The more I think about it, the more problematic the "Because history is edited, most people today don’t realize that..." part is either.
I don't believe this to be the case. Perhaps most people don't realize it, I have no way of knowing. If they don't, it is because they did not seek to learn. But she seems to be suggesting that there is some attempt to hide the fact that "to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews." I don't agree with this at all and it has some pretty dark and totally untrue overtones. I have read dozens, if not hundreds of books on the rise of Nazism and find that most sources are in clear agreement here. Are there some radical or revisionist histories that claim otherwise? I dunno, probably. I mean, anybody can write anything. *, you can sit down and write a nomination for the Nobel Prize for Donald Trump, but it doesn't mean much.
The more I ponder this the darker and more conspiratorial the tone seems to be. When you take the above section and put it in the context of the last sentence, it becomes a bit of a mess and starts to dovetail into an argument that the some openly racist groups are making - that their own persecution is a sign of society's intolerance. Tiki torch parades with people shouting Jews Will Not Replace Us, should be met with outrage. If I were there, I would have been punching some Nazis.
There's another lesson of the nazi era. A lot of good people sat back for far too long and let it happen without openly and, if needed, forcefully opposing it until it was too late. There were certainly those that did, but too often it was because of their opposing political views rather than their commitment to human rights and this meant the opposition was fractured and easily defeated in detail.