Yankel Berel:
Actually, it is stupid to claim that the oaths are not applicable/practical, because there are midrashim and other chazal who bring actual cases of how violations of those oaths caused extreme destruction, and numerous poskim who bring the oaths as practically in force (usually called “halacha”).
The Avnei Nezer obviously knew of those midrashim and other maamarei chazal, too, so he obviously agrees that the oaths are in force/practical. His original piece, in context, would be much more informative and useful than your translation of one or two paragraphs.
Harugei Beithar, for example, was due to violating the oaths – and resulted in the greatest bloodbath of Jews in history – far, far greater than even the Holocaust, depending on how you learn that gemara in Gittin.
Shevet Efraim (the ones who left Egypt early), as another example, was a violation of the oaths which caused them to be wiped out, R”L L”A.
This isn’t very complicated. For example, there is no halacha that Moshe Rabbeinu is the greatest Navi who ever lived. The Torah says it (explicitly), so we know it’s both true and practically applicable (as in you would be a heretic for stating that any other prophet did reach his level), even if it’s not a halacha. Same here. The Torah tells us about the oaths, including times when violating those caused punishment R”L L”A, so we know that the oaths are both true and practically applicable.
As we know from all the Zionists who fruitlessly attempt to explain away the oaths, we all know that the oaths are indisputably both valid and practical/halachically in force, just like Moshe Rabbeinu being the greatest navi who ever lived.