I Agree With You, whoever you are
Results 1 to 8 of 8
i've noticed that a lot of people on this site are very dogmatic. whenever someone says something that is remotely in disagreement with che guevara, everyone jumps on him/her. just because we all respect che, it doesn't mean we have to blindly agree with everything he says. che himself didn't follow what marx or anyone else said word for word, he complied all his knowledge of different thinkers and philosophers into what he thought would work best for cuba and the world during his time. everything he said then might not necessarily be the best way for the world of today. people need to be more open to the ideas of all their fellow human beings and not be so quick in putting them down. that is the only way of making progress. no one ever accomplished anything by blindly following the thoughts of others. reanalysis and thought is what makes us progressand discover new solutions. but that's just what i think...
Che Guevara wannabe
I Agree With You, whoever you are
Yup
for the love of love
You are absolutely correct. We must remember that Che himself was very non-dogmatic. There are several things that Che did with which I disagree. For example, he revoked the autonomy of the Universidad de La Habana. In Latin America, universities have to declare their autonomy from the government. In Mexico they even had to make it part of their names (e.g. Universidad AUTONOMA nacional de Mexico; Universidad AUTONOMA de Guadalajara) to make it clear to the authoritarian presidents that the students and campus were off limits to censorship and repression. Che took this privilage away from the university and effectively forced certain students to study certain subjects which they may or may not have wanted to persue. Does anyone agree with that policy?
HLVS,
CG
I don't agree with that policy personally. But in Cuba, as with communism, everything is done to be of good to the revolution and benefit the new society. What good would a liberal arts education have in a world based upon the ownership of the means of production?
Che Guevara wannabe
Guest,
That is very true. That was the purpose; I believe that at the time there were too many lawyers and not enough engineers. The revolution called for engineers so students were forced to study engineering. It's ture that under communism the citizens must work to benefit the society, and yet, the society can only exist to benefit the citizen or there would be no point. Society is not an entity unto itself. Rather, it is the product of individuals cooperating. I belive that one's right to persue an education freely is something sacred that must never be infringed upon (like the autonomy of a university). Perhaps they could have used incentives, even moral incentives as I'm sure Che would have prefered. But I can never agree with forcing students to abandon their intellectual goals.
I agree with the thought that we dont have to follow everthing Ches has said.
And also he wasnt very faithful to himself anyways.
But there are things that are so obviously coherent that we ahould all take a look...
dont you think?
hey, did you forget?
the opressed have the right and should use violence against the opressor.
You are absolutely right. Also, we should bear in mind that the world has changed a lot since 1967, so if he still were alive he would for sure have developed new views. However, his thoughts were so realistic that they are still alive and valid.
