Is he actually the fraud that he’s been made to be? With all the red scare-esque balderdash that’s being thrown around, i really can’t make anything out.
His specialty is in literature, not history, and this is why he gets dismissed, because he’s not doing it the “right way”. But he hunts down primary sources in Russian and translates them himself; he’s corrected various mistranslations that have been used as the basis of major anti-USSR narratives for example.
A piece of evidence weighs supreme until something better comes around to dethrone it. Furr’s evidence is thorough, you can’t really argue that a policeman’s badge wasn’t found at a grave other than Katyn, because, well, it was found at that other grave. If they have evidence to the contrary they should present it instead of shriveling into a corncob. He’s inconvenient and that’s why he gets dismissed and people will tell you to not even try to read him.
He really is very autistic with his obsession with the truth. Watching videos of him and reading his books it becomes pretty apparent. He’s just pure on about the facts and evidence. His books are such a hard read because of how factual and dry they are. Spends the first chapter in the few I have read just describing his methods of review he used. Such a fantastical slog to get through.
One big thing for me is, people who are frauds usually are doing it for some real, tangible gain. For money, to get in good with the right people, etc. Furr, makes no money off his books. All the money goes to the publisher just so they can print the books. He makes no material gains from his work. He doesn’t get in good with anyone cause he’s going against the narrative of those with all the power. All he gets from his work is ridicule. So why then would he be lying. Why would he make any of it up? He doesn’t have a fan club. He isn’t even a communist so I’m his support from the left is tempered. So what then is his driving force besides just an obsession with the truth? There isn’t one. The man just wants to report the truth from what the evidence shows.
When the Soviet archives were opened to the public he was one of many who delved I to it, but one of the very few that actually reported the findings because everything they found dispelled all of the western talking points. Most were in it for the money of selling a narrative. When the archives proved fruitless to them they went back to their typical bullshit smear campaigns. Furr was one of the few who’s only desire was to the truth. He makes no money off any of his books. All the funds from the go to the publisher so they can keep printing them. So if he is this big “fraud” that the libs cry about… What is his motivation? What’s he getting out of it other than ridicule from the main stream narratives? He’s not getting wealth, or fame. Hell, most leftists don’t even know who he is or have read his works. If you’ve ever taken the time to read his works, or watch lectures from him, it becomes evident he is probably a bit autistic with his obsession about combating the western lies about Stalin and the USSR. On top of all that, he repeatedly claims he isn’t actually a communist. He just wants to report the facts and evidence as truthfully as he can.
Yes, he’s also cool guy in person. very pedantic in a humorous way, you’d almost mistake him as a trot.
Also a sort of role-model for myself as an amateur historiographer that never academically studied sovietology and is approaching it from outside the ivory tower of cold war warriors
As far as I’ve seen it’s just libs who are desperate to smear him. It’s embrassing having your only talking points dismantled with primary sources.
I know virtually nothing about him and haven’t read his works. It seems he and Losurdo knew each other.
Grover Furr, 2018: In Memoriam Domenico Losurdo
Tangentially related
Not trying to undermine his work,
lol. lmao
They say that right after essentially degrading him in the title (calling anyone an apologist and denier of anything implies something bad).
I HATE redditors so much…
