Home Politics and Debate
Exciting news! Join our watch club and get free access to NOW for 1 month

Opinions on Che Guevara (12/28/2010)

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
Here's something I'd like to start doing. Everyday I will post a discussion in which we discuss and share opinions on important figures of past and present. Today's person is Che Guevara, what do you think of him? Che Guevara was an Argentine Marxist revolutionary, physician, author, intellectual, guerrilla leader, diplomat, military theorist, and major figure of the Cuban Revolution. He traveled the world to preach communism to whom he believed to be oppressed peoples. He was captured and later executed in Bolivia by a joint CIA-Bolivian task force. After his death, he became an international symbol of communism. What are your thoughts on Che Guevera, his life, his works, and his beliefs?

Read more on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che_Guevara
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What do YOU think of him ?

    This isn't a lecture hall. Discuss.

    It's good etiquette to put your own point/view/opinion first, saves you looking like a troll like good ol' saturn.
  • LauraOLauraO ********* Posts: 535 The answer to life, the universe, and everything
    Hi Grid :wave:
    I have just moved this to the Politics and Debate forum as I think you will get more replies here.
    As Rubberskin said it might be a good idea to kick the discussion off by giving your opinion...
    LauraO
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think he got shot a load of times by a drunk dude, pretty bad day for him...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I wonder how he would feel if he knew that his image was the second most-reproduced image on the planet, second only to Jesus, and a very lucrative one at that.

    Does the Guevara estate actually sanction half the tat that's sold with his mug on it?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    My opinion of Che Guevera is that he was a man who saw what he believed to be wrong with the system, and he took a stand against it, and I believe he had good intentions. However, I can't say I agree with some of the means he used to spread his message.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Grid wrote: »
    Today's person is Che Guevara, what do you think of him?

    He's staple t-shirt and poster material for white guys with dreads.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I know the shilloutte of his face looks good superimposed over a red background.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I like how alot of people that wear his face on a t-shirt don't have a clue about the story behind the face as it were...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The forum does record the dates you post, you know? It does it the right way round too. ;)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well, I wouldn't, if that's what you're asking?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The popularity of his image with student revolutionary types allows you to realise you're dealing with a cunt before someone who's wearing it even opens their mouth, so kudos for that I suppose.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Grid wrote: »
    My opinion of Che Guevera is that he was a man who saw what he believed to be wrong with the system, and he took a stand against it, and I believe he had good intentions. However, I can't say I agree with some of the means he used to spread his message.
    There are likely people who know more about the Cuban revolution than me, but I think that it's important to put in to context, the means they took to achieve their goal.

    Batista, the dictator who was in place in the time and pandering to the USA (much in the way the USA backed the overthrowing of Salvador Allende in Chile, replacing him with Pinochet), as governing the country with an iron fist. His 'friends' were organised criminals, elections were staged, dissidents were jailed and people were living in dire poverty...

    I think if in the UK, the same methods of guerilla warfare were used, it could be criticised more harshly, but this was not the UK.

    Is this what you mean?

    What other ways could the movement have took to overthrow the regime?

    (Sorry, I didn't really give an opinion on Che, just on armed revolt in the Cuban revolution, when Che did much much more!)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I've read 'The Motorcycle Diaries' and I still don't have an opinion on Che Guevara.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I've read 'The Motorcycle Diaries' and I still don't have an opinion on Che Guevara.
    Is it a good read though?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Namaste wrote: »
    Is it a good read though?

    Not really :no:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Namaste wrote: »
    There are likely people who know more about the Cuban revolution than me, but I think that it's important to put in to context, the means they took to achieve their goal.

    Batista, the dictator who was in place in the time and pandering to the USA (much in the way the USA backed the overthrowing of Salvador Allende in Chile, replacing him with Pinochet), as governing the country with an iron fist. His 'friends' were organised criminals, elections were staged, dissidents were jailed and people were living in dire poverty...

    I think if in the UK, the same methods of guerilla warfare were used, it could be criticised more harshly, but this was not the UK.

    Is this what you mean?

    What other ways could the movement have took to overthrow the regime?

    (Sorry, I didn't really give an opinion on Che, just on armed revolt in the Cuban revolution, when Che did much much more!)

    You seem to be missing a bit of the context - Batista was corrupt, but the people killed by his regime probably number less than 2000. Under castro they're about 30,000 dead (Che ran the firing squads which killed a fair few of them). Batista was corrupt and didn't allow free elections, which is exactly the same as before except Castro doesn't even bother having elections to fix. Batista was close to the US, Che and Castro were close to the USSR - which was the nastiest of these two regimes?

    The Castro revolution was a cure which was much, much worse than the disease

    I do wonder what the next topic for discussion will be? Laventry Beria -effective policing co-ordinator? Herman Goerring - much maligned airman?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You seem to be missing a bit of the context - Batista was corrupt, but the people killed by his regime probably number less than 2000. Under castro they're about 30,000 dead (Che ran the firing squads which killed a fair few of them). Batista was corrupt and didn't allow free elections, which is exactly the same as before except Castro doesn't even bother having elections to fix. Batista was close to the US, Che and Castro were close to the USSR - which was the nastiest of these two regimes?

    The Castro revolution was a cure which was much, much worse than the disease

    I do wonder what the next topic for discussion will be? Laventry Beria -effective policing co-ordinator? Herman Goerring - much maligned airman?

    Batista was deeemed Right Wing, Guevarra was Left Wing, and the Left are always in the right no matter how many die (100s of millions under Communism) because it's all in the name of peace and equality :heart:

    I thought you would know this? :confused:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Would I be horribly playing to type if I threw in a few musings about the congo and what-the-fuck here?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    katralla wrote: »
    Would I be horribly playing to type if I threw in a few musings about the congo and what-the-fuck here?

    Throw in your musings and we'll see eh?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That was it my dear, the congo what-the-fuck. I'm not very deep.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why are you talking in riddles?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Am I talking in riddles? ffs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    katralla wrote: »
    Am I talking in riddles? ffs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    blawaferehfuerfhrufh
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well, that's simple- the square circle, of course!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    katralla wrote: »
    Well, that's simple- the square circle, of course!


    Quite so! Obviously you are deeper than you let on, your mind penetrates like a mighty phallus.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Spliffie wrote: »
    Batista was deeemed Right Wing, Guevarra was Left Wing, and the Left are always in the right no matter how many die (100s of millions under Communism) because it's all in the name of peace and equality :heart:

    I thought you would know this? :confused:

    Or perhaps they just don't make up statistics? ;)
    By the end of Batista's rule, described by U.S. President John F. Kennedy as "one of the most bloody and repressive dictatorships in the long history of Latin American repression", 20,000 Cubans had been killed.

    From Wikipedia.

    Forget a zero did you Flashman? So an alleged 20,000 in 11 years compared to an alleged 30,000 (although high estimates put it at 80,000) in 49 years? And then add to that the social policies implemented by each government, and you don't have to be left wing to pick the Castro regime as the least bad of the two options mentioned. Which isn't to say he shouldn't have stood down a long time ago (logically, at the end of the Cold War).

    Actually, scratch that. The high estimates of Castro's death toll include refugees dying on boats.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You seem to be missing a bit of the context - Batista was corrupt, but the people killed by his regime probably number less than 2000. Under castro they're about 30,000 dead (Che ran the firing squads which killed a fair few of them). Batista was corrupt and didn't allow free elections, which is exactly the same as before except Castro doesn't even bother having elections to fix. Batista was close to the US, Che and Castro were close to the USSR - which was the nastiest of these two regimes?

    The Castro revolution was a cure which was much, much worse than the disease
    Only I'm not talking about what they did post revolution. I'm talking about their means of getting there. Why I think the Cuban revolution was fought the way it was. Where did you get the figure of 30,000 from btw?

    How many people did Stalin kill?

    How many people have the USA killed, through economic programs, war, supporting dictators, deforestation ect ect ect

    It's not as simple as who was worse and it's not just about domestic affairs either. Both have done a lot of horrible things and whilst the Soviet Bloc collapsed, the USA still continues to kill a lot of people, even if they aren't on their own soil, or always from their own bombs.

    Who was worse does not matter if you're being tortured, or if a bomb has just been dropped on a health centre, but your kids need medicine to live. It's not a competition imo.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Or perhaps they just don't make up statistics? ;)



    From Wikipedia.

    Forget a zero did you Flashman?.


    Actually I didn't , I just didn't use Wikipedia as a source

    http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat7.htm#Cuba52


    43.Cuba (1952-59)
    ◦Batista regime (1952-59)
    ■Mario Lazo, Dagger in the Heart : American Policy Failures in Cuba (1968), calls Castro's charge that 20,000 were killed by Batista a "cynical falsehood". He says "total deaths ... not more than 900 on both [sides]"
    ■Mid-Century World, Newsweek (1970) believes the accusation: 20,000 executions in 2 years. (This is probably the only mainstream American source that does. Most simply ignore it.)
    ■Hugh Thomas, Cuba, or, the pursuit of freedom (1971, 1988): 1,500-2,000 deaths as a direct consequence of the political crisis, 1952-58, including war.
    ■Gilbert: 2,000 deaths in 6 years of war and punitive actions.
    ◦Civil War, 1958-59:
    ■B&J: 5,000
    ■Singer: 5,000 battle deaths, 1958-59
    ■Eckhardt: 2,000 civ. + 3,000 mil. = 5,000 (1958-59)
    ■WHPSI: 3,977 deaths from political violence, 1956-63

    I actually used Eckhardt and assumed all the civilian deaths were a direct responsibility of Batista (a big assumption of course). I didn't include military as I don't believe soldiers killed in battle should be included under democide, nor is it really fair to assign them to either Castro or Batista (if I had figures of PWs shot I would include them under democide of course).

    So an alleged 20,000 in 11 years compared to an alleged 30,000 (although high estimates put it at 80,000) in 49 years?


    On the 30,000 I went from this site

    http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/dictat.html

    Going from the site I just used on Batista so I'm being fair
    ◦Fidel Castro regime (1959- )
    ■Skidmore: 550 executions in 1st six months of 1959
    ■Gilbert: more than 2,000 executed.
    ■WHPSI: 2,113 political executions 1958-67
    ■Hugh Thomas, Cuba, or, the pursuit of freedom (1971, 1988): "perhaps" 5,000 executions by 1970.
    ■In addition, Thomas cites (unfavorably: "... does not command confidence")
    ■Cuban Information Service, 1963:
    ■2875 executed after trial
    ■4245 executed w/o trial
    ■2962 killed fighting Castro's regime.
    ■Caldeville (1969)
    ■22,000 killed or died in jail.
    ■2,000 drowned fleeing
    ■27 Dec. 1998 AP (published in Minneapolis Star Tribune and Buffalo News, et al.):
    ■cites Hugh Thomas: 5,000 might have beeen executed by 1970
    ■"... in recent years, capital punishment has been rare."
    ■Cuban American National Foundation (1997): 12,000 political executions (http://www.canfnet.org/english/faqfutur.htm)
    ■11 Dec. 1998 New Statesman: 18,000 killed or disappeared since 1959 (citing Cuban American Nat'l Foundation)
    ■Mario Lazo, Dagger in the Heart : American Policy Failures in Cuba (1968):
    ■15,000 put to death by 1967.
    ■35,000 refugees drowned (based on a 75% mortality, which seems high. cf. Vietnamese and Haitian death rates.)
    ■Total: 50,000
    ■Rummel (1959-87):
    ■Executions: 15,000
    ■Boat people drowned: 51,000 (based on a 75% mortality. See above)
    ■Died in prison: 7,000
    ■TOTAL: 73,000
    ■22 Feb. 1999 Houston Chronicle (editorial by Agustin Blazquez): 97,000 deaths caused by Castro. This number seems to have originally come from an unpublished study by Armando Lago [http://www.nocastro.com/archives/gohome.htm], which now apparently estimates a death toll of 116,730-119,730, the bulk of whom (85,000) disappeared at sea. [http://www.cubanueva.com/cubahoy/politica/1211_COSTOHUMANO-REVOLUCION.htm] Like most sources that only appear in editorials and Internet, be careful.


    ■ANALYSIS: The dividing line between those who have an ax to grind and those who don't falls in the 5,000-12,000 range. -My bold

    http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat6.htm

    I think the figures (disputable though they are) perhaps rest more on Batista killing less
    Actually, scratch that. The high estimates of Castro's death toll include refugees dying on boats

    Apologies I know you had this later, but it makes more sense to reply here. I actually don't see why Castro shouldn't take responsibility for this - if he had allowed people to leave (as democratic states do) they wouldn't have taken to the sea in leaky and dangerous craft. His regime does bear direction relation for those that died in the same way the East German regime bears responsibility for those who died escaping its borders.
    And then add to that the social policies implemented by each government,

    Why just the social - Castro's economic policies have left his country relatively worse off than the majority of its neighbours - that has a human cost in life expectancy etc.

    It should also be noted that the Cuban Health Care system lacks independent verifications and when there is independent research it doesn't neccessarily co-incide with the official Cuban sponsored view

    http://www.miscelaneasdecuba.net/media/pdf/Article-Hirschfeld-Press.pdf

    and you don't have to be left wing to pick the Castro regime as the least bad of the two options mentioned. Which isn't to say he shouldn't have stood down a long time ago (logically, at the end of the Cold War).

    Logically I would have said about 1960, allowing him twenty one years of murder and repression hardly seems compatible with any defence of democratic values or liberalism...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Or perhaps they just don't make up statistics? ;)

    So what do do you believe is the combined death toll worldwide under Communist regimes? Roughly.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Spliffie wrote: »
    So what do do you believe is the combined death toll worldwide under Communist regimes? Roughly.

    Why does the system of Govt make any difference?

    Are is this a pissing context over which cause the most deaths? If so, it's wasted time because you will never get a true figure... or one even close.
Sign In or Register to comment.