Help me dissect this and shine some light on it...

[NiK]

I have been reading many things, and have just recently had to re-instate to myself the reason why I follow Communism so intensely, and the reasons why I have defended it so passionately when I had to.

Thank goodness that I managed to stay Red so to speak. :thumbup1:


So I need some help, because I know some of this seems too unreasonable to be true --Dissect this article for me!!

(since I can't post links, simply type in "150 Prisoners killed by che" into google, and click on the first find -- thats the article I speak of)

And please do tell me some of it is either propaganda, nonsensical, or etc. :o

[Luisrah]

I can't find the article you speak of.

But every revolutionaire must have a flaw in the eyes of the capitalists, so that they can keep their regime, and maintain things as they are.

Even if you pick the most saint revolutionaire, that thinks that everything should be solved peacefully, they'll still find flaws in it.
Che Guevara was no different.

Sure some may say he was violent, or whatever, but he was violent to who only understood things with violence. He wasn't violent to the innocents.

Here's a quote:

“I have yet to find a single credible source pointing to a case where Che executed “an innocent. Those persons executed by Guevara or on his orders were condemned for the usual crimes punishable by death at times of war or in its aftermath: desertion, treason or crimes such as rape, torture or murder.”
~ The Legacy of Che Guevara” at PBS Online Newshour Forum (20 November 1997)
John Lee Anderson

[NiK]

Awh alright.
Thanks for the response though. :)

Just to point out since you didn't find it, it was on some CubaNet website. Could be just silly old me falling for the nonsense. :P :)
It was intensely degrading.

[Kukulofori]

I wouldn't trust anything from a site that makes it its stated purpose to slander the Cuban revolution.

[NiK]

That's what I thought myself. :D

[The Ungovernable Farce]

Do you mean this? http://www.cubanet.org/CNews/y09/enero09/23_O_3.html (BTW, this thread is now the #1 result for "150 prisoners killed by Che").
I would stress that being a communist doesn't mean you have to defend everything done by anyone who's ever called themselves a communist. Whatever you think of Che, it's still the case that Cuba today has nothing to do with genuine communism, no matter how much Castro may try to deny it; if we actually want to defend communism, we should be stressing how much it differs from the visions of Stalin/Mao/Castro, etc, etc, not trying to whitewash their crimes.

[NiK]

Yes that's the article.

Of course of course.
I agree completely that we should focus on the true Communism. I just wanted some clarification on that article which to me seemed to be patched together with either many negative things which were true, or just pure propaganda.

The idea of defending, or trying to enlighten others on Che and Co. only shows a lack of better symbolism for Communism as a whole, as the most notable symbols (Hammer and Sickle, portrait of Che, etc.) are the easiest to use the majority of the time. I guess you could say I've fallen into that category of laziness only slightly.

[Luisrah]

However, while not whitewashing their ''crimes'', we can atleast point out the true ones and fake ones.

They say Stalin killed 40 or 50 million people, they say that Mao killed 70 million, and that Che Guevara murdered innocents, was blood thirsty and just wanted to kill anyone and that Castro is a dictator.
We're not gonna whitewash them, but we should atleast remove the capitalist layer of lies.

Stalin didn't kill 50 million people, I don't know about Mao, but I'm sure he didn't kill 70 million, Che Guevara didn't kill for nothing,(even considered to be the most complete human being of his time by Jean Paul Sartre) in his guerrila books he even advised releasing non political prisoners because they could be won to their side, and Castro isn't a dictator either.

Because if one doesn't understand that most of the info he gets from ''normal'' sources have the capitalist layer over them.

[NiK]

Mao's "kill count" always has the Great Chinese Famine included. Any reason his numbers are high according to capitalist sources are because of something which could be considered as a natural disaster (which is was, as well as an agricultural accident) is considered, by the bourgeois, a fault of Mao and Mao only.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Wow, that article goes to laughable lengths to demonize Che. I mean, they dedicated quite a lot of space to accusing him of bad personal hygiene for God's sake! That's just... no comment. :rolleyes: What next? Che had bad breath? Che had an unhealthy smoking habit?

The problem with capitalist attacks on communism is that they hold the communists to ludicrously high standards. ZOMG Che shot people!!! Well, yeah, he did. So, what? Capitalists shot many, many more people. Capitalists routinely start imperialist wars that murder millions of innocents (I'm sorry, I mean, "collateral damage") and they dare complain when it's their turn to reap what they've sown?

The highest sections of the bourgeoisie contain a large number of murderous, exploitative, sadistic sociopaths. This is because the capitalist system promotes such character traits, and people who possess them tend to rise to the top. If these people should happen to find themselves lined up against a wall during the revolution, then I'd say justice has been done.