Che Guevara, Fidel Castro and Cuba

[etiennel]

Hello, comrades, this is my first post here.

I was wondering how you would usually respond to some one saying rubbish like "Che Guevara was a racist, homophobic murderer!!" I have read a page debunking the racist part, however how would you respond to the homophobic and murderer?

I have also heard similar ideas about Castro. How would you respond to that.

Finally how do you prove to anti-communists/socialists (not sure if Cuba is communist or socialist??) that Cuba has actually been relatively successful under communism/socialism?

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

[mushroompizza]

Well Che was briefly racist in his youth but outgrew it to the extent that he fought for black liberation. Homophobic, yea, he created and ran a nation that put gays in work camps. "Murderer" uhh... He was a killer he killed many in combat, ordered executions and personal executions. Castro idk about racist but him and Che put gay ppl in camps, pretty homophobic, he also killed ppl in battle and in ordered executions. Cuba is better but not good, if your house was full of trash and you removed a broken bottle its not exactly clean. Poverty is everywhere, corruption is daily, and theft is part of the culture, the only thing that changed is blacks are equal to the same abuse as whites.

[John Nada]

Hello, comrades, this is my first post here.

I was wondering how you would usually respond to some one saying rubbish like "Che Guevara was a racist, homophobic murderer!!" I have read a page debunking the racist part, however how would you respond to the homophobic and murderer?Unfortunately, many leftists aren't immune to the bigotry of society as a whole. Many on left had a horribly incorrect homophobic and transphobic line that homosexuality was unnatural "bourgeois decadence". However it's actually the opposite, with LGBTQ people being super-exploited, and homophobia/transphobia upheld by capitalism and spread through imperialism, disproportionately affecting the proletariat. I think that had Che(and other leftist like Marx and Engels) lived today they'd support queer liberation. The Cuban Communist Party and Castro himself later self-criticized their early homophobia and transphobia, and have taken steps to combat these forms of oppression.

On racism, he gave his life for oppressed black/indigenous people. He fought racism the permeated Cuba. His actions against racism and imperialism speak louder than some racist remarks when he was younger.

As for being a murder. Murder is unlawful killing. Che didn't kill anyone that didn't have it coming. Armed combatants, torturers, rapists and war criminals are fair game. People die in war, sad but that's how it is.
I have also heard similar ideas about Castro. How would you respond to that.Pretty much the same. Revolutions are bloody affairs. A lot of people even on the left were bigots in the 50's and 60's. Cuba's probably more progressive on race, gender and sexuality than much of the US.
Finally how do you prove to anti-communists/socialists (not sure if Cuba is communist or socialist??) that Cuba has actually been relatively successful under communism/socialism?

Thank you for taking the time to read this.Unfortunately Cuba hasn't achieved socialism/communism yet, and the "reforms" going on are moving them towards capitalism. They have a progressive state, but there's only so much Cuba can do alone. To achieve socialism/communism it's got to be a global system. Cuba's been trying to build up socialism as much as they could've, but they've been trapped in a economic blockade for over 60 years, costing them possibly hundreds of billions that could've gone a long way.

If you compare any country to the US(who has the advantage an imperialist empire to prop up the economy), any country not going to match that. However, compared to other non-imperialist nations under capitalism, like Honduras, Cuba has a high quality of life by many measurements. If Batista were still in charge, Cuba would probably be mired in dire poverty.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

He was homophobic, but some people act as if the rest of the world in the 1950s and '60s wasn't. Most of the Left internationally was homophobic during that time. So was the US and Europe.

[Antiochus]

If Batista were still in charge, Cuba would probably be mired in dire poverty.

Cuba is mired in deep poverty, hence the "market reforms". And don't blurt some shit about healthcare or whatever. Cuba, for several reasons, the embargo being one though imo not the most pertinent, has an average health-care system that is on the high end of Latin America but neo-liberal Chile has a higher life expectancy. The fetish some leftists have with statistics out of context (and I am not directing this at you) often lead them to support dictatorships like Cuba "because at least the poor have it ok there".

I think one ought to be critical. Expanding access to healthcare, while a great thing, is hardly mitigation of state repression. Suharto greatly increased life expectancy in Indonesia, you know when he wasn't butchering people in E.Timor.

[G4b3n]

The "man of his time argument" is shit and apologia. He was a homophobe, take his good work and practice for what its worth and understand and disregard the bad.
Also, many revolutionaries were murderers including the progressive bourgeois revolutionaries that liberals defend who were constantly cutting royal throats. So that argument is shit from any angle.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

The "man of his time argument" is shit and apologia.
It's certainly disappointing when revolutionaries don't recognize that their own prejudices are socially constructed, but it's somewhat understandable in the context of the Left as a whole being homophobic during that era.

[G4b3n]

It's certainly disappointing when revolutionaries don't recognize that their own prejudices are socially constructed, but it's somewhat understandable in the context of the Left as a whole being homophobic during that era.

Not all of them. The vast majority yes, but there were a small minority who weren't, a few of them made an issue of the homophobic laws continuing under Lenin. So it was possible to not be a homophobe pre-1960s.

[etiennel]

So I've established that they basically were homophobic, but it was a societal influence of the time. Fair enough, but still one of their weaknesses. I think instead of trying to cover it up we should be openly critical about this. I think if Che was alive today he would be anti-homophobic.

[Comrade Jacob]

Well Che was briefly racist in his youth but outgrew it to the extent that he fought for black liberation. Homophobic, yea, he created and ran a nation that put gays in work camps. "Murderer" uhh... He was a killer he killed many in combat, ordered executions and personal executions. Castro idk about racist but him and Che put gay ppl in camps, pretty homophobic, he also killed ppl in battle and in ordered executions. Cuba is better but not good, if your house was full of trash and you removed a broken bottle its not exactly clean. Poverty is everywhere, corruption is daily, and theft is part of the culture, the only thing that changed is blacks are equal to the same abuse as whites.

Put gay people in camps? There where no "camps" in Cuba. Do you have a source? No?

[Comrade Jacob]

Fidel and Che among others are great people. Massive strides in all areas of life have come about because of the revolution.

[Antiochus]

Put gay people in camps? There where no "camps" in Cuba. Do you have a source? No?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Cuba

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinaldo_Arenas

There were labor camps set up to separate gays from society. If you want to call those "re-education camps" to correct "deviancy", its up to you; just know that it is apologia for it.

[Culicarius]

Racist in his youth, but as said before it was something he outgrew. Pretty sure after his tour of South America is when that changed, well before he ever took up arms.

I've read some things regarding homosexuality, from just indiscriminately punishing gays, to only taking action against prisoners who he disliked and -also- happened to be gay. On one hand, hating homosexuality was the norm, so it's possible he went with it as to not lose support. On the other hand, that's bullshit and inexcusable. I'd like to think Che wasn't actually homophobic and concluded he couldn't openly support it without alienating a large portion of people. That doesn't excuse how he treated them of course, just explains it.