Where are all of the Guevaraists

[aberos]

so when i first stumbled upon this site i was really excited because i had found a place where i could share my ideas and beliefs with like minded individuals without fear of reproach because of that like-mindedness, but i have been noticing that it seems as if not even a majority of the people on this forum are guevaraists or maoists. this is neither good nor bad i suppose because there is a majority of intellectually elevated individuals here, but they do not seem to be as enchanted with che as i had originally expected. furthermore, it seems, in most cases, that the people in here who do follow the theology of che tend to be closer to less informed than more.

so, to the point of the post and my question, i wanted to put this out there to see if my conclusions were ill conceived, and there are, in actuality, just as many staunch guevaraist-maoist supporters as i had originally anticipated and hoped for. if so, please make your presence known, and maybe take a minute to recount your favorite mao or che story so that others might become rightfully entranced with the immortal spirits of these two great heroes.

[Tupac-Amaru]

Well, not everybody is Guevarist-Maoist. But everybody here is definitly from the extreme left, so dont worry about not finding any "like-minded" people...cause you will.

And also, i think that every body here admires Che...no dought about it.

[fernando]

I respect Guevara and agree with his ideas on a united Latin America, however I also try to look at it with a view which the people have now. This does not mean Im a rightwinger or anything like that, but I dont think it would work if we would impose a maiost/communist regime in that area, forcing all the people to agree with us or else kill them.

Things have to go slower which is the problem since things can get sabotaged, which is why Im sort of looking on how the Venezuelan "Revolution" is working out, I mean there is a trend growing that there are more left wing governments in Latin America, hopefully Venezuela can prove its succes and leftism will grow throughout the continent.

[Severian]

Which one, Guevaraist or Maoist?

Besides, what is "Guevaraist" anway? I don't think he founded a new ideology.

[fernando]

I think he means Guevara's ideas and interpretations on the existing ideologies.

[NovelGentry]

Besides, what is "Guevaraist" anway? I don't think he founded a new ideology.

Agreed. I'd have to say the general feel of what Fidel and Guevara did was something towards Marxism-Leninism -- although it obviously differed a bit because of the nature of Cuba.

One thing that does seem more interesting, however, is that the education and growth in consciousness came about through their actual opposition to the state. Lenin's vanguard was more "instantaneous" it would seem. There was a fiarly big attempt to "preach" to the people, but the actual action occured in a fairly small period of time and the vanguard just sort of slid into power. -- It really does seem more like a coup than revolution (I think that has been debated before on this board).

The Cuban revolution differed for obvious reasons. Militarily, the opposition was different. Batista remained in control really -- Lenin's revolution had a lot of military backing because of the likes of the war and the promise of peace which Lenin would make. In fact, it appealed in much aspects directly to the military. The approach in Cuba never really took this route, rather than making such appeals it seemed more like a simple attack against it -- focusing more on the people under the oppression, than the military itself, which was an extension of the oppression.

Really two very different situations, but the same general concept. Something even closer to a maoism probably than strictly leninism -- although rather than an extension to it, more parrallel to it.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 10:23 AM
so when i first stumbled upon this site i was really excited because i had found a place where i could share my ideas and beliefs with like minded individuals without fear of reproach because of that like-mindedness, but i have been noticing that it seems as if not even a majority of the people on this forum are guevaraists or maoists.
This message forum is called RevolutionaryLeft.com. Although it is connected with the Che-Lives website, the actual forum is broad based and to some extent seperate to.

Although many people find this forum through the website and come because of the admiration of Che, it is not indicative of the board, nor should it be.

[NovelGentry]

This message forum is called RevolutionaryLeft.com. Although it is connected with the Che-Lives website, the actual forum is broad based and to some extent seperate to.

Although many people find this forum through the website and come because of the admiration of Che, it is not indicative of the board, nor should it be.

Except... according to his info he joined when it was still the che-lives forum.

Although yes, he should now understand there is a broader appeal, or at least an open attempt to create broader appeal than just that of Che fans.

[aberos]

fair enough novel gentry. i was unaware that the shift in the forum's status had changed. my apologies.

as to the validity of my "guevaraist" philosophy, although he did not write a book titled "the philosophy of guevaraism," there definitely is a political philosophy born out of his life. to me this philosophy is defined as an intense belief in the possibility of success of a communist society by freeing the oppressed peoples of the world from the oppressive dictators through the means of armed insurrection when it is often needed. furthermore, the revolutionary economy will begin as agriculturally driven before all else to build a strong base for industry in the future. and, most importantly, it is crucial for the leader of this revolution to always be on the front lines with his/her people for longer amounts of time than his/her people. they must be a model of discipline and well-informed on every aspect of the movement so they can inspire the masses. i guess it is just the title i have given to a combination of marxism-leninism and maoism, but i think that che was the first to truly embody these concepts wholly and purely. maybe i am biased though.

i appreciate all of the action on this post and the kind words. thank you.

[{GR}Raine]

I truly beleive in what che beleived, except that, we saw how "well" it worked in other countries. <_< but i do think that with a larger base, it could work. However, since Guevara essentialy was a marxist, its not much diffrent to be a guevarist.

[aberos]

not too much different i suppose, as i admitted, but it does depart from simple marxism in that it is also hodgepodged with maoism and it incorporates his discipline, drive and resolve

[pandora]

To me it always seems that Che&#39;s late obsession with Maoism had to do with it&#39;s universalist populist support, ie.) culture groups instead of bureaucracy, and it&#39;s respect towards disipline with it&#39;s youth groups. I think later as abuses became more clear in the 70&#39;s and definately with the repression of democracy groups in the 80&#39;s he would have still had love for the Chinese model, but would have been less of a supporter and began to shape different ideals.

I am unsure of what you mean by Guevarists, but I have always seen Che as a critical educator as part of his approach, another key part of Che&#39;s approach was the inclusion of Indigenous rights in the Americas as part of the struggle. This differs rapidly with the approach towards peasant people&#39;s in other sectors and must be noted. Marx did not have a theory towards Indigenous people in general, although he saw Native tribes collective groups as a model for later acheivement.

Che had great respect for the early civilizations of his Native land, and this is what makes his Revolution fundamentally an American one, or a Pan American one.

As far as your disrespect towards other members of the site for being as intelligent or less so in terms of yourself to the matters at hand, this pushes towards competition. Sorry kid, that&#39;s an immature answer, where I come from you learn to accept wisdom from the bum on the park bench as you never know where wisdom will come from. I find it ridiculous that you think you know the level of study of the majority of this board. I was researching Che when you were probably in elementary school for a rather long writing we shall say, and leave it at that, but I definately have my structural weaknesses in terms of theory, but we all do. Not even those who have done nothing but study theory are completely well versed in the theories they themselves do not employ.

Bottom line is theory without practice is meaningless, it is what you do with it that makes it a living breathing, growing thing.

[aberos]

exuse me pandora, but i think that i stepped very lighty in order to avoid impuning the intelligence of anyone on the board. i did not make one comment about there being a pervasive flow of idiocy, but, rather, what i saw as a lack of fascination with che. i am very sorry if you took it as me trying to attack members of the board because that was not my intent. and while i DO believe that there are some members of the board that are ill-informed, that CERTAINLY is not the case with the overwhelming majority. i am very happy that you were studying che back when i was in elementary school pandora because that means that you are likely to be even more enchanted with his legacy than i. and thank you for making me aware to the concept of taking wisdom from every place that i can find it because until now i only thought to look in the direction of college professors and accredited businessmen; but this new concept of all people, even on the lowest rung of the social ladder, having some sort of wisom to give is quite intriguing to say the least. you really have opened my unstudying, elitiist, ignorant, pubescent and, most deplorably, spiteful eyes to a whole new world. thank you.