If this person is reviewing Blackshirts and Reds as a work of academic history, then I actually don't think it's that unreasonable. However, Blackshirts and Reds isn't a work of academic history. It's for a popular audience and is meant to make people reconsider the propaganda "common knowledge" they've absorbed.
Until he starts citing a single unauthenticated/corroborated document about a mole in the POUM during the spanish civil war somehow is major evidence in proving that Trotsky was a nazi collaborator.
Uhh, if this person believes that Parenti wasn't critical of the Soviet Union in Blackshirts And Reds, they obviously never read the book.
This looks like typical r*ddit-bro bullshit to me.
deleted by creator
Ok, but calling Parenti an "unrepentant defender of Stalin's Soviet Union" is still bullshit.
If this person is reviewing Blackshirts and Reds as a work of academic history, then I actually don't think it's that unreasonable. However, Blackshirts and Reds isn't a work of academic history. It's for a popular audience and is meant to make people reconsider the propaganda "common knowledge" they've absorbed.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Didn't Stalin oppose Beria's appointment? I remember hearing that he just got outvoted on that one.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Furr is a well known fraud, and Chapo tends to associate with actual historians when they can.
deleted by creator
Until he starts citing a single unauthenticated/corroborated document about a mole in the POUM during the spanish civil war somehow is major evidence in proving that Trotsky was a nazi collaborator.
“There’s no evidence that Trotsky was a nazi, which is evidence that Trotsky was a Nazi cuz Nazis are so good at hiding evidence”
deleted by creator
He went on ProlesPod (RIP)
Here's the episode