The below are, I think, the most important points raised in the Shamir essay:
The most important question Unz’s essay leads us to, is not ‘whether six million Jews were killed by Germans just because they were Jews’ but: Why the Holocaust cult became so popular, with its temples, perversely called “Holocaust museums” or “Places of Tolerance” sprung up everywhere from Nebraska to Fiji? [...]
The first and obvious answer is “It is good for rich and powerful Jews”. [...] The second answer is “It is good for Israel”. [...] The third answer is “Because it is profitable”. [...]
These three answers cover the Jewish position, but they do not fully explain the almost universal acceptance of the H dogma by the ruling classes all over the West.
And here comes the fourth answer: “The H cult is good as a discursive tool of the Deep State against the majority”. [...]The fifth answer is “It is good for the US providing it with a licence to be the World Sheriff”. [...] The sixth answer, “It is good for justifying unlimited migration and open borders”. [...] The seventh answer will lead us into deep waters, and you can skip it if it is too deep for you. “It is good to replace Christ”. The H dogma is a parody of Christian teaching, with Jews being brought as a sacrifice, with Auschwitz replacing Golgotha, and with creation of the State of Israel as a new Resurrection. [...]
All of these are generally agreed-to by most Revisionists. While none of it is new ground, necessarily, it does serve two purposes: (1) It will be new to many readers at the Unz Review
, (2) It is a good perspective on the Holocaust from the position of the 1990s-2010s era that I think Shamir is referring to, putting it into world-political context in our time.
Here are two papers that deal with the non-Jewish role in Holocaust promotion
and 'enforcement,' Shamir's points 4 through 6 or 7:
(1) "The Non-Jewish Stake in Holocaust Mythology,"
originally published by Paul Grubach in Bradley Smith's Smith Report
, Jan. 2010.
This from Grubach is something close to Shamir's fifth point ("[Holocaust belief] is good for the US providing it with a licence to be the World Sheriff"):
Non-Jewish American and British power elites also have a vested interest in promoting the Holocaust ideology. As historian Jeffrey Herf recently revealed in his study, The Jewish Enemy, the Holocaust ideology paints the American and British war effort during WWII in a good and ethical light, and thus “justifies” the entire Allied war effort against Germany.
Grubach doesn't quite extend this all the way to relevance to present-day international (and even domestic-political) affairs. U.S.-led military interventions of recent memory are really all
justified by reference to the Holocaust.
A cornerstone of the international system today is: The U.S. and its allies can do anything militarily because  the Holocaust occurred in the 1940s and is the most significant event in history, and because  we (the U.S. and to an extent UK and France) were on the side opposing the Holocausters, therefore  we are moral, and finally  we have a responsibility to prevent any potential future Holocausts through aggressive action if needed.
Grubach towards the end of his essay also goes in for Shamir's most controversial, seventh point:
For many influential non-Jewish, American and European liberals, belief in the Holocaust has replaced belief in God as the supreme virtue.
(2) "Qui Bono? An American Veteran's Views on Non-Jewish Toleration and Propagation of the Extermination Thesis,"
paper presented at the Nov. 1981 IHR Revisionist Conference at the University of California, by Dr. Charles E. Weber [1922-2002], published in the Journal of Historical Review
Vol. 3 (1982), No.2.
There is a lot in this longer essay, some of it dated considering its authorship nearly forty years ago during the Cold War. One of the things that Weber does is place early Holocaust "propagation" in a party-political setting, as I have done recently here at CODOH-Forum for modern day party politics, especially in Germany (see German Bundestag Election 2017 and 'Holocaust Politics'
, The Holocaust in Swedish Politics: 2018 election
, and Potential Support for Abolishing Holocaust Laws in Germany by Party
). Here is Weber:
[S]ome time after the hostilities were over no less a figure than Senator Taft of Ohio [leading Republican Senator, 1939-1953] had the wisdom, decency and courage to question the legal basis of the Nuremberg trials.
The Democratic Party, which had its men in the presidential office from 1933 to 1953 and, thus bore the essential responsibility for the conduct of the war and the postwar relationship with the USSR, welcomed any means of rationalization and justification of its conduct during this period. Democrats further welcomed any means to discredit their former adversaries on the intervention question
Now, the Holocaust as we know it today has become hegemonic. All parties and even many third-party dissidents use it, thus justifying nearly all U.S. politics in any form. Even activists on the hard-conservative-right who support wide gun ownership rights and oppose gun restrictions almost invariably use the Hitler argument; "Hitler regulated gun ownership and then the Holocaust occurred" is the argument.
While I don't think it's accurate to say, in the first and (soon coming) second quarters of this century, that the Democratic Party uses the Holocaust as a weapon against the Republican Party, Weber's argument of a partial party-political origin of Holocaust promotion, in the Holocaust's early iterations, is excellent. It is something Shamir does not touch on.
In other words, the Holocaust is partly a historical puzzle (who promoted it, when, why, how?) and not just something that dropped down in full-form and seized hegemonic control of our culture, which is how one might read Shamir without other context. But Shamir's polemical style is effective at getting to the heart of why the Holocaust matters.
One final excerpt from Dr. Charles Weber (1981):
Let us finally consider a group of states which have exploited the "Holocaust" material in a most energetic manner: the USSR and its satrapal governments in eastern Europe. As we shall see, the communist lands have had compelling reasons to continue to propagate the "Holocaust" material.
Skillful and energetic propaganda efforts on the part of the Soviet rulers have undoubtedly been a big factor in the upward climb of the Soviet Union, which started from a nadir of its fortunes in 1943. The "Holocaust" material has proved to be especially valuable to the Soviet Union for a number of objectives. It has not been without design that memorials relating to the "Holocaust" claims are to be found in many places throughout the Soviet empire and that the sites of former relocation and labor camps in which large numbers of Jews were interned...have been preserved and altered in such a way as to make the "Holocaust" claims seem plausible, at least to the superficial viewer. Even postage stamps issued by the satrapies over a long period keep up the publicity of the "Holocaust" [eight communist-country postage stamps relating to the Holocaust are included as an appendix]
An essential objective of this propaganda effort is the demonstration that in spite of the obvious and continued oppressiveness of the Soviet empire, a German victory would have meant a worse life. The "Holocaust" material thus plays an essential role in the pacification of the many nations and ethnic groups of the Soviet empire [...]
This is very certainly a major reason the Holocaust myth exists in the first place, as its most important political use was by the USSR, not the USA, to justify its sudden major expansion (half of Europe). The Soviet Union is now gone; the post-1991 Russian state, and its successors, has largely inherited this, the "Soviet WWII cult," but it is now watered down there -- and ironically became solidified in the non-communist West!