Log in

View Full Version : Legacy Of Che



Hiero
23rd September 2004, 03:18
This was from ernesto-guevara forums. Althought i swear it had a link to the iraqi comunist party.


The Militant Communist Legacy of Ernesto Che Guevara
ERNESTO (Che) GUEVARA is a cult figure of the leftist youth all over the world. While nearly everyone on the left admires Guevara few really understand who he was and what he stood for. There has been an attempt on the part of wide circles of liberal leftists to convert Guevara into a harmless cultural icon. It is unfortunate that “Che” as understood by the liberal left is mainstream Che. The real Che Guevara is obscured from view and rendered harmless with this subtle liberal subversion.

Just like there is an attempt to make Faiz Ahmed Faiz into a “humanist” and to ignore his life-long affiliation with the communist movement, there is a similar attempt to render Che into “an idealistic rebellious young man.” Many young people are shocked to even hear that Che was a communist. They hear of him as a rebel but never as a communist rebel. They are even more shocked to find that Che abhorred anarchism, pacifism, liberalism, and all ‘non-hierarchical’ forms of organizations or resistance movements. In fact, Che was a strict (some even say overly strict) disciplinarian and an extremely exacting taskmaster. If anything he was the equivalent of the Latin American Jacobin for the communist movement.

Guevara was totally opposed to bourgeois individualism. In March of 1960, he declared that, "one has to constantly think on behalf of masses and not on behalf of individuals...It's criminal to think of individuals because the needs of the individual become completely weakened in the face of the needs of the human conglomeration." In August of 1964, Che postulated that the individual, "becomes happy to feel himself a cog in the wheel, a cog that has its own characteristics and is necessary though not indispensable, to the production process, a conscious cog, a cog that has its own motor, and that consciously tries to push itself harder and harder to carry to a happy conclusion one of the premises of the construction of socialism -- creating a sufficient quantity of consumer goods for the entire population."(Anderson, pp.470, 605)

And if that wasn’t enough to shock you about the person on your coffee mug or hip T-shirt, Che Guevara was an open admirer of Joseph Stalin. While traveling across Latin America Che witnessed first hand the awful exploitation of the continent by US imperialism and specifically the United Fruit Company. This experience made Guevara a supporter of the Soviet Union and Stalin. While traveling through Costa Rica he wrote to his aunt Beatriz telling her that he had sworn "before a picture of our, old much lamented comrade Stalin that I will not rest until I see these capitalist octopuses annihilated." Another letter to the same aunt was signed with the words "Stalin II." (p.62 and Anderson, p.167). Even after Khrushchev's so-called ‘revelations’ of Stalin's crimes at the 20th Congress, Che did not change his views about Stalin. In fact, when Guevara visited the USSR in his capacity as one of the most important leaders of the victorious Cuban revolution in November of 1960, he insisted on depositing a floral tribute at Stalin's tomb (p. 181).

NovelGentry
23rd September 2004, 04:02
Guevara was totally opposed to bourgeois individualism. In March of 1960, he declared that, "one has to constantly think on behalf of masses and not on behalf of individuals...It's criminal to think of individuals because the needs of the individual become completely weakened in the face of the needs of the human conglomeration."

Oh no!!! Let's not put all human kind before ourselves!

And that's all I really got to say about that. Che's admiration of Stalin I don't think at all reflects on what his own policies were, which is where the man is really defined. Take for example Stalin's attempt to isolate all interest of the communist struggle as an interest in the USSR -- it's representative of his nationalism, something Che obviously didn't have.

redstar2000
23rd September 2004, 06:02
There has been an attempt on the part of wide circles of liberal leftists to convert Guevara into a harmless cultural icon.

Old news...though some wannabe Leninist/Stalinist can be counted on to bring it up here at least once every six months or so.

Ask yourself this: were Che a young man now, where on the political spectrum would he most likely be found?

Do you really think he'd be on the sidewalk hawking some wretched sectarian tabloid extolling the virtues of "democratic" centralism and the need for "strong leaders"?

Or signing up with some Maoist guerrilla group in Colombia or Peru?

Che, like all of us, was a product of his times, his moment in history. He chose the best revolutionary group he could find...which wasn't "Stalinist" by the way.

To suggest that he might not have made different and better choices now is to simply "prop up his corpse" and "worship it".

I quite agree that he has become something of a "cultural icon"...and so what?

What does the "icon" symbolize?

Active and life-long resistance to the prevailing social order, revolutionary integrity, dedication, etc.

It's the attitude of Che that so many people have come to admire.

What's the matter with that?

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

Hiero
23rd September 2004, 07:34
Ask yourself this: were Stalin a young man now, where on the political spectrum would he most likely be found?

I posted this because i thought this was a good summary of Che leaning to the Stalinist side. Well other then the times he said he was a Stalinist.

redstar2000
23rd September 2004, 21:11
Ask yourself this: were Stalin a young man now, where on the political spectrum would he most likely be found?

That's a good question!

My guess is that with his demonstrated organizational abilities, he'd probably be a tough trade union leader...like that fellow whose name I can't remember right now but who led the militant miners' strike in the U.K. against Thatcher.

When he was "on his own" in Petrograd prior to Lenin's arrival, it seems to me his political outlook "pointed" in that direction.

Che had a "vision" (for want of a better word) of communist society; Joe just wanted to "make things work"...which, by and large, he did.

Naturally, it's the "visionary" who is most likely to become the "icon".

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

NovelGentry
23rd September 2004, 21:24
"tough trade union leader" -- you mean like a teamster?.... hehehe

Teamster's are all well and good for what they stand for, but they're pretty idiotic in a lot of ways too. There were teamsters around when UPS went on strike down where my school was they broke a bunch of glass so that the UPS trucks couldn't get back in to the warehouse. Problem was they broke it in the middle of the road, not within the UPS driveway. Next thing you know there's about 30 students and 30 other people who were coming to help the protest with flat tires. I don't think any of them were supporting the teamsters after that.


Che, like all of us, was a product of his times, his moment in history. He chose the best revolutionary group he could find...which wasn't "Stalinist" by the way.

Assuming this was targetted at me... I don't deny that Che was a supporter/admirer/follower of Stalin, or that he joined a Stalinist revolution. What I do deny is related to what you later said: "Che had a "vision" (for want of a better word) of communist society; Joe just wanted to "make things work"...which, by and large, he did."

Thus his admiration and support for Stalin by no means defined his personal policies to himself or to his people. Rather than taking the time to "just make thigns work" in Cuba, he ran off to take part in other revolutions. This is I think a fundamental difference, which in my eyes, places Che far outside the outline of a Stalinist. He was a true international, and I think a true believer that socialism must be spread worldwide before communism is a viable option anywhere.