Sure but lots of people have superficial attachments to phrases they pick up online. I’ve just seen a lot of incoherent/bad irony-mixed-with-sincerity posting and I give people a shot across the bow first. If the followup to being debunked is more playing dumb then you know.

It’s not like everyone visiting the site can remember how to counter this story. Keep in mind Montefiore is a very mainstream historian so this will keep coming up. I’ve seen a lot of people fail to reply to this in full. It’s good to remind people about the extent to which the historians we don’t read make fallacious claims and how to approach them.

It’s a shame, because the entire debunk sort of exposes how desperate people were to heap lies on his legacy.

I really see the whole Lemmy/Reddit moderation strategy as a failed experiment but it hasn’t completely killed the sites at least. Extreme pruning down to seriously out of touch people.