Same answer as above: https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/25676408/14608182
I can also cite academic papers that apparently prove homeopathy works or, if time doesn’t matter, that lobotomy is worth a nobel prize. Doesn’t mean they ain’t of low quality / biased and pro-shit.
Where are you finding low-quality works being cited by MLs? I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but ML groups are infinitely more willing to engage in self-crit than liberals.
An example I had comments removed for was Liberalism: A counter history, that goes through the words, actions, and context of major liberal philosophers to define liberalism.
Also Life and Terror in Stalin’s Russia, because using real data to derive a nuanced understanding distracted from the USSR bad circle-jerk.
