Are Domenico Losurdo's books misleading?
I often see his books recommended online, but having reading Stalin: History and Critique of a Black Legend and Western Marxism, a few things stuck out to me. Firstly, Stalin seems to be more of a discussion of how the common narrative given is misleading, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the discussion itself will answer all questions. As a matter of fact, I recall that on the question of the Katyn Massacre, he addressed it by comparison to a separate event rather than going into the details of the event itself and I also recall that Grover Furr had questioned the validity of the narrative of that event, though I haven't read that book yet.
In his book on Western Marxism, he discusses how the Frankfurt School and the works of Slavoj Zizek and Hannah Arendt are misleading, but he seemed to put a lot of focus in his discussion on colonial violence without much discussion on the economic base, and he also had a chapter on how, in his view, Chinese culture is more revolutionary because it is not influenced by Christianity. I also recall him saying something about the adaptation of Buddhism to Chinese culture. Would I be right in thinking that his writing style is misleading, especially in the case of the latter work?