissed. When a totalitarian movement invests resources in building military capabilities and educating an entire generation in hatred, its stated intentions should be taken seriously. The use of comparative analysis is not intended to appropriate the memory of the Holocaust, but rather to identify dangerous patterns in real time. In the twenty-first century, when confronted with movements that glorify death and aspire to annihilation, early and decisive action is the only way to ensure that history does not repeat itself in a new guise.
