Che - revolutionary hero or just fascist?

[Tim]

I have always admired Che Guevara for a number of reasons. Namely, his altruism, his sacrafice and his willingness to fight to the death for what he believed in. In this sense, his position as one the most romantic figures of the 1960s is fully justified.

However, the move I read about Che and Fidel Castro, the less I feel comfortable about fully embracing him as an idol. For example, the hundreds if not thousands of executions after the revolution. I have read an argument in these pages regarding the exact number killed - does that make a difference? In what way can this be justified? And how is the murder of political opponents - often with laughable mass trials in a baseball stadium, of all places- not a form of fascism? I guess it all comes down to the old adage that "if you're not with us, you're against us" which is awfully similar to the "if you're not with us, you're a terrorist" rhetoric espoused by Bush and co. in the modern era. And the "labour camps" he established in Guanahcabibes that confined dissidents, homosexuals and later AIDS victims? How could any leftward leaning individual suggest that imprisoning those with alternate policital views or sexual preferences is in any way progressive? Let alone sick people.

Until I can be convinced that these atrocities were not orchestrated or carried out by Ernesto Che Guevara then he will never be a true inspiration to me.

[Xanthor]

I'll tell you this much. I can see fidel doing that, not Che. Please send me a link of where you heard of these things. By the way the capitalist media will go to great extents to lie about anything not to their likeing.

I found this a little after reading this thread. (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?act=ST&f=2&t=32115&st=0#entry491524)

[Tim]

Actually, in Jorge Castaneda's Companero, as well as various internet sites.

Are you disputing that these events occurred at all? Thanks

[Xanthor]

No, I'm not disputing that these events ever occured. I'm disputing that Che approved or had any part in these events.

[bubbЯubbgoeswoo]

First of all the numbers were not in the thousands.Yes, maybe the numbers werea little high, but the revolution was at stake. That might not have been the best way to do things,but hey castro regime is still around.

[wiebew]

Not everything what you heard about Ché Guevara is true.

It's true that he had execute people after the revolution. But that was normal. Batista and his support were murderers, and after Nazi Germany, the world execute important persons of the too. Che Guevara, Fidel Castro and the rest of the comrades saw how the soldiers of Batista killed other comrades and citizens.

After a few year in the government of Cuba, Che Guevara left with quarrel to Bolivia. What the problem was is never announced by Castro. But I think that it criticism was on the manner of govern. Castro give the citizens too little freedom.

My English isn't good, so I hope that you understand what I say.

-a Dutchmen- ;) <_<

[NovelGentry]

often with laughable mass trials in a baseball stadium, of all places

Yes, I always laugh at trials where literally dozens of people walk up to the mic to explain the horror (rape, torture, blatant murder) of the people they loved by the people on trial. The funniest one I saw was a small child explaining how his entire family was killed, but of course not before his mother was raped and not before their houses were lit on fire by some of these "political opposers."

[Raisa]

"However, the move I read about Che and Fidel Castro, the less I feel comfortable about fully embracing him as an idol"

Then stop embracing idols and be your own hero. Che Guevara was just a man.

[trex]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2005, 08:10 PM
"However, the move I read about Che and Fidel Castro, the less I feel comfortable about fully embracing him as an idol"

Then stop embracing idols and be your own hero. Che Guevara was just a man.
Che&#39;s last words, I think,

"GO ahead and shoot, you&#39;ll only kill a man"

[bubb&#1071;ubbgoeswoo]

I don&#39;t think he wanted to be an idol but it was inevitable.

[Big Boss]

I don&#39;t think that he wanted himself to be inmortalized but his revolution. Just like your quote says, bubbRubbgoeswoo. As far as the trials, I think that they deserved it. In the U.S there is something called Death Sentence. The pourpose of this is to execute criminals who have violated the law in a big way. The people killed in the trials were murderers, rapists and people who committed torture to civilians including innocent women, children and students. Che was merciful with his enemies. An example of this is the way he treated the POWS by taking their clothes and amo and then freeing them. He even gave medical attention to the enemies who were wounded. He is not an idol to me but a person who should be used as an example by imitating his greatests traits

[Tim]

Thanks for your answers. When I used the world laughable it was not meant to be taken literally. I meant it only in the sense that, in the way that I have read of them, if would appear that the trials perhaps went ahead without respect for due process. NOT that the crimes themselves were to be scoffed at. With regard to my use of the word idol - clearly my scepticism of Che&#39;s motives and actions indicate that I am not putting the man on a pedestal.

There is no death penalty in Australia. I oppose the death penalty or mistreatment of prisoners. True, some people commit appalling acts against their fellow human beings. But how can an an indignity be corrected with an indignity? This is perhaps where I struggle the most with the events of the Cuban Revolution. Although I acknowledge that perhaps that&#39;s easy for me to say; apart from an mugging at gunpoint, I&#39;ve never really been the victim of violence / tyranny/ oppression etc etc.

I acknowledge your efforts to distance Che from the perceived ruthlessness of the revolution. But am still of the opinion; execute one, execute a hundred - does it really matter how many? Remember, these are EXECUTIONS - ending a person&#39;s life. Who has the right to do that? I sometimes feel, reading websites and literature, that the word is bandied about so much that it loses its impact.

I am reading your comments with an open mind, so keep them coming.

[Big Boss]

You are welcome anytime comrade&#33;

[BOZG]

What has any of this got to do with fascism?

[Rage Against the Right]

I think Che may have approved of the deaths, he was unconditionally for Communism and from reading his biography, he didn&#39;t seem to mind "offing" opposers at will. It may have been borderline fascism, but it&#39;s impossible to run a new government without eliminating the main antagonists.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

And how is the murder of political opponents - often with laughable mass trials in a baseball stadium, of all places- not a form of fascism?


No.

Fascism is a system and ideology.

Communists have been responsible for executions, but so have liberals, conservatives, fascists, anarchists, nazis, etc.

Executions has litlte or nothing to do with "a set of ideology".

In 1959, Guevara was appointed commander of the La Cabana Fortress prison. During his term as commander of the fortress from 1959–1963, he oversaw the executions of hundreds of political prisoners and regime opponents. - Wikipedia

[NovelGentry]

I meant it only in the sense that, in the way that I have read of them, if would appear that the trials perhaps went ahead without respect for due process.

Well this comes down to what you consider due process. I don&#39;t consider systems such as that of the United States where the supplied lawyers can be habitual drug users, fall asleep during trials, or go against their clients demands and NOT have it be called a mistrial "due process." Apparently our courts disagree.

I would have no problem personally shooting many of those criminals in the face after hearing MULTIPLE accounts of their crimes and eye witness testamony from people who would have no decent reason to lie, but then again, maybe we should make them swear on a book about an invisible man in the sky just to make sure they&#39;re not lying.

[Tim]

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fascism

1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.

2. Oppressive, dictatorial control

I used the word in the sense of the second definition. Although you would have to admit that parts of the Castro regime could be defined by the first. Che Guevara was intrinsically a part of the Castro regime.

Perhaps it does sound like I&#39;m &#39;bashing&#39; Castro and Guevara. That&#39;s not the case at all - I admire much about both men. I just like to take an academic approach to research by being critical and gathering many opinions and yes, sometimes playing the Devil&#39;s Advocate.

Thanks

[BOZG]

And political ideologies cannot be described by dictionaries. They&#39;re far more complex than that. The likelihood of a dictionary actually giving a proper analysis of fascism is extremely unlikely as it would involve an admittance that fascism is used by the capitalist class itself, when it finds itself in danger.

[Big Boss]

To me, Fidel and Che are two of the greatest men that have ever lived. Many people think that Castro is oppresive and a dicator but nobody asks the people in general about how Castro really rules his island. The vast majority of Cubans living there love Castro and even calls him "Father". The kids are crazy about him and he has become truly the people&#39;s champion. The ones that hate him are the ones that are against the communist ideal or just plainly want more material gains instead of moral incentives. As BOZG said, it is quite difficult to explain in a couple of sentences what a Revolution is and even more if it is a Communist one.

[cubalibra]

I agree. Che and Fidel only killed those people after a public trial that anyone could atend, and their guilt was proven. The revolution would no have lasted any other way. How about the American government who kills its own people through assassination such as JFK, RFK, Malcom X, and even Martin Luther King, as well as covertly destroying democratic countrys and inserting their own dictators who will be cheap whores to American corporate interests.

[encephalon]

A see both sides of the issue. Giving a state the pwer to take life at will is giving the state complete control of every aspect of an individual. In this sense, regardless of moral issues, it is a danger to the people it supposedly represents. In the case of a state, reform should be used, rather than execution.

One must note, however, that a revolution is not an act of a state. It is warfare of the people against the state. And, as a state kills its enemies in warfare until there is no chance of the enemy coming back to power, so too must the people destroy that which would attempt to defy the will of the people against the foundation of a new, more representative state.

Che was not the only revolutionary that killed people. *All* revolutionaries have killed people. George Washington killed many. He didn&#39;t give the britist a chance at fair trial--in the minds of colonial america, there was no doubt of their guilt. They were the enemy, trying to impose their will upon a cohesive group that no longer wished to be imposed upon (granted, the reasons for the american revolution were rather fishy). The infrastructure of the British government was retained quite well, and exists still to a large extent in america today. Yet those who supported Britain were killed, plain and simple. If they had not been, the revolution would have failed--and so too would have the cuban revolution.

As a side note, each and every person in the area took turns at shooting the counter-revolutionaries--not just che--so that the blood would not be on the hands of only a select few. As gory and horrid as it seems, this makes sense. If it is a movement by the people, then all aspects of the revolution are the people&#39;s responsibility, including preventing a counter insurrection.

Much the same happened in france 1848, except even more violent. It&#39;s the nature of revolution.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

The vast majority of Cubans living there love Castro and even calls him "Father".

Proof?



The ones that hate him are the ones that are against the communist ideal or just plainly want more material gains instead of moral incentives.

False.

There are several people that are against Castro but are pro-communist.




As BOZG said, it is quite difficult to explain in a couple of sentences what a Revolution is and even more if it is a Communist one.

He talked about ideology, not revolution. Revolution is not an ideology.

As BOZG said, dictionaries are rarely reliable when it comes to ideologies. Thus, seeking answer from a dictionary would most likely only create confusion.


I asked a fascist of a definition of fascism. He said:


Fascism is a Totalitarian ideology created by Italian Benuto Mussolini in 1919. In the traditional Italian model, it includes:
- Complete centralisation of power in the hands of one dictator;
- A cult of personality surrounding the leader;
- Nationalism/Patriotism but not to the degree of racism or ultranationalism;
- A "third way" economic platform between Capitalism and Communism, Corporatism;
- Expansionist military policy;
- Censorship and violence to put down any opposition to the government.

[Salvador Allende]

I think the executions of counter-revolutionaries and capitalists was quite neccesary for the survival of the revolution. In the early 1960&#39;s there were hundreds of plots by the CIA to destroy Socialist Cuba and without the suppression of counter-revolutionaries one of those most likely would have succeeded.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

What if you would simply imprison these "counter-revolutionaries", instead of killing them?

[Salvador Allende]

Jailing can only be effective on the less important counter-revolutionaries, the leaders will continue to have effect from prison and must be executed. I think generally many counter-revolutionaries can be rehabilitated and turned into comrades, but the leaders must be taken out or there is a serious threat of counter-revolution.

[encephalon]

provided it doesn&#39;t martyr them..

[Hiero]

The revolution is not a tea party. - Mao Tse-Tung

That best sums up peoples problems here.

[bubb&#1071;ubbgoeswoo]

Who knows what could&#39;ve happened.Some may have been no threat but some may have been a threat.At one point the Batista gov&#39;t had Castro jailed but he was released and look what happened.

[encephalon]

The revolution is not a tea party. - Mao Tse-Tung

Unless you&#39;re a fat capitalist in Boston.

[choekiewoekie]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2005, 10:03 PM
What if you would simply imprison these "counter-revolutionaries", instead of killing them?
I agree on this. Execution is not the solution i believe, i can not appprove of death penalty. Keeping people impisoned will not simply make a tea party out of it.

Homosexuality is still an issue in cuba. I heard it is better in the cities were lots of tourists come. Are there gay bars yet?? I dont know...
But he, in more countries homesexuality is still an issue. But putting them away in a camp ???? I read about that too. It is disgusting i think.
On the other hand, it is a dynamic country, and i think it is really improving through the years. No country is perfect.

[NovelGentry]

Are there gay bars yet??

I never understood this type of shit, really. You will know homosexuality isn&#39;t a problem when there doesn&#39;t need to be gay bars. This is like saying on the transition from slavery to segregation... "African Americans need to be equal to white Americans... do we have black schools yet?"

[DUNKiNUTS]

well if you just jail a leader or major role player, they can still get information to and from the outside. There are gang leaders in solitery confinement that can have some one killed on the outside. Now that is power. So to kill the snake you need to cut off its head. But that also causes the blood to come out and some times that isn&#39;t easy to clean up.

[refuse_resist]

I completely agree with you there Gent.

Another thing is that just because a few people may have been executed then over-exaggerated by Cuban exiles and the capitalist and fascist U.S.-backed terrorist groups doesn&#39;t make Fidel or Che evil or "fascist" at all. They did what was necessary and what was in the interest of the Cuban proletariat. I doubt any of them would sympathize for anyone in Bautista&#39;s regime, considering how cruel many of them were.