> Reading and reviewing clean history is really so much nicer.
You can have both with git and it's not even hard. Unfortunately it seems many people pride themselves in what little they know of git. I'm not being sarcastic, I've read people say this almost word-for-word.
git is a means, not an end
commits mean precisely what their author intend them to mean, nothing more
if you squash-merge every PR then history is clean where it matters
To quote my least favourite HN response: "No."
Such developers should be condemned to work with CVS until they repent for their sinful statements.