Commandante Che Guevara, Stalinist or good guy?

[Colonello Buendia]

Now guys I have been reading Ches' biography and it seems to suggest he was a Stalinist.
Was he?

I'd like to know because, well I thought he was a great guy so if he was Stalinist I would be shocked and would have to burn my Che T-shirt!

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 05:23 pm
Now guys I have been reading Ches' biography and it seems to suggest he was a Stalinist.
Was he?

I'd like to know because, well I thought he was a great guy so if he was Stalinist I would be shocked and would have to burn my Che T-shirt!
"burn my che t-shirt" haha well that would teach you not to rock someone's face on a Tshirt if you don't know who they were or what they stand for.

[blackstone]

Originally posted by R_P_A_S+October 15, 2007 05:29 pm--> (R_P_A_S @ October 15, 2007 05:29 pm)
[email protected] 15, 2007 05:23 pm
Now guys I have been reading Ches' biography and it seems to suggest he was a Stalinist.
Was he?

I'd like to know because, well I thought he was a great guy so if he was Stalinist I would be shocked and would have to burn my Che T-shirt!
"burn my che t-shirt" haha well that would teach you not to rock someone's face on a Tshirt if you don't know who they were or what they stand for. [/b]
I agree with RPAS, don't wear the shirt as some sorta fashion statement. Wear it because there's something about Che that you admire and respect.

[Boriznov]

Che wasn't a intelligent politician, he just fought for communism to establish it in lands. I think he didn't think about the ways how, only if it would set the way to it.

Rock the shirt because he fought for a good cause and was a good rebelfighter.

[R_P_A_S]

myself was very confused after reading that Che book. by Anderson Lee. I mean I guess it's my own fault and if you think about it its the way we been raised. specially here in the American school system.

All these History Book heroes are made out to be saints and just the most righteous! and there is never any other info on them besides all "the good things they did"

Che is no different. to me he was perhaps one of the greatest man that ever lived just for his sacrifice and efforts. He might not had been the smartest politician. some what of a dreamer we all I think agree on that. not the most rational guy and perhaps ruthless and violent. but then again isn't the issue revolution? and the conditions were also hostile towards him.

there's no book on how to fight a "nice war" you know? theres no way. I hate how the attacks on che are always slander and accusations of being a murder and a power freak. I repeat again. not to make excuses but then again look at the war like conditions che had to perform in and most importantly the enemy!

i simply can't stand back and criticize his methods and bash him for them.

I have no idea what I WOULD HAVE DONE in his place.

[Colonello Buendia]

I thought I understood what he stood for when I bought the tee it was when I delved into it I got confused.



But thanks you guys you helped me out




and in America do the teach you abut Che?



We don't even get a mention of him

[Искра]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 05:48 pm
Rock the shirt because he fought for a good cause and was a good rebelfighter.
and what is a good cause? because he was fighting for freedom and killed a lot of innocent people? or because he was fighting for communism?

[bootleg42]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 06:43 pm
I thought I understood what he stood for when I bought the tee it was when I delved into it I got confused.



But thanks you guys you helped me out




and in America do the teach you abut Che?



We don't even get a mention of him
They don't mention El Che at all in the United States schools, no.

And they did not even mention the Cuban revolution, they only mention the missle crisis and they kept calling Cuba a communist state (oxymoron) in my textbook and my teacher just basically repeated it.

[Killer Enigma]

myself was very confused after reading that Che book. by Anderson Lee.
I love when people use "myself" incorrectly, quite obviously because they wished to sound smarter. You cannot use an intensive pronoun without an antecedent ('I' for 'myself, 'he' for 'himself', etc.).

[Boriznov]

Originally posted by Jurko Kataklizma+October 15, 2007 06:51 pm--> (Jurko Kataklizma @ October 15, 2007 06:51 pm)
[email protected] 15, 2007 05:48 pm
Rock the shirt because he fought for a good cause and was a good rebelfighter.
and what is a good cause? because he was fighting for freedom and killed a lot of innocent people? or because he was fighting for communism? [/b]
He was fighting against american and belgian imperialism.

Innocent people always fall, every revolution it happens. It's a shame innocent lives are harmed also but you can't blame che for that alone.

[Herman]

well I thought he was a great guy so if he was Stalinist I would be shocked and would have to burn my Che T-shirt!

You would be shocked to learn that Che admired Stalin?

Why?

Judge him by his actions, not the people he admires.

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by Killer [email protected] 15, 2007 07:56 pm

myself was very confused after reading that Che book. by Anderson Lee.
I love when people use "myself" incorrectly, quite obviously because they wished to sound smarter. You cannot use an intensive pronoun without an antecedent ('I' for 'myself, 'he' for 'himself', etc.).
glad i can do something "you love" and thanks for the english lesson. it was merely a mistake.

[Killer Enigma]

Originally posted by R_P_A_S+October 15, 2007 08:59 pm--> (R_P_A_S @ October 15, 2007 08:59 pm)
Killer [email protected] 15, 2007 07:56 pm

myself was very confused after reading that Che book. by Anderson Lee.
I love when people use "myself" incorrectly, quite obviously because they wished to sound smarter. You cannot use an intensive pronoun without an antecedent ('I' for 'myself, 'he' for 'himself', etc.).
glad i can do something "you love" and thanks for the english lesson. it was merely a mistake. [/b]
You're forgiven and thank you.

[Great Helmsman]

What's wrong with being a Stalinist?

[Axel1917]

I read a crap article in The Economist that stated things about Che being a "mass murderer," "anti-democratic," etc. This is not true at all. I believe that he had his faults, and I am working my way through an article by Alan Woods, but from what I have seen of his article so far, Che was not a Stalinist.

The article I have been working through:

Part 1 : http://www.marxist.com/forty-years-death-c...evara091007.htm (http://www.marxist.com/forty-years-death-che-guevara091007.htm)

Part 2: http://www.marxist.com/forty-years-death-c...t-two101007.htm (http://www.marxist.com/forty-years-death-che-guevara-part-two101007.htm)

The article is Trotskyist, and I am not sure of how much you agree with Trotskyism, but it does show that Che was not a Stalinist.

The bourgeoisie are waging a two-sided war against Che: on the one hand, they try to turn him into a harmless icon, trying to make a caricature of him without his revolutionary method, to rob Che's method of its very substance, and on the other hand, to portray him as some kind of totalitarian mass murder. In the article, Alan Woods remarked that people that support revolutionary measures should make some kind of "Society for the Protection of Che Guevara." He really is one of the most distorted and icon-like figures in history. It is important to understand what he stood for to get a start at revolutionary ideology, in addition to showing the bourgeoisie that any shirt or item you have with his face on it is not intended to be merely a trinket.

[Faux Real]

How about he saw past ideologies and was simply a human trying to change things for better.

Judge him on his actions CCCP900.

((If you hate Stalinism why do you have that forum name anyway?))

@ KE: lay off RPAS.

[mandy_z]

Stalin scares Amerikans and first worlders. Didn't Marx say something about the ruling class trembling?

[Led Zeppelin]

Yes, Che was a Stalinist. That's why after the revolution in Cuba he stayed there in the bureaucracy and lived well for the rest of his life....oh wait. :P

[Schrödinger's Cat]

How Stalin has been portrayed differs on the time period in question. The extent of corruption in the Soviet Union wasn't known until the 80s with reforms, allowing for an "open government." Although the personality cult was discredit by Kruschev, the full extent of what Stalin did remained filed away until the last throes of the USSR.

Che advocated democracy and didn't reside with Castro long enough to know he'd be appointed "dictator for life." I wouldn't call that "Stalinist" by any measure.

[Colonello Buendia]

You cleared a few things up thanks

[Random Precision]

I doubt ideology within the communist movement mattered all that much to Che, he was pretty much solely concerned with immidiate action against capitalism. I have heard many things about his supposed "Anti-Revisionism", such as that he admired Stalin and Kim Il Sung. I don't know which way to go on that, I don't know what he was thinking. What I do know is that when he visited the USSR and Eastern Europe, he was horrified by the lavish lifestyles of the Stalinist bureaucracts there as well as the position of the working class.

I have also heard that he was interested in Trotsky's works, he was given "The Permanent Revolution" by a friend, and in fact he supposedly took "The Revolution Betrayed" with him to Bolivia. He also convinced at least one friend to study Trotsky. Whatever his position on Trotskyism, however, he certainly did not have the correct analysis of proletarian revolution and a sufficient alternative to Stalinist bureaucracy, as his "Foco" strategy proves.

One thing I will say about Che, Stalinist or no, is that he could have had a much more comfortable lifestyle by staying in Cuba after the revolution. Someone like that is worth ten million armchair Trotskyists.

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 01:44 pm
Someone like that is worth ten million armchair Trotskyists.
Or one @nti-dialectical Trot. ;)

[Die Neue Zeit]

Originally posted by rev0lt+October 16, 2007 02:29 pm--> (rev0lt @ October 16, 2007 02:29 pm)
[email protected] 16, 2007 01:44 pm
Someone like that is worth ten million armchair Trotskyists.
Or one @nti-dialectical Trot. ;) [/b]
I'm more inclined to say three. That she still happens to be a Trot is somewhat disappointing. :( ;)

[Ander]

Is the biography you're talking about A Revolutionary Life by Anderson? It's a great book.

I don't think it's fair to call Che a Stalinist because the term bears a different meaning now than it did back then. As Gene-Costa said, the knowledge of what had actually occurred in the Soviet Union during Stalin's reign wasn't fully known until much later. There were many famous Stalinists in the 30's, 40's, and 50's who I'm sure would quickly denounce their support for him if they were still around nowadays.

As for admiring him, there are several reasons.

In this same biography, Anderson later writes about Che's reaction to the lifestyles of Communist politicians. Che was disappointed and shocked by the obvious class distinctions separating the Party bureaucrats and the common people.

Also, after the Cuban Revolution when Che secured important positions within the Cuban government, he continued to pursue revolutionary struggle around the world. He didn't choose to stay in Cuba and live a fat life of luxury, instead he shipped off to fight guerilla warfare in awful conditions in Africa and South America, dying in the process.

Che, like all human beings, has his faults, sure. But you cannot deny his undying revolutionary spirit and overall desire to better humanity. That's something to admire him for and a reason to wear a shirt bearing his likeness with pride.

[bezdomni]

lol he would have said he was a maoist too, although I think in practice some of his methods were not consistent with marxist-leninist-maoist tactics.

[Comrade Nadezhda]

I am not a 'Stalinist' but I still admire Che, and regardless of whether or not he would be considered a Stalinist, I don't consider him to be. I admire him for his revolutionary spirit- the term 'Stalinist' is almost meaningless in regard to Che- it is thought of much differently now, and the circumstances that existed during Che's lifetime are not thought of the same way by people now as it was at the time. I have a che shirt, among other things, and I do because I admire him for his courage, and his revolutionary spirit- and how he fought for the sake of humanity- in horrible conditions- he did not live a life of luxury.

[dez]

"Comandante", not "Commandante".
It's not a spin of of commander, you know..

[Ander]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 05:05 pm
"Comandante", not "Commandante".
It's not a spin of of commander, you know..
Um...actually, if you translated commander directly into Spanish you'd get comandante.

[black magick hustla]

Che was a communist, period. it is pathetic how ideologues try to claim him as "theirs"- :rolleyes:

[ComradeR]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 10:41 pm
Che was a communist, period. it is pathetic how ideologues try to claim him as "theirs"- :rolleyes:
Agreed. It's rather sad how the left has reduced itself to bickering over ideological nonsense.

[Herman]

Like I said, don't judge him according to what his ideological inspirations were, but by his actions and his personality.

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by ComradeR+October 19, 2007 08:50 am--> (ComradeR @ October 19, 2007 08:50 am)
[email protected] 18, 2007 10:41 pm
Che was a communist, period. it is pathetic how ideologues try to claim him as "theirs"- :rolleyes:
Agreed. It's rather sad how the left has reduced itself to bickering over ideological nonsense. [/b]
i THIRD THAT

[lvleph]

Obviously, revolution can not take place while there is bickering within.

[Leo]

Now guys I have been reading Ches' biography and it seems to suggest he was a Stalinist.
Was he?

Yes, he was.

[black magick hustla]

Originally posted by Leo [email protected] 30, 2007 05:26 pm

Now guys I have been reading Ches' biography and it seems to suggest he was a Stalinist.
Was he?

Yes, he was.
Yes, he was a stalinist, however...

A lot of communists were stalinists at that time, and frankly, it seems Guevara was more concerned with direct action and dealing with opression, rather than with grand theoretical frameworks.

[Leo]

"I have sworn before a picture of old and mourned comrade Stalin that I won't rest until I see these capitalists octopuses annihilated." - Che

[Led Zeppelin]

That quote is from his Motorcycle Diaries, while Stalin himself was still alive.

He changed his view on Stalin later on, so he was not a Stalinist in the "orthodox" sense either.

[Le Libérer]

Originally posted by Led [email protected] 30, 2007 01:30 pm
That quote is from his Motorcycle Diaries, while Stalin himself was still alive.

He changed his view on Stalin later on, so he was not a Stalinist in the "orthodox" sense either.
I agree. As mentioned earlier, he was a defender of the down trodded and oppressed, and that is something that reaches across every idealogy/and or religion for that matter.

Isnt that the true nature of a revolutionary? To fight for those who cannot defend themselves? It is the highest calling there is.

[bootleg42]

True.

Plus, remember how he criticized the ruling class in the Soviet Union later on about the way they lived in luxury. If he had seen Stalin back in those days, then he probably would have said the same thing.

Que viva El Che carajo!!!!! :che: :hammer:

[Leo]

That quote is from his Motorcycle Diaries, while Stalin himself was still alive.

No, it actually is from a personal letter he sent to his aunt or something, after Stalin died. (Source: Compañero: The Life and Death of Che Guevara, New York: Vintage, 1998, p. 62)


He changed his view on Stalin later on

I would assume that he briefly did, as a reflection of Khrushchev's secret speech. Again, I would also assume that when he moved towards Maoism, his old feelings towards Stalin were restored. Nevertheless, I find it ridiculous to claim that Khrushchev himself really ceased to become a Stalinist anyway so...


Plus, remember how he criticized the ruling class in the Soviet Union later on about the way they lived in luxury. If he had seen Stalin back in those days, then he probably would have said the same thing.

But he didn't do the same thing when he went to Mao's China. Does this mean that Maoist China was not like Stalin's or Khrushchev's Russia to you?


Isnt that the true nature of a revolutionary? To fight for those who cannot defend themselves?

To me that resembles the romantic image of feudal chivalry rather than true nature of a revolutionary. A revolutionary is not someone who fights for those who can't defend themselves. The working class everywhere has got the power to defend it's interests and the task to emancipate themselves. A revolutionary is someone who fights along and pushes forward the workers who are defending their interests and attacking capital.

[Redmau5]

(Source: Compañero: The Life and Death of Che Guevara, New York: Vintage, 1998, p. 62)

In that very biography, Castaneda mentions that Trotskyist students were among the most willing to help Che during his struggle in Bolivia.

I don't think Che pigeon-holed himself into one particular ideology. As has been mentioned, I think he was more concerned with the practical side of things rather than the theoretical.

[Led Zeppelin]

Originally posted by Devrim
No, it actually is from a personal letter he sent to his aunt or something, after Stalin died. (Source: Compañero: The Life and Death of Che Guevara, New York: Vintage, 1998, p. 62)

He sent that personal letter while he was on his motorcycle travelling Latin-America, so it was from the same time-period. Stalin died around that same time I believe, so I could've been wrong about it being written while he was still alive.

Could you quote the source for the date of the letter?

Also CDL, I watched a docu on Che the other day in which it was said that he turned anti-Stalinist and anti-bureaucracy (of both the USSR and China), and criticized both for not helping the third world enough.

Then there was a video-speech of Che where he spoke in French and warned against the bureaucracy after a socialist revolution. Then "Willie", the last person to be with him while he was still alive and I believe also his closest comrade in arms, said that Che was furious after Fidel read the letter he wrote and said angrily: "Some people want to be like Stalin and create a cult of personality around themselves."

So I really doubt that Che was a pro-Stalin himself as a person, for one. And two, I really doubt that he was pro-Stalinist, as in pro-bureaucratic deformed socialism.

Regardless though, every serious revolutionary can agree that Che was a hero to the cause of working-class liberation. It is typical of ultra-leftists like Devrim and Leo to slander such people because they are not theoretically "pure" enough for them.

Who cares though? The working-class sure doesn't, or else they wouldn't have been a insignificant tendency in the working-class movement ever since their existence. It just annoys me when people who haven't done half of what the people they slander have done for working-class liberation, are so quick to paint them with the brush of "reactionary".

Also CDL, "Willie", when asked who was at fault for Che's mission failing in Bolivia, said that the USSR (KGB), Fidel and the Bolivian Communist Party were all to blame, and said that Che thought so as well, because they were promised a lot of things by them, and then when they arrived the situation was totally different.

What is your opinion on that?

[Leo]

“It is obvious that we can learn a series of things from Trotsky’s thinking.” - Che

Source?


QUOTE (Devrim)

That was me actually.


In that very biography, Castaneda mentions that Trotskyist students were among the most willing to help Che during his struggle in Bolivia.

Trotskyism was strong in Bolivia, I don't think any went to help Che in the jungles though because Che's main recruitment guy in the city was a Maoist. Besides he did consider Trotskyists to be counter-revolutionaries.


“It is obvious that we can learn a series of things from Trotsky’s thinking.” - Che

Source?

The only quote about Trotskyism from Guevara that I know is this "we consider the Trotskyist party to be acting against the revolution. For example, they were taking the line that the Revolutionary Government is petty bourgeois, and were calling on the proletariat to exert pressure on the government and even to carry out another revolution in which the proletariat would come to power. This was prejudicing the discipline necessary at this stage."

And also:


“..the terrible historical crime of Stalin: to have treated communist education with contempt and instituted the unlimited cult of authority”. - Che

Again, source?


Could you quote the source for the date of the letter?

Mid '53.


It is typical of ultra-leftists like Devrim and Leo to slander such people because they are not theoretically "pure" enough for them.

Actually, it's got nothing to do with theory and everything to do with the practice.


Also CDL, I watched a docu on Che the other day in which it was said that he turned anti-Stalinist and anti-bureaucracy (of both the USSR and China), and criticized both for not helping the third world enough.

Well, Maoists in China considered him to be unreliable so they didn't support him after a point. Nor did the USSR because they Che had gotten close to the Maoists. Thus it is natural that he did criticize them for not giving enough support to the "third world", although I highly doubt he had any criticisms about the internal regime in China. Can you quote or something?

[Led Zeppelin]

Originally posted by Leo [email protected] 31, 2007 03:05 pm
Actually, it's got nothing to do with theory and everything to do with the practice.
How was he a Stalinist in practice? Stalinists don't move to other countries to join or start liberation movements; Stalinists stay in the bureaucracy.


Can you quote or something?

No, the narrator said it.

[ellipsis]

if anything i would think he would be a leninist

[Leo]

First of all, I missed this bit:


every serious revolutionary can agree that Che was a hero to the cause of working-class liberation.

I think that every sane person who knows what working-class means, let alone working class liberation, can say that Che had nothing to do with the working class.

You can say he was a "hero to the cause of people's liberation", "hero to the cause of Cuban liberation", "hero to the cause of south American liberation" and so forth but not a "hero" or anything else of the working class.


How was he a Stalinist in practice? Stalinists don't move to other countries to join or start liberation movements; Stalinists stay in the bureaucracy.

Stalinists can move out of the country: they can have some problems with the existing bureaucracy and they can have to run for example or they can be intelligence agents or diplomats who are sent to other countries.

It is not the act of leaving that determines, it's what you do after you leave.

[Led Zeppelin]

Originally posted by Leo [email protected] 31, 2007 03:15 pm
I think that every sane person who knows what working-class means, let alone working class liberation, can say that Che had nothing to do with the working class.

You can say he was a "hero to the cause of people's liberation", "hero to the cause of Cuban liberation", "hero to the cause of south American liberation" and so forth but not a "hero" or anything else of the working class.
Yes, because Latin America and Cuba have no working-class, right?


Stalinists can move out of the country: they can have some problems with the existing bureaucracy and they can have to run for example or they can be intelligence agents or diplomats who are sent to other countries.

It is not the act of leaving that determines, it's what you do after you leave.

Yes, and what he did was to actively support liberation movements in other countries, instead of joining the Communist Party of that nation and sitting on his ass, like all the "official" Stalinist Communist Parties did.

[Leo]

Yes, because Latin America and Cuba have no working-class, right?

Of course they have a working class. He just had nothing to do with them.


Yes, and what he did was to actively support liberation movements in other countries, instead of joining the Communist Party of that nation and sitting on his ass, like all the "official" Stalinist Communist Parties did.

Well, let's see... In Guatemala (before going to Cuba), he ended being involved with the official CP. He then joined forces with Castro, after he left Cuba he toured lots of places. When in North Korea, he said North Korea was a model to which revolutionary Cuba should aspire. In Congo, he managed to get direct support from Castro. In Bolivia he lead a "national liberation" army of his own, loosely connected to Castro, on his own terms.

[Leo]

There's a lot you don't know about Che.

Oh, please :rolleyes:


Read the Message to the Tricontinental.

I have read it. Did you?


What is this based on?

http://www.geocities.com/youcreatedcosmos/cuba.html


Mario Monje, who wasn't a Maoist but a USSR-loyalist, sabotaged recruitment by preventing folks access to Che's unit.

Well, Monje was the head of the Bolivian CP so there wasn't any real trust between them and Monje wasn't really in any place to prevent anything. He merely promised to aid him and ended up not aiding him, but he couldn't even prevent several people from his party going over Guevara's side.


the tendency of both forces to use capitalist means of regulating trade

There isn't anything about that in that message. Quote directly if you think I'm wrong.


He criticized the split

That's also why he praised North Korea*: he was for, what we call "the middle way" here, that is between the USSR and China.

Back to the original question though, he was a Stalinist, that is always.

He had rejected Khrushchev’s speech in 1956 denouncing the crimes of Stalin as “imperialist propaganda” and defended the Russian invasion of Hungary that crushed the workers’ uprising there in the same year (Castañeda p.86). He thought that "solution to this world’s problems is to be found behind the so-called Iron Curtain” (Taibo p.154). However he still told Russian delegates that he was “a true friend of the Soviet Union” as late as January 1964* (Anderson p.625, p.585). (All quotes here come from: http://www.workersliberty.org/node/3076)

*In case you didn't know, this was also North Korea's position.
*Possibly another reason why he wasn't the favorite guy of Chinese Stalinists, but as I said he was an advocate of the "middle way" anyway.

[Leo]

Look, Che saw that the main enemy was imperialism, and that the main task was to destroy it; to pave the way for communism.

Yeah, something of that sorts... Again proving that he had nothing to do with the working class and his understanding of socialism had nothing to do with the working class as well.


Che recognized the bureaucracies arising in the USSR, China, etc.

Did he? When? Can you quote about China?


though neither took sides in the Sino-Soviet split.

Exactly. That is the "middle way".


Well, if some geocities free website created by an ultra-leftist says it, it must be true!

That's just incredibly hypocritical. "Any pro-castro site is reliable but hey, if it's a "ultra-leftist" website it must be full of lies, right!"

<_<



You&#39;re relying on the Third-Campist AWL, which doesn&#39;t even oppose the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan?

AWL? You mean the website?

I don&#39;t really care about their politics (but what do you mean by not opposing the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan? - I can&#39;t think of any left-wing group who doesn&#39;t oppose it... Do they support the Americans?) : everything I quoted from them had sources from books. But I find it ridiculous to bring out the website rather than dealing with the content.


“Monje, not satisfied with this outcome [of some members of the CP rejecting his decision not to assist Che as was originally promised], began to sabotage the movement, intercepting well-trained communist militants in La Paz who were going to join the guerrilla.”


"...Mario Monje, the general secretary of the Bolivian Communist Party, had pledged to support the initial plan headed by Che. Monje didn’t keep those pledges, and that held back the revolutionary movement that Che headed, depriving it of political support right from the beginning. It also caused difficulties with the urban networks, which were hard hit. Some members of the Bolivian Communist Party wanted to join the guerrilla movement but Monje placed obstacles in their way. For example, when Che left Cuba, there was a group of about 15 or 20 Bolivians here who had completed their training, but Monje didn’t give them the facilities for joining the guerrillas." - Manuel ‘Barbarroja’ Piñeiro “Che Guevara and the Latin American Revolutionary Movements”

Of course he tried to stop people from his Party (that&#39;s what well-trained communist militant means here if you didn&#39;t know) from joining with Che Guevara. It was hardly a sabotage though, Monje was only trying to keep his little party under his control. He didn&#39;t, as he wasn&#39;t in the position to sabotage Guevara&#39;s movement as a whole. He was just trying to prevent people from his party aiding Guevara.


You are sorely mistaken here.

I don&#39;t think so.


I said to read the Message to the Tricontinental in response to your asking where Che criticized China.

And I said I already read it and there is no criticism towards the bureaucracy in China in that text.


The next statement, that Che criticized China and the USSR for all those other reasons was meant in general, i.e. he criticized them for all those things, at different times and in different places.

OK, so can you directly quote from any criticism made by Guevara of the Chinese (or the North Korean) bureaucracies?

[The Author]

Commandante Che Guevara, Stalinist or good guy?

I look at Che as a revolutionary fighter who helped in the struggle against imperialism and inspired the peoples of the oppressed countries to fight their oppressors. He made many contributions to the communist struggle, and he made his share of mistakes as well.

[Orange Juche]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 04:03 pm
Innocent people always fall, every revolution it happens. It&#39;s a shame innocent lives are harmed also but you can&#39;t blame che for that alone.
And you also cant just excuse easily and half-ass excuse evil bullshit because you percieve someone as a high-status icon.