Executions at La Cabana

[Andy Bowden]

Is there any truth in the articles written by some on the right that Che Guevara had thousands executed at La Cabana without trial? Were there people executed there who were not Bastiano repressors?

[Commandante_Ant]

I very much doubt it. Che was rigid with the rules, he never bent them so i would be very, very surprised to hear of any executions without trial. As for non-Bastiano repressors, i dont know about that. All i really know is that, just at the end of reading Jon lee Andersons biography of Che, i cannot recall reading about any executions without trial. Even Masetti had trials with his poor guerilla's in Argentina.

[black]

This is completely true, he was in charge of La Cabana prison in 1959 and had between 200-500 people executed sometimes with a hasty or as, some say, without any real trial...The Batistan secret police were all, obviously, done away with but also many other officials and ofcourse this was only the beginning. According to Armando Valladeres who was imprisoned at the time, Che took an "personal interest" in the torture and execution of prisoners.

[BitchBrew]

Yes it is true. Not only did they kill batista people, but also anarcho- syndicalists who foght in the revolution, just like Lenin did to alot of Boljsevik anarchists.'¨'

If you ask me, Che is a complete asshole.

[fernando]

*****Brew, what are your sources for these claims?

And @black, it seems interesting that Che took interest in torturing and executions while during war releasing or even taking care of enemy prisoners.

[black]

"Crazy with fury I will stain my rifle red while slaughtering any enemy that falls in my hands! My nostrils dilate while savoring the acrid odor of gunpowder and blood. With the deaths of my enemies I prepare my being for the sacred fight and join the triumphant proletariat with a bestial howl!"

-El "Che" Bastardo!

Are you saying he "helped" the enemies he was personally involved with crushing, which included;

Batistan officials
Anarchists
Anarcho-syndicalists
Left radicals opposition
Even Cuban people
and those under his command.

These facts are pretty well known if you look into it;

"Hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine. This is what our soldiers must become …"

[BitchBrew]

Fernando, no I can't present any sourses for my statment, of two reasons:

1. The articlas in wich I have read about these conserns have been published in swedish, so I have hard to think you would understand them anyhow (unless youre swedish yourself ofcource)

2. And even if you do understand swedish im not sure I can dig up the articles in the first place, but if you insist I can try.

Otherwise Black seems to know a hole lot about these conserns, maybe you could ask him for soursec?

B.T.W Good post black, I could'nt have said it better myself.

[Intifada]

Che took an "personal interest" in the torture and execution of prisoners.

I would like to see some evidence to back up that claim.

The two quotes you provided prove nothing.

[Djehuti]

Originally posted by Andy [email protected] 5 2005, 01:32 PM
Is there any truth in the articles written by some on the right that Che Guevara had thousands executed at La Cabana without trial? Were there people executed there who were not Bastiano repressors?
The source for that is "Cuba and the Rule of Law" (Geneva, 1962). The report is compiled by The International Commision of Jurists, a non-state organisation with status B at the economic and social council of the UN.





I also think I know wich article *****Brew is refering to. It is a short article in a swedish anarcho-syndicalist digital newspaper. The article is called "Che Guevara executed syndicalists" and can be read at: http://www.yelah.net/articles/che (swedish)

At the same site you can also read Frank Fernandez essay "Cuba - The Anarchists & Liberty". The link to the essay is: http://www.yelah.net/articles/cuba

I have however not read it and am in no possition of making any judgements.

[KC]

This is completely true, he was in charge of La Cabana prison in 1959 and had between 200-500 people executed sometimes with a hasty or as, some say, without any real trial...The Batistan secret police were all, obviously, done away with but also many other officials and ofcourse this was only the beginning. According to Armando Valladeres who was imprisoned at the time, Che took an "personal interest" in the torture and execution of prisoners.

Armando Valladeres was anti-Castro. He is a completely unreliable source.

[fernando]

Sounds more like you took that anti che article from MSN news or something <_<



"Crazy with fury I will stain my rifle red while slaughtering any enemy that falls in my hands&#33; My nostrils dilate while savoring the acrid odor of gunpowder and blood. With the deaths of my enemies I prepare my being for the sacred fight and join the triumphant proletariat with a bestial howl&#33;"
How does this prove that he liked to torture his enemies and that he didnt give them a trail?


Are you saying he "helped" the enemies he was personally involved with crushing, which included;

Batistan officials
Anarchists
Anarcho-syndicalists
Left radicals opposition
Even Cuban people
and those under his command.
Im saying enemies in combat during the Cuban Revolution...but okay if the Cuban people and those under his command are the enemy as you claim to be, why is Che so loved in Cuba? Che was already almost a holy figure before Castro began his sort of personality-cult like campaign.


"Hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine. This is what our soldiers must become …"
Again...what does this prove? Does saying this proves that Che tortured prisoners and executed them without a trail?

But look what else this "evil bastard man" we know as Ernesto &#39;Che&#39; Guevara said:

At the risk of seeming ridiculous, let me say that the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love. It is impossible to think of a genuine revolutionary lacking this quality.

Oh this really proves that Guevara was a hippie who was all up for love and peace :rolleyes:

[anomaly]

It is true that Che executed several hundred people at La Cabana. Although, it is also true that all of these people were given trial. Now, these trials sometimes consisted of Che asking his comrades at La Cabana whether the prisoner in question should be killed, but it was still a trial (it just so happens that Che&#39;s comrades always yelled for execution&#33;).

I read Jon Lee Anderson&#39;s biography on Che, and I do not recall him mentioning that anyone other counterevolutionaries (that is, &#39;Batista&#39;s people&#39;) were executed. I really do not know if Che executed anarchists as black claimed (I&#39;d be wary to believe black judging by what he has said..he seems vehemently anti-Che). Che certainly did not execute anyone other than those he considered counterrevolutionaries, though. I do remember that there was an anti-Castro uprising in Cuba shortly after the revolution. This uprising was helped put down by Che, but it had nothing to do with La Cabana.

I think there is much justification for Che&#39;s actions. For one thing, he witnessed the disaster that was the Arbenz-led Guatemalen revolution, which was quickly put down by the old Guatemalen army. Che made a point of elminating the resistance after the revolution so as to avoid such a disaster. This is also why Che was very much against a free press, as that too helped put down the Guatemalen revolution. IN times of revolution, such executions as were performed at La Cabana sometimes need to be done. If they are not done, it is quite likely that, as Che noted, a disaster like that of Guatemala could occur. Tactically, eliminating the resistance is never a bad move. I, for one, empathize with Che.

[black]

Armando Valladeres was anti-Castro. He is a completely unreliable source.

You think he&#39;s going to be pro-Castro? Well that means we can just discount any one (of the thousands) who were tortured and/or executed at the hands of an unjust authoritarian regime. So we just need to find a masochistic pro-Castroist who says the same thing...


How does this prove that he liked to torture his enemies and that he didnt give them a trail?

kinda ironic considering the other post I made on the subject. Che The Arsehole (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=37751&st=40&#entry1291919368)


At the risk of seeming ridiculous, let me say that the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love. It is impossible to think of a genuine revolutionary lacking this quality.

Omg, are you actually using this as an argument against objective facts that clearly and utterly show this for the hypocrisy it is?

[fernando]

You think he&#39;s going to be pro-Castro? Well that means we can just discount any one (of the thousands) who were tortured and/or executed at the hands of an unjust authoritarian regime. So we just need to find a masochistic pro-Castroist who says the same thing...
Now...I think we need to look for an objective source for the claims, not one of the traitors who wants to turn Cuba into another banana-republic ;)


kinda ironic considering the other post I made on the subject. Che The Arsehole
Post you made later on...the quote you posted here proves nothing


Omg, are you actually using this as an argument against objective facts that clearly and utterly show this for the hypocrisy it is?
You never heard of the word &#39;sarcasm&#39; have you? the two quotes you posted in this thread dont prove Che tortured and executer prisoners, however you believe that these quotes do prove that...so with that mentality of these little quotes proving greast accusations I put this quote...but then again you will not understand this :blink:

[black]

the two quotes you posted in this thread dont prove Che tortured and executer prisoners, however you believe that these quotes do prove that...so with that mentality of these little quotes proving greast accusations I put this quote...but then again you will not understand this

No, the quotes I provided were telling contributions from someone who&#39;s supposedly hailed as a defender of freedom and fighter of injustice, who infact even holding this view (one of hate and authoritarianism) dismantles the popular misconception that he was only "guided by love". The evidence of his atrocities can only come from eyewitnesses and the statistics of governmental and human rights organisations...all of which don&#39;t tend to support Che in any sense.

I mean ffs, he states in his own diaries of some (a few) of those he executed, but it&#39;s people under his own army who did it best to summarise what he did. For example Jaime Costa Vázquez states how Guevara ordered the execution of a couple dozen people in the central Cuban region of Santa Clara on the eve of victory of the "revolution". José Vilasuso involved in the judicial process at La Cabana witnessed the execution of political prisoners and Javier Arzuaga, a Liberation Theology-inclined clergyman said,

"Che Guevara never overturned a sentence."

He said he personally witnessed 55 executions, including that of a young boy named Ariel Lima.

Guevara, for example, admitted to shooting Eutimio Guerra in January of 1957 because he suspected him of passing on information. He also admitted to having shot a peasant named Aristidio, although he wasn&#39;t certain he could justify that execution, as well as a man named Echevarría, the brother of a comrade. These are, by all accounts, not uncommon instances.

[fernando]

No, the quotes I provided were telling contributions from someone who&#39;s supposedly hailed as a defender of freedom and fighter of injustice, who infact even holding this view (one of hate and authoritarianism) dismantles the popular misconception that he was only "guided by love". The evidence of his atrocities can only come from eyewitnesses and the statistics of governmental and human rights organisations...all of which don&#39;t tend to support Che in any sense.
So these two quotes show human emotion..anger hatred, sure it sounds harsh, but what do you want...cuddle and hug with your enemies and then keep on whining about peacful coexistence? Who says he is only guided by love? I think its a misconception you have about us here.


I mean ffs, he states in his own diaries of some (a few) of those he executed, but it&#39;s people under his own army who did it best to summarise what he did. For example Jaime Costa Vázquez states how Guevara ordered the execution of a couple dozen people in the central Cuban region of Santa Clara on the eve of victory of the "revolution".
Execution of who? just using the word &#39;execution&#39; doesnt say so much <_<


José Vilasuso involved in the judicial process at La Cabana witnessed the execution of political prisoners
yes...after the trail and convicted guilty they were executed, something similar happened in Europe after World War 2



Javier Arzuaga, a Liberation Theology-inclined clergyman said,

"Che Guevara never overturned a sentence."
so?


He said he personally witnessed 55 executions, including that of a young boy named Ariel Lima.
Again...why were they executed...and who were these prisoners? Just using the word execution doesnt prove anything...


Guevara, for example, admitted to shooting Eutimio Guerra in January of 1957 because he suspected him of passing on information.
In a instable and dangerous situation you dont want to keep traitors and informants alive by your side...


He also admitted to having shot a peasant named Aristidio, although he wasn&#39;t certain he could justify that execution, as well as a man named Echevarría, the brother of a comrade. These are, by all accounts, not uncommon instances.
Yes this probably proves he liked to kill and torture at random :unsure:

[Karl Marx's Camel]

"Hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine. This is what our soldiers must become …"

And Guevara was quite right. Your point?

[Andy Bowden]

Eutimio Guerro was caught with a pass on him saying that he was not to be arrested by Batista forces. When the Guerillas found him, and this pass he confessed and was shot. He was a traitor in the pay of the Batista dictatorship, and this is why he was executed.

[black]

So these two quotes show human emotion..anger hatred, sure it sounds harsh, but what do you want

um, "violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine. This is what our soldiers must become …" human emotions? I&#39;d say it&#39;s bordering on the psychopathic, but hey all in a day&#39;s work for "communist" totalitarian.


after the trail and convicted guilty they were executed.



>>>Please explain the workings of the trials.<<<




Again...why were they executed...and who were these prisoners? Just using the word execution doesnt prove anything...

People were executed because they were a part of the old regime, people were executed because they were against the new regime, people were executed because they were genuine (left) (-er) radicals, or even got in the way of the system. Hell, there&#39;s quite cases of people being murdered for being Christian.

But, ya know, Guevara (rot in hell) said himself;

"If in doubt, kill him."


He was a traitor in the pay of the Batista dictatorship, and this is why he was executed.

I find this extraordinary, with as little as a fucking care you can let the life of a man be wasted...you don&#39;t even know the full events. If someone is a real counter-revolutionary and who&#39;s existence puts others in danger does that warrant his life being taken from him? Maybe. Did the Castroists fully know the truth of his cooperation with the Batistan dictatorship? In this case, I don&#39;t know but this multiplied a thousand odd times is justified in "defence of the revolution", right?
I don&#39;t defend Batista and the right-wing scum that were brought down, but where&#39;s this revolution? Why are people even now defending a murdering Stalinist poster boy?

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 04:14 PM
The source for that is "Cuba and the Rule of Law" (Geneva, 1962). The report is compiled by The International Commision of Jurists, a non-state organisation with status B at the economic and social council of the UN.
The ICJ was a CIA-financed Cold War propaganda organization. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Commission_of_Jurists) It put out a report on Tibet, for example, which was truly laughable in its bizarre claims - e.g. that the Chinese were sterilizing people with injections, which is medically impossible. It&#39;s not hard to be a UN-registered NGO, that really means nothing.

The total executed by the "revolutionary tribunals" - hundreds - is small compared to other revolutions historically, and compared to the scale of the Batista regime&#39;s crimes.

How about someone name a particular individual executed unjustly? It&#39;s hard to refute such vague accusations.

Valladares was an employee of the Batista police. He was jailed after dynamite was found in his home. He was hyped as a poet unjustly imprisoned; it was claimed that he had lost the use of his legs due to being tortured by the "Castro tyranny."

Then he was released, and walked off the plane in Miami. (In fact, he been unable to walk for a time....due to a hunger strike.)

See what can be done when a particular alleged victim is named?

Frank Fernandez is mentioned as a source. In his book on Cuban anarchism (http://www.ainfos.ca/04/feb/ainfos00387.html) he alleged that anarchists were executed by the state...after they took up arms against it. No specific executions are mentioned in his justification for why the anarchists resorted to "direct action"...just a vague prediction they would have been considered counterrevolutionaries.


The most combative elements among the Cuban anarchists had few options
left at their disposal. After the response to the Declaración, they knew
that they would be harried by the government, as would be any other Cubans
opposed to the “revolutionary” process. In those days an accusation of
being “counterrevolutionary” meant a trip to jail or to the firing squad.
So, with other means cut off, they went underground and resorted to clandestine
direct action.
...
The methods included armed struggle. Moscú relates: “I participated in
efforts to support guerrilla insurgencies in different parts of the country.”
In particular, two important operations took place in the same zone, the
Sierra Occidental, in which operations were difficult because the mountains
aren’t very high, they’re narrow, and they’re near Havana: “There was
direct contact with the guerrilla band commanded by Captain Pedro Sánchez
in San Cristobal; since some of our compañeros participated actively in
this band . . . they were supplied with arms . . . We also did everything
we could to support the guerrilla band commanded by Francisco Robaina
(known as ‘Machete’) that operated in the same range.” At least one anarchist
fighter in these bands, Augusto Sánchez, was executed by the government
without trial after being taken prisoner. The government considered the
guerrillas “bandits” and had very little respect for the lives of those
who surrendered.

According to Moscú, in addition to Augusto Sánchez, the following “compañeros
combatientes” were murdered by the Castro government: Rolando Tamargo,
Sebastián Aguilar, Jr. and Ventura Suárez were shot; Eusebio Otero was
found dead in his cell; Raúl Negrin, harassed beyond endurance, set himself
on fire.
link (http://www.ainfos.ca/04/feb/ainfos00387.html)

Francisco "Machete" Robaina led one of the most notorious and murderous of the CIA-supported contra groups; the anarchist quoted here admits aiding him. The various anarchists allegedly killed are admitted to be "companeros combatientes."

Fernandez denounces other Cuban anarchists for supporting the revolutionary government.

Book giving overview of the "revolutionary tribunals" work (http://www.socialistalternative.org/literature/che/ch6.html)

Ex-CIA agent Philip Agee describes how the CIA tried to save one of its operatives from the "revolutionary tribunals" and why Washington was so upset by them. (http://www.ruleoflawandcuba.fsu.edu/regime-9.cfm)

That "crazy with fury" quote sounded improbably over-the-top to me, so I tried to look it up...found a bunch of right-wing sites claiming it&#39;s from the Motorcycle Diaries. Supposing it&#39;s authentic (I don&#39;t have the book to hand), it&#39;s pretty ridiculous to make a huge thing over a bit of rhetoric from his youth. "slaughtering any enemy that falls in my hands&#33;" was certainly was not the practice of the Rebel Army or Revolutionary Armed Forces. As the Bay of Pigs mercenaries found out.

[black]

1) The ICJ admitted being given money by the CIA in the 60s, as it did from other governmental and non-governmental organisations. The idea is that it remains neutral, believe that or not but much of its finding are corroborated by other Human Rights and Legal bodies.

2) What&#39;s with Valladares? He seems like he&#39;s pretty "in" with the American administration against Castro...does this automatically invalidate everything he said, which again (particularly in regards to torture, executions and prison conditions) can be found by a number of other eyewitnesses? You&#39;ve attacked him, which is fair enough, but like elsewhere not his claims.

3) "Overview of the "revolutionary tribunals" work"; the same article states, "The Tribunals were not elected committees of workers, soldiers and representatives of the local community as would have been advocated by Marxists during such revolutionary conditions. However, the measures taken by the Tribunals were to defend the revolution and to try and exact some justice for the victims of Batista&#39;s sadistic torturers..." This is quite a bizarre form of justice.

Other sources (this from Indagacion en Los Origenes del Movimiento Cubano pro Derechos Humanos) expanded on the proceedings of the tribunals, assuming that it was always used; "..executions by firing squad, ordered by the Summary War Tribunals, which were entirely composed of State Security police, and included the so-called defense attorneys who, in accordance with their job duties, concurred with the sentences that had already been determined.

In this way, we began in 1976 to compile an increasingly thick dossier on the brutal repressiveness of Castroism. It slowly filtered out to various European chanceries and, in some cases, to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights...By then we could prove that many death sentences in Cuba had been handed down by puppet tribunals that failed to abide by the most minimal standards of due process and penal law that exist in civilized countries. We were thus able to obtain an Open Letter, signed in 1979 by more than 50 prominent intellectuals, among them Jorge Semprún, Ernesto Sábato, Juan Goytisolo, K.S. Karol, Francesco Rossi, Milan Kundera and others, which described Fidel Castro&#39;s firing squads as "death squads."

To this abundance of direct proof... we added accounts of terror reconstructed by Cuban political prisoners such as Ernesto Díaz Rodríguez, Alberto de la Cruz, Ramón Guín, René González Herreros, Guido Faramiñán, and others, which allowed us to prepare well-founded charges regarding the endless atrocities and systematic tortures as evidenced by the cruel and degrading treatment of those who resisted oppression. We also provided proof of the sub-human living conditions instituted by the Cuban prison system... to eliminate those who maintained a firm ideology of resistance. We could also demonstrate the use of all forms of dirty warfare in attempting to crush the family members of those same resistors through extortion and blackmail...."

4)
Fernandez denounces other Cuban anarchists for supporting the revolutionary government.

No, Fernandez rightly viewed the government as counter-revolutionary. Most anarchists would denounce someone who claimed to have libertarian principles and then turned to support an authoritarian regime. Yet we&#39;ve never viewed anyone who changes their politcal course as necessarily a "traitor" unless you they openly attack their former comrades, just as Manuel Gaona Sousa did when he not only sided with the Castroists (to save his own skin) but worked with them against the libertarian movement.

Here&#39;s a small sample of the Anarchists who were imprisoned (I don&#39;t know what&#39;s happened to them now);

Pláacido Mendez: Bus driver, delegate for routes 16, 17, and 18. For many years, fought against the Batista tyranny and at various times imprisoned and brutally tortured. In 193X he was forced to go into exile, returning secretly to Cuba to fight in the Cuban underground movement against Batista in the Sierra Escambray. With the downfall of Batista, he resumed his union activities refusing to accept the totalitarian decrees of the so-called revolutionary government. Comrade Mendez is serving his sentence in the National Prison on the Island of Pines, built by the bloody dictator Machado. Mendez has been condemned by ( Castro&#39;s Revolutionary Tribunal to twelve years at hard labor. His family is in desperate economic difficulties.

Antonio Degas: Militant member of the glorious National Confederation of Labor of Spain (CNT): living in Cuba since the termination of the Spanish Civil War, working in the motion picture industry. This comrade conspired against the Batista tyranny and with the triumph of the Revolution, unconditionally placed himself at the service of the new Castro regime. Because of his activities against the communist usurpers of the Revolution, he was imprisoned by the lackeys of Castro without trial. Antonio Degas is imprisoned in the dungeons of Cabana Fortress and subjected to inhuman treatment. His wife and children, under conditions of at-owing poverty, must also find ways of helping him in prison where he is under medical treatment.

Alberto Miguel Linsuain: Comrade Linsuain is the son of a well-known Spanish Revolutionist, who died in Alicante towards the end of the Spanish Civil War. Linsuain was extremely active against the Batista dictatorship and joined the rebel forces in the Sierra Cristal, under the command of Castro s brother, Raúl Castro. For his bravery in battle he was promoted to Lieutenant in the Rebel Army. With the end of the armed struggle, he left the army and dedicated himself to the union movement of his industry. He was elected by his fellow workers as General Secretary of the Federation of Food, Hotel and Restaurant Workers of the Province of Oriente. When the communists subtly began to infiltrate and take over the organized labor movement, Comrade Linsuain fought the communist connivers. This aroused the hatred of the communist leaders in general and Rau&#39;l Castro, in particular he had violent quarrels with Raúl Castro even when he had first met him in the Sierra Cristal while fighting against Batista. Comrade Linsuain has been in jail for over a year without trial. His family has not heard from him for months and fears for his life. (A later Bulletin reported that Linsuain was either murdered or died in jail.)

SondalioTorres: Young sympathizer of libertarian ideas, who, inspired by our comrades, fought bravely in his native Cuba, against Batista. With the triumph of the Revolution, Torres threw himself, body and soul, into the consolidation and constructive work of the Revolution, moving to Havana on government construction projects. On the job, he openly voiced his fears that the Castro government was gradually, but surely, becoming a ferocious dictatorship. For this, the stool-pigeon members of the local Committee for the Defense of the Revolution (CDR) accused him of counter-revolutionary activities. Sondalio was sentenced to ten years imprisonment. To force him to falsely accuse other fellow-workers of counter-revolutionary acts, Sondalio was subjected to barbarous torture. Four times he was dragged out to face the firing squad and four times he was retrieved just as he was about to be shot. Torres is serving his sentence in the Provincial prison of Pinar del Kito.

José Acena: Veteran libertarian militant; employed in the La Polar brewery; Professor (at one time) at the Instituto de la Vibora. For thirty years Acena carried on an uninterrupted struggle against all dictatorships, including the first as well as the second periods of Batista s tyrannical regimes. For his bravery in the underground revolutionary struggles of the 26th of July Movement, he was made treasurer of the Province of Havana. With the triumph of the Revolution, Acena collaborated fully with the new Castro regime, particularly in the labor and political movements. Acena soon realized that a totalitarian Marxist-Leninist system was being established in Cuba and quarreled violently with the new rulers, denouncing Castro personally and telling him plainly why he hated his regime. From that time on, he was hounded and persecuted by Castro s henchmen and imprisoned various times. Finally, after a year without trial, he was accused of counter-revolutionary acts and sentenced to twenty years imprisonment. This, in spite of the fact that he still bears on his body the scars of wounds inflicted on him by Batista s jailers. He is desperately ill and in need of surgery.

Alberto Garcia: Comrade Alberto Garcia, like so many other militants of our movement, fought against Batista in the ranks of Castro&#39;s 26th of July Movement. Because of his well-earned prestige earned in the course of hard underground struggles, Garcia, after the fall of Batista, was elected by the workers of his industry to be Secretary of the Federation of Medical Workers. For his uncompromising opposition to the super-authoritarian conduct of the communists, he was arrested and sentenced to thirty years at hard labor, flasely accused of &#39;counter-revolutionary&#39; activitiees. Comrade Garcia is one of the most valiant young militants in the Cuban Liberation Movement.

[KickMcCann]

I think some idealistic people worry about associating blood and murder with their "spotless" hero Che Guevara. This is probably because altough he struggled for goals such as peace, freedom, and equality, he did it violently. Thus, when an arguement occurs between a right-winger, they will bring up that fact and try to make him out as a hipocrite in comparision to radicals approved by the ruling class like Ghandi or Martin Luther King Jr.
But try this out for size, those right wingers probably hold people like George Washington or Winston Churchill close to their hearts. Why don&#39;t you ask them how many people George Washington had executed for desertion, treason, espionage, aiding and abetting the enemy, etc... You will probably find the number of people Washington killed as high if not higher than Che&#39;s death count.
Or how about how many innocent Iraqis Winston Churchill killed with chemical weapons because they refused to pay taxes to the Crown?
Or back to America, how many innocent people did "heroes" like Patton, MacArthur, and Eisenhower kill at the Bonus Army Massacre in Washington D.C?

I myself don&#39;t know the details of what Che did in La Cabana, but I do know that war is never pretty, clean, or enjoyable for anyone fighting it. You can&#39;t have a war without war crimes, every side commits them.

[BitchBrew]

You can&#39;t justify the crimes made by Che because people like Churchil also made such crimes. By doing that your&#39;e just proving that Che wasn&#39;t any better then Churchil for instance.

Who cares about the right-wing? The people critisisng Che in this thread (including me) are not right-wing. Where socialist, socialists who don&#39;t like Che.

[fernando]

Who do you like? What do you suggest we do for a revolution in Latin America? Sit around and drink tea with the Yankees? Or keep on whining that we dislike them? Vietnam has shown that the only way to get rid of the Yankee is to make them bleed enough, Iraq will prove that point again.

[viva le revolution]

Umm.. This is a question to all anarchists calling for peace, doesn&#39;t anarchism call for a proletarian revolution? where exactly has anarchist theory ever called for pacifism and revolution through peaceful means?

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2005, 07:29 AM
1) The ICJ admitted being given money by the CIA in the 60s, as it did from other governmental and non-governmental organisations. The idea is that it remains neutral, believe that or not but much of its finding are corroborated by other Human Rights and Legal bodies.
That may be your idea, but that don&#39;t make it so. Nobody&#39;s neutral. And if its findings are corroborated by more truthful organizations, you should be able to cite those organizations.


2) What&#39;s with Valladares? He seems like he&#39;s pretty "in" with the American administration against Castro...does this automatically invalidate everything he said,

His lies and status as a U.S. puppet (the U.S. rep to the UN Human Rights Commission, an ex-Batista cop&#33;) show he&#39;s not to be relied on as a source. Ad hominem is not a fallacy when it&#39;s used to judge the credibility of a source.

Again: If there are better sources who say the same, cite them.


3) "Overview of the "revolutionary tribunals" work"; the same article states, "The Tribunals were not elected committees of workers, soldiers and representatives of the local community as would have been advocated by Marxists during such revolutionary conditions. However, the measures taken by the Tribunals were to defend the revolution and to try and exact some justice for the victims of Batista&#39;s sadistic torturers..." This is quite a bizarre form of justice.

Which is bizarre, the form advocated by the article, or the form that was used?

In any case, your quotes in this section argue that proper legal procedure was used. That&#39;s probably true, and I doubt that proper legal procedure could have convicted most Batistianos given that they had all the resources of state power to conceal and destroy evidence of their crimes.

It&#39;s kind of an odd complaint for anarchists to make: when have you believed in courts, judges, proper legal procedure? When anarchist "propagandists of the deed" have eliminated enemies of the people, when have they given them trials first?

What your sources have not even attempted to show, is that the terror was directed against anyone but Batistianos and the armed counterrevolution....


4)
Fernandez denounces other Cuban anarchists for supporting the revolutionary government.

No, Fernandez rightly viewed the government as counter-revolutionary. Most anarchists would denounce someone who claimed to have libertarian principles and then turned to support an authoritarian regime. Yet we&#39;ve never viewed anyone who changes their politcal course as necessarily a "traitor" unless you they openly attack their former comrades, just as Manuel Gaona Sousa did when he not only sided with the Castroists (to save his own skin) but worked with them against the libertarian movement.

I see. God forbid Gaona should attack someone for joining the CIA-financed counterrevolutionary groups....which Fernandez admits, no proudly proclaims, his faction of the Cuban anarchist movement did. Assuming one is to regard anarchism as a revolutionary working-class tendency....that is the real treachery.


Here&#39;s a small sample of the Anarchists who were imprisoned (I don&#39;t know what&#39;s happened to them now);

Probably eventually released and went to Miami, like others jailed on charges of counterrevolution. Nor do either of us know whether, in fact, they joined the armed counterrevolution like Fernandez&#39; heroes. But regardless:

The topic of this thread is executions. If you know of any anarchists executed for their ideas or peaceful political activities...name one&#33;

[BitchBrew]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2005, 06:47 PM
Who do you like? What do you suggest we do for a revolution in Latin America? Sit around and drink tea with the Yankees? Or keep on whining that we dislike them? Vietnam has shown that the only way to get rid of the Yankee is to make them bleed enough, Iraq will prove that point again.
I suggest another form of revolution to ascheve a better sociatey then the extremely authoritarian way of "the prolitarian dictatorship" thats all.

Ever heard of a movement called anarchism and anarcho-syndicalism? The movment of wich it&#39;s followers were executed by Che.

If you don&#39;t, I suggest you pick up some reading ;)

[viva le revolution]

Originally posted by *****[email protected] 16 2005, 08:50 PM

I suggest another form of revolution to ascheve a better sociatey then the extremely authoritarian way of "the prolitarian dictatorship" thats all.

Ever heard of a movement called anarchism and anarcho-syndicalism? The movment of wich it&#39;s followers were executed by Che.

If you don&#39;t, I suggest you pick up some reading ;)
Another form of revolution, such as? Non-violence? Do you even know what Marx meant when he used the term &#39;dictatorship of the proletariat&#39;? it meant the rule of the proletariat&#33; That is quite what anarchism is also all about. Unless you personallly have other views... <_<
Anarchism is almost exactly the same as communism, both have the same end and striving towards the same goal basically, the rule of the proletariat.Both advocate mass action and use of violent means to effect change. If any anarchist writer has suggested otherwise, please let me know.
Likewise i would suggest reading into communist literature to gain a better understanding of the movement and it&#39;s goals, instead of focusing only on anarchist critique.
I would suggest reading the communist manifesto followed by &#39;marxism freedom and the state&#39;by mikhail bakunin. The second is a critique of marx&#39;s work and theory.
Stateism and anarchy by mikhail bakunin followed by the &#39;conspectus of bakunin&#39;s stateism and anarchy&#39; by karl marx. This will give you an understanding of the split between the two and the differences in fundamental communist and anarchist theory.
I would furthur suggest reading into works by Lenin and Trotsky. Fidel Castro&#39;s capitalism in crisis is also an extremely interesting read.

[fernando]

I suggest another form of revolution to ascheve a better sociatey then the extremely authoritarian way of "the prolitarian dictatorship" thats all.
What form do you suggest?



Ever heard of a movement called anarchism and anarcho-syndicalism? The movment of wich it&#39;s followers were executed by Che.
I heard of the movement...


Anarchism is almost exactly the same as communism, both have the same end and striving towards the same goal basically, the rule of the proletariat.Both advocate mass action and use of violent means to effect change. If any anarchist writer has suggested otherwise, please let me know.
Then what is the difference between Anarchism and communism if they both want the same through the same means?

[viva le revolution]

The only difference i percieve is that Communists believe in a transitional phase after the overthrow of capitalism, socialism.
Anarchism does not believe in this transitional phase and instead advocates for power to directly fall into the worker&#39;s hands and an immediate shift into communist society.
Communists, in general, regard as neccessary some form of leadership or vanguard on a political party basis.
Anarchists do not percieve this need as very important and instead rely wholly on mass action with local co-ordination instead of central.
In fact the two are so alike that very often, even on this board, you can encounter anarcho-communists who can wear that moniker without percieving any conflict or distinction in between the two.
What has helped create this separation can be attributed also to the personal differences between Karl Marx and Mikhail Bakunin.
However both advocate the struggle against capitalism and it&#39;s overthrow through popular revolution and revolt. Both advocate as the end result a stateless, classless society, since the absense of any class distinction will render null and void many of the institutions needed for control of the masses, hence the dissappearance of the state. Both have an internationalist perspective, not recognizing any borders and expressing solidarity with all of the workers and proletarians of the world without regard for superficial differences such as religion or nationality nor ethnicity.
If i have left anything out, please let me know, comrades.

[BitchBrew]

Originally posted by viva le revolution+Aug 16 2005, 09:11 PM--> (viva le revolution @ Aug 16 2005, 09:11 PM)
*****[email protected] 16 2005, 08:50 PM

I suggest another form of revolution to ascheve a better sociatey then the extremely authoritarian way of "the prolitarian dictatorship" thats all.

Ever heard of a movement called anarchism and anarcho-syndicalism? The movment of wich it&#39;s followers were executed by Che.

If you don&#39;t, I suggest you pick up some reading ;)
Another form of revolution, such as? Non-violence? Do you even know what Marx meant when he used the term &#39;dictatorship of the proletariat&#39;? it meant the rule of the proletariat&#33; That is quite what anarchism is also all about. Unless you personallly have other views... <_<
Anarchism is almost exactly the same as communism, both have the same end and striving towards the same goal basically, the rule of the proletariat.Both advocate mass action and use of violent means to effect change. If any anarchist writer has suggested otherwise, please let me know.
Likewise i would suggest reading into communist literature to gain a better understanding of the movement and it&#39;s goals, instead of focusing only on anarchist critique.
I would suggest reading the communist manifesto followed by &#39;marxism freedom and the state&#39;by mikhail bakunin. The second is a critique of marx&#39;s work and theory.
Stateism and anarchy by mikhail bakunin followed by the &#39;conspectus of bakunin&#39;s stateism and anarchy&#39; by karl marx. This will give you an understanding of the split between the two and the differences in fundamental communist and anarchist theory.
I would furthur suggest reading into works by Lenin and Trotsky. Fidel Castro&#39;s capitalism in crisis is also an extremely interesting read. [/b]
Im refering to the so called "prolitarian dictatorship" as the one revolutionary form used in cuba. Which is very authoritarian.

[Paradox]

Never read the "If in doubt, kill him" quote anywhere. Read the other two, but don&#39;t see the relevance.

And to the best of my knowledge, from what I&#39;ve read, the only people executed were real enemies of the revolution. So I would say, if someone&#39;s counter-revolutionary and guilty of rape, murder, or torture, shoot the bastards. What the hell would you do with them? I&#39;m not saying go crazy and kill anyone who expresses concern or criticism, but damn, if they&#39;re fuckin&#39; guilty, their fuckin&#39; guilty. You make it sound as if we should all just go frolic in the park together or some shit. And I&#39;m not one of these Che idolizers who practically worship him, but I do have some shirts, Jon Lee Anderson&#39;s book on him, and his book on Guerrilla Warfare. He was quite strict, but that was with his troops, discipline, and with himself. Things like not wanting to live differently than the average Cuban, like when he stayed in the house of a former batista official because he was ill, he didn&#39;t want to be seen as have advantages, shit like that. Or not letting his wife have fancy, expensive Italian leather boots. And he did care for captured enemy troops. And I&#39;ve never read anything to prove there was torture of prisoners. So if you have any links on that, why don&#39;t you post them? You still haven&#39;t proved there was any torture, whether it be done to Anarchists or actual counter-revolutionaries.

[MoscowFarewell]

Originally posted by *****[email protected] 14 2005, 04:55 PM
Yes it is true. Not only did they kill batista people, but also anarcho- syndicalists who foght in the revolution, just like Lenin did to alot of Boljsevik anarchists.&#39;¨&#39;

If you ask me, Che is a complete asshole.
Read a few Biographies. I think he may have killed a few hundred, but he prefers to convert than to slaughter. Know the accused, please.

[Hiero]

Its quite ironic as many members of this board are so keen to talk about how they will fight and kill for the revolution, yet they condemn every violent act of revolution.

[4514]

Its quite ironic as many members of this board are so keen to talk about how they will fight and kill for the revolution, yet they condemn every violent act of revolution.


nothing better than when someone puts a statement that hits the nail right on the head.

if you don&#39;t crush your enemies without mercy they will only re-group and fight back.
Che was a great person in my opinion whether he excuted them or not,
his virtues and legend out way any of his wrong doings or faults.

4514
rank and file

[BitchBrew]

Originally posted by MoscowFarewell+Aug 21 2005, 05:56 AM--> (MoscowFarewell @ Aug 21 2005, 05:56 AM)
*****[email protected] 14 2005, 04:55 PM
Yes it is true. Not only did they kill batista people, but also anarcho- syndicalists who foght in the revolution, just like Lenin did to alot of Boljsevik anarchists.&#39;¨&#39;

If you ask me, Che is a complete asshole.
Read a few Biographies. I think he may have killed a few hundred, but he prefers to convert than to slaughter. Know the accused, please. [/b]
Actually I have read John Lee Andersons biographie, it didn&#39;t exacley make me more "pro-che".

[MoscowFarewell]

Originally posted by *****Brew+Aug 21 2005, 01:43 PM--> (*****Brew @ Aug 21 2005, 01:43 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2005, 05:56 AM

*****[email protected] 14 2005, 04:55 PM
Yes it is true. Not only did they kill batista people, but also anarcho- syndicalists who foght in the revolution, just like Lenin did to alot of Boljsevik anarchists.&#39;¨&#39;

If you ask me, Che is a complete asshole.
Read a few Biographies. I think he may have killed a few hundred, but he prefers to convert than to slaughter. Know the accused, please.
Actually I have read John Lee Andersons biographie, it didn&#39;t exacley make me more "pro-che". [/b]
I have it to, with a few others. And I&#39;m surprised you didn&#39;t understand his person with that kind of act. Che would rather people live than not, why do you think his tactic was to convert the opposition and help tend their wounded? You might have read it, but give a shot at understanding it.