I haven’t read any of his books, though I have read everything he’s posted online (that I’m aware of). My issue isn’t necessarily with his methodology so much as his motivated reasoning—though you’re completely right that liberal historians don’t do any better, so maybe I should be more charitable.
Every time i read someone bashing Furr, it’s never anything substantial, always something like you did “he’s a meme” or the most popular “he’s a medieval historian therefore his thesis on another period are invalid”. They made him a meme using their complete control over academia because they can’t refute him, while at the same time i seen “leftists” cite long debunked or completely outrageous lies of Montefiore or Pipes. Hell, in Poland of all countries, Furr is met with complete and universal damnatio memoriae from all media and all academia, if you still don’t believe it’s not accidental.
I haven’t read any of his books, though I have read everything he’s posted online (that I’m aware of). My issue isn’t necessarily with his methodology so much as his motivated reasoning—though you’re completely right that liberal historians don’t do any better, so maybe I should be more charitable.
Every time i read someone bashing Furr, it’s never anything substantial, always something like you did “he’s a meme” or the most popular “he’s a medieval historian therefore his thesis on another period are invalid”. They made him a meme using their complete control over academia because they can’t refute him, while at the same time i seen “leftists” cite long debunked or completely outrageous lies of Montefiore or Pipes. Hell, in Poland of all countries, Furr is met with complete and universal damnatio memoriae from all media and all academia, if you still don’t believe it’s not accidental.
Fair enough: it was wrong of me to use ‘citing Furr’ as a per se negative thing. The rest, I think, stands.