Results 21 to 40 of 111
Was he a Marxist? Well he seemed to consider himself one, so in that sense yes he was a marxist. As far as his interpretation of Marxism, well that's a debate about what would be included in that category and so subjective definitions or demarcations come into play (I don't think this is the most useful way to understand someone or a history or a movement, if it's all just about abstract definitions of political ideas). On the other hand I personally see a more useful way of thinking about this is in terms of if his ideas (or ideas associated with him) advance the project of Marxism and I don't think it does if the goal of Marxism is the self-emancipation of the working class.
In this sense I think his ideas are much more alligned with anti-colonial revolutionaries and in that context there were a lot of revolutions which took parts or took all of Socialist (M-L generally in a cold war context) ideas and termonology and some reforms were a major trend. Many of these revolutions happened in a context where the old ruling class was too tied to international imperialists or colonial rulers to take an independant lead in changing (modernizing) society and the working class movement was too weak, disorganized, or mostly non-existant to create an alternative vision of society. So often some other force (claiming the universal interests of "the people") took power over the state to take initiatives that the bourgoise was unable to do (both in the sense of reforms to keep pesants or workers happy even at the expense of specific capitalists, as well as in modernizing the economy and giving up some short-term profits for longer-term development): a populist general, the intelligencia, etc.
Actually what I said was that their is a difference between someone who is a part of the bourgeoisie (not Che) and someone who has bourgeois beliefs (Che, and most of the world today). He was calling Che a bourgeoisie, and/or that he had bourgeoisie beliefs, which is a) the incorrect use of the term bourgeoisie, and b) untrue, as Che was not a part of the bourgeoisie, but had bourgeois beliefs i.e. not a Marxist. My whole point was about semantics.
Friedrich Engels was part of the Bourgoisie but became a commy.
Fine disregarding my misuse of the words semantically. I have seen NO proof that Che had bourgeoisie beliefs. Che was a Marxist in my belief and I think be brought revolution to South America. You can debate academically all you like, but Che left Cuba to fight the international fight in Bolivia and South Africa. He doesn't show any sense of having bourgeoisie beliefs. The man fought for the international struggle for the liberation of oppressed people. Until there is finite proof, and I mean contextual support, all I'm hearing is a bunch of opinionated people. I've yet been presented with the idea that was Che held bourgeoisie beliefs so please provide the support to this claim. I'm here to learn and I asked a specific question that has yet been proven. Thank you.
Again, he didn't have bourgeoisie beliefs, but rather bourgeois beliefs.
Onto the substance, do you believe Stalinism is a bourgeois ideology or a socialist ideology?
Please define bourgeoisie and bourgeois.
Che wasn't a materialist and I personally don't see how he had bourgeois beliefs.. He didn't believe in owning capital. He wasn't a materialist.
Bourgeoisie is a noun referring to the entire ruling class in capitalist society.
Bourgeois is an adjective meanig of or relating to the bourgeoisie.
Bourgeois ideology, in my mind, is any sort of ideology that helps and/or does not threaten the existence of the bourgeoisie and bourgeois society.
To be a Marxist, one must be a materialist.
How was he not a materialist?
Che was a genuine revolutionary. Anyone here saying he was "bourgeois" and "had bourgeois beliefs" should take a closer look at themselves.
I think RedGuevara is not using a Marxist definition of 'materialist'. I think s/he means 'Che wasn't greedy'.
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
Why should we look at ourselves to determine if Che was a Marxist or not? Why not look at Che himself if we want to determine what he was, and if he was a Marxist?
Edit: Revolutionary is not synonymous with Marxist.
You should look at yourself, your bourgeois life and what you have achieved. He was a Marxist even if he did some things you don't like.
Wow. I can't believe any revolutionary leftist of any tendency would have this opinion. It sounds like Batista's and Barrientos' propaganda machine during Che's insurgencies as a matter of fact.
I'm not talking about differences between what possible tendencies he could be considered, if Che had bourgeois notions of society, or even this ridiculous notion that he wasn't a materialist. I won't even debate if he was a Marxist in this reply because no one has given me any proof otherwise, although he obviously does not fall under any one specific tendency of communism.
I will say however, that many, not all, but many of the things he did benefited the proletariat and peasants; Cuban workers and peasants benefited from Batista's downfall and Che's push for universal literacy most certainly helped the "interests of the 'poor and oppressed'"; he pushed for better machinery for the Cuban industrial workers and peasants while working at INRA and the Ministry of Industries in Cuba since the Soviets gave old harvesting equipment, cheap steel, and faulty industrial equipment; and he was willing to attempt to teach socialism to disenfranchised peasants and toilers in both Bolivia and the Congo, which obviously benefits the field and factory workers in those countries.
Even if he did nothing beneficial, inspiring, or exemplary for the working class, how, in any way, is Che Guevara an "assassin for the bourgeoisie"?
Essentially, I understand how some do not consider Che a Marxist since he used and advocated a new, completely different method of attempting a socialistic worker's state.
However, I don't understand and would appreciate some examples of his "bourgeois beliefs", I'd appreciate some examples of how he was not a materialist, AND I'd really appreciate some, actually any, example of how Che was an "assassin for the bourgeoisie."
Yeah, totally Batista's propaganda machine said Che was working for the bourgeoisie, that's totally what they were saying.
The 'Cuban Revolution' had nothing to do with the proletariat. Wherever did you get that notion from?
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
what is a bourgeois life? and what is he or we supposed to achieve?
All i want is a Marxist Hunk.
It is true that labor produces for the rich wonderful things – but for the worker it produces privation. It produces palaces – but for the worker, hovels. It produces beauty – but for the worker, deformity. It replaces labor by machines, but it throws one section of the workers back into barbarous types of labor and it turns the other section into a machine. It produces intelligence – but for the worker, stupidity, cretinism.
Wer hat uns verraten? Sozialdemokraten!
Ideological purity and complete inaction, obviously.
well left coms(and others) usally dont consider themselfs to be part of "the left".
i never heard any batista propaganda, what was it saying? was it saying that che was a "bourgeois assassin"?
what is your defenition of socialism? and how can you teach socialism to someone?
All i want is a Marxist Hunk.
It is true that labor produces for the rich wonderful things – but for the worker it produces privation. It produces palaces – but for the worker, hovels. It produces beauty – but for the worker, deformity. It replaces labor by machines, but it throws one section of the workers back into barbarous types of labor and it turns the other section into a machine. It produces intelligence – but for the worker, stupidity, cretinism.
Wer hat uns verraten? Sozialdemokraten!
And what bourgeois beliefs did Che have?
"WE COMMUNISTS ARE ALL DEAD MEN ON LEAVE"
Eugen Leviné
