Follow
corvids
how to summarise the work of an author who refuses to engage logically with their audience. wtf
i'm seriously pissed about this. a historian, refusing to do their research before commenting on history. who the hells gave this person their degree. but i'm also too stubborn to put this down without unpacking everything wrong about this. and as i can't understand what's being said, that may take a while
like seriously i can't parse a word they're saying it's buried behind so many layers of misinformation, false conclusions, and lack of research. this person is supposed to be a historian, but all they seem to be documenting is their own bias