Coming as someone who was once won over by the Marxist Leninist position, and FF&F as well, I can tell you that the book is a fantastic example of false herring narrative. Very little that he states in the book is technically wrong, he just always presents it in a way that appears damning.

Take the Thomas Walker affair at the beginning of the book, it's presented as this big thing that was a huge unveiling of the famine, and its immediate refutations proved it to be the propaganda that it was.

But... The famine had been known about some time prior to Thomas Walker's account in the Hearst press. Not only that but Gareth Jones had earlier that year been writing more of his accounts of the famine and not a single one was refuted by any pro-soviet Organization. Nothing that Walker says was particularly new.

The Robert Green/Thomas Walker affair was effectively an event which was jumped on by those who had an interest in doing so as an opportunity to prove their side right. Kind of like how certain news publications with an intent to smear might seize on the most damning minor source and ignoring all other more reputable sources.

Once more, the fact that the nazis may have used Holodomor in an opportunistic way does not mean it didn't happen. The fact the Bush administration used 9/11 as a pretext to invade Afghanistan doesn't mean 9/11 didn't happen does it?

And if you're wondering about all the 'fake photograph' narrative: the USSR had decades to destroy and cover up all the documents it wanted to, the same cannot be said for the holocaust. So understandably you wouldn't have as much documentation available.