Their point is that the zionist movement that began in the 1880s is a “dead end”. A Jewish entity in Eretz Yisrael that wants the trappings of a goyish state will not be compatible with Torah, and anything “Jewish” that isn’t based on Torah will eventually disappear. Either it will give up the trappings of a sovereign state or it will give up any pretense of being “Jewish”. Medinat Yisrael as well know is probably doomed in the long run.
If the growth of the yishuv had occured under Orthodox leadership, even “Modern” or “Mizrahi” leadership, they would have focused on sufficient autonomy to allow Jews in Eretz Yisrael to peacefully live a frum lifestyle, rather than starting a fight with the goyim by demanding political control (meaning non-Jews reduced to “second class” status, something that Arab racist pride will never accept) combined with building a western (Euro-American style) and secular (meaning anti-Islamic as well as anti-Torah) state.
Has R. Yosef Hayyim Sonnenfeld, probably assisted by Dr. Jacob De Haan (rather than David Ben Gurion) been the dominant figure in the politics of Eretz Yisrael in the first part of the 20th century, Eretz Yisrael would today probably have a Jewish majority but would be part of a much larger Arab/Islamic state (probably a great Syria led by the current King Abdullah II). While we would be “second class” citizens politically (something Orthodox Jews never had a problem with), we’ll have the economic and communal autonomy that would allow Orthodox Jews to flourish without being forced to fight “tooth and nail” for the right to follow a Torah based lifestyle. And in this “alternative history” and interest side effect is that at worst, Hitler would be remembered for expelling Jews from Europe, since the Brits would have had no reason to close their Empire to Jewish refugees (especially since the frum ones would have preferred to join the large and secure Jewish community in the Arab state that almost was established in the post-World War I period).