Furr claims not to support Stalin but is combatting specious claims against him because of their anticommunist implications. However, he seems quite too sanguine about him.
Some of what he has written is quite good, like his criticism of Radosh's book on the Spanish civil war, and in general his material is much better quality than that or Tottle or Martens or other current Stalinphiles. However, on some issues he doesn't know what he is talking about.for example, He supports Douglas Tottle's argument in his book on the famine of the early 1930s (in fact, the guy who hosts the book online told me Furr scanned it and sent it to him http://www.rationalrevolution.net/special/library/famine.htm). While correctly arguing that the Soviet Union didn't deliberately inflict a famine, it argues that none of it can be attributed to their incompetent and brutal implementation of policies and can be completely attributed to pre-existing epidemics, bad weather, and Kulak sabotage (an example of the logic - document a case of saboteurs killing livestock and give a figure on the entire decline of livestock, attributing it to that rather than the famine itself!). >>Montclair State University: Grover Furr > > Yes, this is a real person and that is his name. He is one of the most > unabashed defenders of Stalin in the past 25 years. Somehow I doubt that > he > has much influence at Montclair State.<< > > Comment > > Gee . . . I thought I had that distinction as an "unreconstructed > Stalinist" > as you call it. Actually, Furr's material is pretty good. > http://eserver.org/clogic/2005/furr.html > > > Waistline > > >
