Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
"my professor made me learn about my own country's barbarism!"
"He was anti American during the class about the time we tried to exterminate the brutes in Vietnam!"
" He said we could read Hansel and Gretel and have warm milk and cookies but tricked us and forced us to read Heart of Darkness!"
these are deeply unserious people and I wish the bottom left one in particular a very join the Marines and drown in the red sea
Edit :just saw that one was in 2007 but my sentiments still stand.
guy who learns about abu ghraib and thinks it's good 
There are genuine academic critiques to be made of some of Furr's work. "He made me learn America bad" and "he made me learn about pirates and communism" aren't them.
Yes. J Arch Getty - a legit Soviet historian who is a lib but is still very fair to Stalin IMO and generally very USSR-friendly - once said that Furr understands the material in the archives, but he just comes to really weird conclusions.
I think Furr is fine as long as you know you’re getting an apologist more than a historian. There’s a place for that. Furr himself admittedly (on the Proles pod) he thinks Stalin did nothing wrong. If you approach history from that angle you’re going to have blind spots. IMO skip Furr and go to Losurdo.
if it's not "plain text" he will send your essay back
Anti-Formatting Aktion
based
you can format .txt files pretty nicely if you're not a dweeb, skill issue imo
He actually does go off topic quite a bit. But it's 100% worth going down whatever rabbithole he goes on an adventure on.
10/10, if you get a chance to talk with him and pick his brain on random early soviet history topics, you should.
Furr's Natopedia page is wild. The very first line:
Grover Carr Furr III (born April 3, 1944) is an American professor of Medieval English literature at Montclair State University who is best known for his revisionist views regarding the Soviet Union and Joseph Stalin.
And the edit history is a war zone. The 2 most recent changes are someone rewording a sentence to make it less biased:
| before | after |
|---|---|
| Furr has written books, papers, and articles about Soviet history, especially the Stalin era, in which he has stated that the Holodomor, the 1932–33 ~~government-created~~ famine in Soviet Ukraine, was not deliberate, describing it as a fiction created by pro-Nazi Ukrainian nationalists | Furr has written books, papers, and articles about Soviet history, especially the Stalin era, in which he has stated that the Holodomor, the 1932–33 famine in Soviet Ukraine, was not deliberate, describing the story of it being deliberate as a fiction created by pro-Nazi Ukrainian nationalists |
with edit summary Word correction - could have previously be interpreted as famine denial, made the language less biased.. Within 4 minutes, it was undone, with edit summary Previous version appeared more neutral.
Of course fucking Mzajac/Michael Z is on that page. He defends pro-Western narratives about Ukraine all over Wikipedia.
Mzajac is such a fucking asshole to every editor he interacts with. He's been pulled into ANI so many times, and people are like "why is he still an admin". I do think that the war in Ukraine broke his brain tho, since he's been so much more unhinged and aggressive since then.
i too had a history teacher who went on wild tangents with the smallest provocation
he was a stinking lib though 
I had a history prof go on a class long tangent about how communists were evil because Marx said religion is the opiate of the masses. I, being a cringe atheist at the time thought "damn that's cool af, this Marx guy is spitting" and I think that was the general consensus of the class.
Geography professor however started day one with a lecture on why Mercator, and most other map projections are racist, and told us that he wasn't listening to any complaints about saying that from anyone white.