| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| PJK |
Posted - 10/16/2006 : 8:14:10 PM
OK, I come home and get on my computer to read my emails. There is one from a political group I support called VoteNoWar.org.
So there is information on upcoming antiwar protests and I see a place selling "gear" and expecting to see shirts with NO WAR slogans I click on it. There they are, the damned fucking Che Tee-Shirts! I go ballistic, sending an email to the organization telling them they should research who they put on their shirts!
I know people are very pro Che, TR apparently being one of them naming a song after him, but I don't give a shit. I am so pissed and damn it people need to know that guy was NO wonderful revolutionary!
I know people who barely escaped Cuba with their lives and Che tortured many of their friends and family members!
PLEASE don't wear those shirts! You might just as well wear a shirt praising Hitler as wear one with Che on it!
The following is from an article I found on line that is well written and factual. I will list the web page so you can read the whole article if you feel so inclined. This is NOT where I base my understandings of Che from, but is one site that I feel is worthy of reading. The internet is not always the best place to find honest information, but this is the easiest way for me to convey my message!
I am sorry if I offend anyone with this, but I have had enough! The email today was the last straw for me!
From the article:
Guevara played a key role in bringing to Cuba the Soviet nuclear-armed ballistic missiles that precipitated the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962. During an interview with the British newspaper Daily Worker some weeks later, he stated that, if the missiles had been under Cuban control, they would have fired them against major U.S. cities.[30]
Though he has been labeled by some as a hero, opponents of Guevara, including most of the Cuban exile community as well as refugees from other countries under communism, view him as a killer and terrorist. New York Sun writer, Williams Myers, labels Che as a “sociopathic thug”. Other US newspaper critics have made similar remarks. These critics point out that Che Guevara was "personally responsible" for the torture and execution of hundreds of people in Cuban prisons, and the murder of many more peasants in the regions controlled or visited by his guerrilla forces. They also believe that Guevara was a blundering tactician, not a revolutionary genius, who has not one recorded combat victory. Some critics also believe that Che failed medical school in Argentina and that there is no evidence he actually ever earned a medical degree. [3] ,[4], [5], [6], [7], ,[9] Guevara founded Cuba’s forced labor camp system, establishing its first forced labor camp in Guanahacabibes to re-educate managers of state-owned enterprises who were guilty of various violations of "revolutionary ethics".[76] Many years after Guevara’s death, Cuba’s labor camp system was used to jail dissidents of the Revolution.
In 2005, after Carlos Santana wore a Che shirt to the Academy Awards Ceremony, Cuban-born musician Paquito D’Rivera wrote an open letter castigating Santana for supporting "The Butcher of the Cabaña." The Cabaña is the name of a prison where Guevara oversaw the execution of many dissidents, including D’Rivera’s own cousin, who, according to D’Rivera, was imprisoned there for being a Christian and witnessed the executions of many Christians at the prison.[77]
Detractors argue that while much propaganda depicts him as a formidable warrior, Guevara was a poor tactician. Empirically, Guevara was a failure at managing the Cuban economy, as he "oversaw the near-collapse of sugar production, the failure of industrialization, and the introduction of rationing-all this in what had been one of Latin America’s four most economically successful countries since before the Batista dictatorship."[78][79]
In "The Cult of Che",[80] writer Paul Berman critiques the film The Motorcycle Diaries and argues "that modern-day cult of Che" obscures the "tremendous social struggle" currently taking place in Cuba. For example, the article discusses the jailing of dissidents, such as poet and journalist Raúl Rivero, who was eventually freed after worldwide pressure due to a campaign of solidarity by the International Committee for Democracy in Cuba[81] which included Václav Havel, Lech Wa#322;#281;sa, Árpád Göncz, Elena Bonner and others. Berman claims that in the U.S., where Motorcycle Diaries received standing ovations at the Sundance film festival, the adoration of Che has caused Americans to overlook the plight of dissident Cubans. Although most of the criticism of Guevara and his legacy emanates from the political center or right-wing, there has also been criticism from other political groups such as anarchists and civil libertarians, some of whom consider Guevara an authoritarian, whose goal was the creation of a more bureaucratic state-Stalinist regime.[82]
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=13777
|
| 16 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Fluffy |
Posted - 11/01/2006 : 5:52:22 PM
Heard today that there is a movie being made about Che with Benecio Del Toro in the lead role. Not sure what aspect of his life it will focus on but I think it's more about the revolutionary Che than the Che they covered in the Motorcycle Diarys. |
| Fluffy |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 07:21:10 AM
So would TR, but I think he would opt for Sumatra. hehe |
| Ranting Thespian |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 12:33:31 AM
The Dali Lama has to be the happiest man on the planet. He also just cracks joke after joke. I would just love to one day just sit down with him, have a cup of tea, and talk. |
| Robin |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 11:58:56 AM
How could I have forgotten the DL!? yes, another true visionary of our TIMes. Peace, Robin |
| tericee |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 07:51:31 AM
I will definitely add both of those (MLK and Dalai Lama) to my preferred t-shirt list! |
| Fluffy |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 04:19:25 AM
quote:
I don't think anyone else in my lifeTIMe has ever been so selfless in their vision, and really truly believed it could happen until it began to unravel.
There's always TR's fave, the Dali Lama! |
| Robin |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 9:32:09 PM
And yet there are issues with Malcolm for some people too, mostly concerning the early years. Good heroes are hard to find. I'll stick with Martin Luther King Jr.as one of my fave heroes. I don't think anyone else in my lifeTIMe has ever been so selfless in their vision, and really truly believed it could happen until it began to unravel. His speeches still bring me to tears. Good thread though, thanks to all of you who posted all the info. It's such an informative board. Peace, Robin |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 2:45:46 PM
Malcolm X was the man. Listen to some of his final speeches, pure poetry. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 12:49:20 PM
I like Malcolm X a lot myself, because he made the switch over from a violent doctrine, to a relatively peaceful and inclusive one.
Everything posted was extremely interesting and informative, thanks for finding the articles and posting them everybody. |
| tericee |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 11:26:16 AM
I agree with you Pam! I would gladly wear a t-shirt with Mother Teresa, Ghandi, or Jesus Christ if I wanted to make the statement those wearing Che *thing* they are making!
All of them were revolutionary in their own way -- and they didn't kill anybody in the process! |
| PJK |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 07:01:30 AM
Hey Fluffy, dan, Nick, and Zach, I just want to say I am happy you guys read what I wrote. I don't expect everyone to agree with me and I have read the reasons people think of him as a symbol of revolution, but what is most important is to speak out about what you believe. I am ashamed that it took me so long to realize that I shouldn't remain silent on things that I find so deplorable.
There was a time not too long ago, when I posted about this topic and got a lot of negative responses and Fluffy kindly deletely what I had written at my request. Part of that was because I felt it was getting into an attack of TR's song, not Che himself and I don't want to attack any artists work.
Last week I met (and bonded with) a woman who is willing to say what she thinks even though she gets daily death threats from people who have the means to carry them out. I can no longer keep that which I am passionate about inside.
This board is a great place to speak ones mind and not get responses from idiots. I do have respect for the opinions of those who expressed them here, and I celebrate the fact that we can in fact, share our opinions.
You are right Fluffy, you didn't and can't change my mind on how I feel about Che. I know first hand what he did. Look at Cuba now and tell me that after Castro took over he was so much better than Batista. I don't think so. My point exactly. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 03:03:23 AM
as far as those symbols go, those symbols being che's face and the american flag, i'd have to agree with zach. for instance. i like america. i do, really. the rights we're supposed, as set forth in the constitution, and i like philosophies that guided the original, constitutional set up of government. the way it's outlined in the constitution anyway, i think america is pretty damn good. but that doesn't mean i love every goddamn thing america does. in fact, right now, shit's pretty disappointing. i don't know about you, but i liked habeus corpus. and i liked it when the head of the executive branch didn't believe it was his job, as the "decider," to interpret law. i would go so far as to say that all that is not america at all. but maybe you don't like america. that's fine, too. i mean, your sort of stuck here, not much you can do about that, but you don't have to like it. ideally, there's no punishment for that. ideally.
it's the same sort of thing with che. he doesn't mean anything to me one way or another, but people like his ideals. they're not huge fans of everything he did. but just like me liking america, you don't have to approve of everything he does to like what he stood for. |
| Ranting Thespian |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 01:40:05 AM
I will prefer to stay nuetral on this subject. I am not sure what to believe, and what not to believe. I also watched the Motorcycle Diaries without knowing who Che was, so I really just focused on the directing of the film which was beautiful. Also when I hear Tim's song, I just listen to the music (which you have to say is good). I will also continue to wear my shirts with John Lennon on them, which I think all of us on these boards can agree on :) . |
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 01:36:49 AM
Pam not sure who stole from who but check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che_Guevera
Look under criticism. It's the exact same thing word for word as the article.
Here's a quote from Murray Rothbard I found interesting.
“What made Che such an heroic figure for our time is that he, more than any man of our epoch or even of our century, was the living embodiment of the principle of Revolution. More than any man since the lovable but entirely ineffectual nineteenth-century Russian anarchist, Mikhail Bakunin, Che earned the title of ‘professional revolutionary.’ And furthermore, to paraphrase Christopher Jencks in a recent perceptive, if wrongheaded, article in the New Republic, we all knew that his enemy was our enemy — that great Colossus that oppresses and threatens all the peoples of the world, U.S. imperialism.”
Basically I'm not going to defend Che the man or his actions in regard to the torture and execution. However I think the reason people wear his face is because his face simply symbolizes the fight against imperialism. Like Fluffy had said he was a guy who continually turned down power and wealth and instead fought for revolution in many countries in which he saw opression.
Personally when seen in the light of his face isn't meant to represent or celebrate Che the man as much as Che the ideal I would say that there's nothing more wrong with that then someone flying an american flag. The US as a country is a murderous, imperial POS in a lot of ways, but we tend to fly the flag to celebrate the ideal of the country and all that. I mean just because you fly the american flag doesn't mean you agree that Vietnam was a good idea or Iraq or funding the Contras or whatever other atrocities you'd like to insert. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 10/16/2006 : 11:37:48 PM
also, a lot of people wear shirts with che on them because they're in hot topic and don't necessarily know who in the blue fuck che is. they just see other people wearing the shirt. oh, if you ask them they'll say "it's che" and possibly call you one of the "sheeple." dipshits, in other words. they understand that he's associated with revolution, but really, that's it. people here on the board don't fall into that category, but most people do. i'd be willing to bet that a) the hot topic people wouldn't read those articles and b) if they read and understood them, some might not wear the shirts. but as it is, we got pictures of che being sold at a chain store for people who want to rebel safely in a capitalist country. go figure.
and if he did really say "shoot, coward, you're only going to kill a man" then, if nothing else, you have to submit that he had balls roughtly the size of our sun. |
| Fluffy |
Posted - 10/16/2006 : 9:19:42 PM
Hey PJK, I understand and respect your opinion of the Che. From your personal experience it sounds as though there is no reason to idolize this man. I found an article that does alot to explain plausibly why so many anti-establishment youth might hold up his picture or wear a shirt by him. I know it will still not justify it to you and I don't expect it to but I thought it might help you understand why SOME look up to him despite the atrocities he is also responsible for. As well as the Che you know, he also forsaked his priviledged upbringing and his home to fight for what he saw as downtrodden of the earth. I know this doesn't justify his acts against humanity, but as the article below points out so many are willing to overlook that as they search for a symbol of someone who stands up for the oppressed. Unfortunately it seems it is at the same TIMe as opressing others. Just offering up to help you possibly better understand WHY people see him they way they do. Maybe they aren't looking at the WHOLE picture. I certainly don't expect you to agree or change your mind but I wanted to try and help you understand others possible views on it. PEACE
As Che Guevara has become well known, he has achieved a cult status and is an icon of revolution (or just youthful rebellion). Guevara's status as a popular icon symbolizing revolution and left-wing political ideals has continued thoughout the world. During the shift to the left in Latin American politics in recent years, the image of Che has continued to represent the ideals of anti-imperialism and revolutionary liberation that permeate the region.
From TIME Magazine:
Monday, June 14, 1999
By the time Ernesto Guevara, known to us as Che, was murdered in the jungles of Bolivia in October 1967, he was already a legend to my generation, not only in Latin America but also around the world.
Like so many epics, the story of the obscure Argentine doctor who abandoned his profession and his native land to pursue the emancipation of the poor of the earth began with a voyage. In 1956, along with Fidel Castro and a handful of others, he had crossed the Caribbean in the rickety yacht Granma on the mad mission of invading Cuba and overthrowing the dictator Fulgencio Batista. Landing in a hostile swamp, losing most of their contingent, the survivors fought their way to the Sierra Maestra. A bit over two years later, after a guerrilla campaign in which Guevara displayed such outrageous bravery and skill that he was named comandante, the insurgents entered Havana and launched what was to become the first and only victorious socialist revolution in the Americas. The images were thereafter invariably gigantic. Che the titan standing up to the Yanquis, the world's dominant power. Che the moral guru proclaiming that a New Man, no ego and all ferocious love for the other, had to be forcibly created out of the ruins of the old one. Che the romantic mysteriously leaving the revolution to continue, sick though he might be with asthma, the struggle against oppression and tyranny.
His execution in Vallegrande at the age of 39 only enhanced Guevara's mythical stature. That Christ-like figure laid out on a bed of death with his uncanny eyes almost about to open; those fearless last words ("Shoot, coward, you're only going to kill a man") that somebody invented or reported; the anonymous burial and the hacked-off hands, as if his killers feared him more after he was dead than when he had been alive: all of it is scalded into the mind and memory of those defiant times. He would resurrect, young people shouted in the late '60s; I can remember fervently proclaiming it in the streets of Santiago, Chile, while similar vows exploded across Latin America. !No lo vamos a olvidar! We won't let him be forgotten.
More than 30 years have passed, and the dead hero has indeed persisted in collective memory, but not exactly in the way the majority of us would have anticipated. Che has become ubiquitous: his figure stares out at us from coffee mugs and posters, jingles at the end of key rings and jewelry, pops up in rock songs and operas and art shows. This apotheosis of his image has been accompanied by a parallel disappearance of the real man, swallowed by the myth. Most of those who idolize the incendiary guerrilla with the star on his beret were born long after his demise and have only the sketchiest knowledge of his goals or his life. Gone is the generous Che who tended wounded enemy soldiers, gone is the vulnerable warrior who wanted to curtail his love of life lest it make him less effective in combat and gone also is the darker, more turbulent Che who signed orders to execute prisoners in Cuban jails without a fair trial.
This erasure of complexity is the normal fate of any icon. More paradoxical is that the humanity that worships Che has by and large turned away from just about everything he believed in. The future he predicted has not been kind to his ideals or his ideas. Back in the '60s, we presumed that his self-immolation would be commemorated by social action, the downtrodden rising against the system and creating — to use Che's own words — two, three, many Vietnams. Thousands of luminous young men, particularly in Latin America, followed his example into the hills and were slaughtered there or tortured to death in sad city cellars, never knowing that their dreams of total liberation, like those of Che, would not come true. If Vietnam is being imitated today, it is primarily as a model for how a society forged in insurrection now seeks to be actively integrated into the global market. Nor has Guevara's uncompromising, unrealistic style of struggle, or his ethical absolutism, prevailed. The major revolutions of the past quarter-century (South Africa, Iran, the Philippines, Nicaragua), not to mention the peaceful transitions to democracy in Latin America, East Asia and the communist world, have all entailed negotiations with former adversaries, a give and take that could not be farther from Che's unyielding demand for confrontation to the death. Even someone like Subcomandante Marcos, the spokesman for the Chiapas Maya revolt, whose charisma and moral stance remind us of Che's, does not espouse his hero's economic or military theories.
How to understand, then, Che Guevara's pervasive popularity, especially among the affluent young?
Perhaps in these orphaned times of incessantly shifting identities and alliances, the fantasy of an adventurer who changed countries and crossed borders and broke down limits without once betraying his basic loyalties provides the restless youth of our era with an optimal combination, grounding them in a fierce center of moral gravity while simultaneously appealing to their contemporary nomadic impulse. To those who will never follow in his footsteps, submerged as they are in a world of cynicism, self-interest and frantic consumption, nothing could be more vicariously gratifying than Che's disdain for material comfort and everyday desires. One might suggest that it is Che's distance, the apparent impossibility of duplicating his life anymore, that makes him so attractive. And is not Che, with his hippie hair and wispy revolutionary beard, the perfect postmodern conduit to the nonconformist, seditious '60s, that disruptive past confined to gesture and fashion? Is it conceivable that one of the only two Latin Americans to make it onto TIME's 100 most important figures of the century can be comfortably transmogrified into a symbol of rebellion precisely because he is no longer dangerous?
I wouldn't be too sure. I suspect that the young of the world grasp that the man whose poster beckons from their walls cannot be that irrelevant, this secular saint ready to die because he could not tolerate a world where los pobres de la tierra, the displaced and dislocated of history, would be eternally relegated to its vast margins.
Even though I have come to be wary of dead heroes and the overwhelming burden their martyrdom imposes on the living, I will allow myself a prophecy. Or maybe it is a warning. More than 3 billion human beings on this planet right now live on less than $2 a day. And every day that breaks, 40,000 children — more than one every second! — succumb to diseases linked to chronic hunger. They are there, always there, the terrifying conditions of injustice and inequality that led Che many decades ago to start his journey toward that bullet and that photo awaiting him in Bolivia.
The powerful of the earth should take heed: deep inside that T shirt where we have tried to trap him, the eyes of Che Guevara are still burning with impatience.
Ariel Dorfman holds the Walter Hines Page Chair at Duke University. His latest novel is The Nanny and the Iceberg
http://www.time.com/time/time100/heroes/profile/guevara01.html |
|
|
