theory

I see this more often, the "cherry-pick/strawman" accusation. Can you elaborate more? I often think that it's a disagreement with method moreso than a well landed hit on his works. I think that because his methodology is very much empirical, looking exactly for how cases in reality played out, and then afterwards he starts searching for which ideological support existed for that case at the time. He prioritizes the empirical side, and picks the Marx/Engels/Lenin/Gramsci quote that he supposes supported it.

I guess in other words, do you see him doing the same "cherry picking and strawmanning" in his hit pieces on Liberalism? Because that's the book that made me understand his method and made his work method in general clear.

I don't mean this confrontationally, I really want to know. If the tone seems that way, it's my English, sorry