somejew > Netziv strongly advises against complete separation even from those within the community who may seem lax or different in their observance, arguing that such division weakens the Jewish people, especially in exile, and makes them vulnerable. However, his solution is not to actively collaborate with outright heretics (apikorsim or those who deny the Talmud – like today’s “religious” zionists). Rather, he advocates for strengthening the entire observant community – including the less meticulous – through widespread, communal Torah study, even if initially pursued shelo lishmah.
Look, I can see one of the today’s heads of schools in Israel writing what you wrote. But I think this is not what Netziv wrote and your understanding is a little off historically. This is not how others understood Netziv: he is against cooperating of the anti-religious (Bundists, Communists, maybe anti-religious Zionists), aso Reform “culturalists” – these are those who claim that they are for the Torah but “deny Talmud” and mesorah in general. At the same time, he is for cooperation with those who are observant, what they call “traditional” in Israel, and surely other observant groups. Where on earth you found that “religious Zionists” deny Talmud, I don’t know. It seems at worst, there is a disagreement about one agadta about 3 shevuous. So, you are doing opposite of what Netziv is suggesting – you are looking for a machlokes and then try to make as much fire from this little machlokes.
As I mentioned on WZO, even authors of Kol Koreh admit that there are Talmidei Chachamim with opposite view. And you refuse to show respect to those who your leaders recognize as T’Ch?! Imagine you are a antiZ and also a student of R Feinstein and you come and see him talking to his cousin R Soloveitchik – are you going to show respect to one and not another? If they are having a halachik discussion – would you listen to one of them and close your ears not to hear the other? I am really curious.