NationStates Jolt Archive

What do you think of the guy?

Communist posterboy? That would be a good choice for your poll. Woulda been my pick.

He would be cool if he wasn't a commie.

How about overrated? I bet you 90% of people who have his poster/t-shirt/coffee mug don't even know who he was or what he did. And how do you think a diehard communist would feel about having his image marketed to college students across the US?

You8 shoulda allowed votign more than once

How about overrated? I bet you 90% of people who have his poster/t-shirt/coffee mug don't even know who he was or what he did. And how do you think a diehard communist would feel about having his image marketed to college students across the US?

Or being depicted in a blockbuster Broadway musical by Mandy Patinkin...

How about overrated? I bet you 90% of people who have his poster/t-shirt/coffee mug don't even know who he was or what he did. And how do you think a diehard communist would feel about having his image marketed to college students across the US?
Hed be mighty peeved.
But I think he's more annoyed that people don't recognise him (I've had people identify him as Bam Margera, Marx, Filipe (wth?) Castro and Fidel Castro)

I had posted him as one as the most overrated persons.
Against Che's will, he is now an iccon or pin up in every student's room. Even Fidel abused him for propaganda after his death. Fidel showed hereby that he he was at the same bottom levell on some issues like propagand aso. asthe US.

I got this one in my room :cool:
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~UG02/cullers/images/celeb/che.jpg

...he is now an iccon or pin up in every student's room...Not every students rooms...just the rebels...like me. :D

I got this one in my room :cool:
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~UG02/cullers/images/celeb/che.jpg

And why do you have that poster in your room?

And why do you have that poster in your room?Cos I Like the Fella.

I recently did a spraypaint image of him for my room like a metre square. I also did one of Charlie Manson.

And why do you have that poster in your room?Viva El Che !!!

I got this one in my room :cool:
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~UG02/cullers/images/celeb/che.jpg

Great!!!
BTW I have never said that it does not have a place in a intelligent students chamber. Where I studied every anti-fascists/-republican, -Nazi, -Stalinist had them.

Just said that Fidell abused great Dr. Che. Keep on having this great poster in your young years :fluffle:

His life's work was uninspiring to me, but overcoming his own physical afflictions to play the part of a die-hard revolutionary is kinda interesting. Its true, I know people who have Che bumperstickers because "it seemed like the thing to do." Hell, many people who have Che stuff are ardent capitalists.

...Just said that Fidell abused great Dr. CheYou mean...abused him more than the Rangers?

The world's most successful singal person in spreading communism, and building the USSR's sphere of influence. I hate his ideas, but you gotta admire the fact that he was so involved. And his face is now synomynous with revolution.

his name is spelled wrong in the title....Ernesto "Che" Guevara

Who is that commie pinko in tha Jeep?http://www.southwestern.edu/~hinojosa/CultCiv/unidad5/resources/chepope.jpg

The world's most successful singal person in spreading communism, and building the USSR's sphere of influence. I hate his ideas, but you gotta admire the fact that he was so involved. And his face is now synomynous with revolution.

And Warhollian Pop Culture...

You mean...abused him more than the Rangers?

:p But I don't know the Rangers (guess they are a famous base- or basketball team, is it the NY Rangers?) I am from the other side of the Atlantic. :p Verry nice poster (don"'t mind Sdaeriji or what he says, know him since the beginning, a right wing pain in the ass :mp5: :rolleyes: ).

In Dutch/German/ French they say, his beacon ("baken") goes with the wind, witch means that he is only standfast in his opinions when it fits him. Some UK posters called him "doublle standard" often.

Late now, by man :cool:

his name is spelled wrong in the title....Ernesto "Che" Guevara
I knew somebody would notice that sooner or later *cries*

Or being depicted in a blockbuster Broadway musical by Mandy Patinkin...
I dislike the Commie, but
Oh what a circus, oh what a show
Argentina has gone to town
Over the death of an actress called Eva Peron
We've all gone crazy
Mourning all day and mourning all night
Falling over ourselves to get all of the misery right

Oh what an exit, that's how to go
When they're ringing your curtain down
Demand to be buried like Eva Peron
It's quite a sunset
And good for the country in a roundabout way
We've made the front page of all the world's papers today

But who is this Santa Evita?
Why all this howling, hysterical sorrow?
What kind of goddess has lived among us?
How will we ever get by without her?

She had her moments, she had some style
The best show in town was the crowd
Outside the Casa Rosada crying, "Eva Peron"
But that's all gone now
As soon as the smoke from the funeral clears
We're all gonna see and how, she did nothing for years


I never said I didn't like Andrew Lloyd Weber though...

Antonia Banderas also played him

I got this one in my room :cool:
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~UG02/cullers/images/celeb/che.jpg

Cool, the man was great. A true martyr for his beliefs.

And Warhollian Pop Culture...
That was Andy Warhol that made that image of Che? I knew there was something I liked about the picture.

I dislike the Commie, but
Oh what a circus, oh what a show
Argentina has gone to town
Over the death of an actress called Eva Peron
We've all gone crazy
Mourning all day and mourning all night
Falling over ourselves to get all of the misery right

Oh what an exit, that's how to go
When they're ringing your curtain down
Demand to be buried like Eva Peron
It's quite a sunset
And good for the country in a roundabout way
We've made the front page of all the world's papers today

But who is this Santa Evita?
Why all this howling, hysterical sorrow?
What kind of goddess has lived among us?
How will we ever get by without her?

She had her moments, she had some style
The best show in town was the crowd
Outside the Casa Rosada crying, "Eva Peron"
But that's all gone now
As soon as the smoke from the funeral clears
We're all gonna see and how, she did nothing for years


I never said I didn't like Andrew Lloyd Weber though...

Antonia Banderas also played him


BWAHAHAHA!!!!!

Good on you! Excellent work. :D

George Washington and Lincoln were stupid pricks who deserved to die a painful death. They were overrated and they smelt, just like Patton, who was an appalling General and should have been shot just for being so ugly.

George Washington and Lincoln were stupid pricks who deserved to die a painful death. They were overrated and they smelt, just like Patton, who was an appalling General and should have been shot just for being so ugly.

Every day...

In every way...

You just keep getting more and more absurd.

*Gosh, it's true. Hallmark DOES make a card for every occasion!*

Every day...

In every way...

You just keep getting more and more absurd.

*Gosh, it's true. Hallmark DOES make a card for every occasion!*

Nope, I was making a point that for many people Che Guavara is a hero. As George Washington and Lincoln are to you most probably. And the offensiveness of those comments about Che is the same as the offensiveness of my comment.

"Shoot, you coward, you're about to kill a man"

Nope, I was making a point that for many people Che Guavara is a hero. As George Washington and Lincoln are to you most probably. And the offensiveness of those comments about Che is the same as the offensiveness of my comment.
good point

Nope, I was making a point that for many people Che Guavara is a hero. As George Washington and Lincoln are to you most probably. And the offensiveness of those comments about Che is the same as the offensiveness of my comment.

Ah, yes, the "One Bad Turn Deserves Another" tactic. Well executed if, ultimately, pointless and immature.

Ah, yes, the "One Bad Turn Deserves Another" tactic. Well executed if, ultimately, pointless and immature.You are talking about the Carpet Bombing of Afghan Civileans?...Women and Children included?

Well executed?...in what way?

You are talking about the Carpet Bombing of Afghan Civileans?...Women and Children included?

Well executed?...in what way?

No, I was referring to the use of inflammatory rhetoric in order to point out the absurdity of inflammatory rhetoric. Any assumptions you make after that are completely your own.

Che? Che was a stupid, pig-headed ass with no value for human life. The man spent his time saying how there were no Marxist nations when he had no clear idea of what Marxism was (otherwise he wouldn't have targeted agrarian nations for his 'revolucions'). He was just a war pig with an opinion. He didn't care what the people of the countries that he was conquering wanted. He didn't think they knew what they wanted (sounds a bit fascist to me). Che was just a murderous warlord. And for all you ardent 'communists' (you bring shame upon the term) who think Che died for his beliefs, he didn't, he died [i]killing[i] for his beliefs. Communism isn't about slaughter or revolution or takeover; it's about helping up those who are down, not killing them in the name of a Black-Flag-Red-Star.

Viva El Che! Viva El Commandante! Viva La Revolucion :sniper: !

No, I was referring to the use of inflammatory rhetoric in order to point out the absurdity of inflammatory rhetoric. Any assumptions you make after that are completely your own.

And now you are supposed to reason with people who use the words 'commie' and 'pinko' because they were taught it in Propoganda classes during the Cold War?

And now you are supposed to reason with people who use the words 'commie' and 'pinko' because they were taught it in Propoganda classes during the Cold War?

Only if you want to be better than them.

Che? Che was a stupid, pig-headed ass with no value for human life. The man spent his time saying how there were no Marxist nations when he had no clear idea of what Marxism was (otherwise he wouldn't have targeted agrarian nations for his 'revolucions'). He was just a war pig with an opinion. He didn't care what the people of the countries that he was conquering wanted. He didn't think they knew what they wanted (sounds a bit fascist to me). Che was just a murderous warlord. And for all you ardent 'communists' (you bring shame upon the term) who think Che died for his beliefs, he didn't, he died [i]killing[i] for his beliefs. Communism isn't about slaughter or revolution or takeover; it's about helping up those who are down, not killing them in the name of a Black-Flag-Red-Star.
You fail to mention Che's...impressive...domestic record. The man failed at everything he ever was assigned to do. Just search Google, I'm sure you'll find plenty about it, I however am far too lazy to go and pull the record up.

Che managed to lead one of the most successful guerrilla warfare operations ever. While he never gained his goal of a Marxist state, he could have, if not for the intervention of the United States. During Che's campaign, he managed to lose only one man for every ten governmental soldiers killed. The government had been repressive by the way, exploiting the people, killing villagers, that whole thing.

Then there was Che who waged his campaign. The US saw his ideals as dangerous, and they used the domino theory to make him a threat to the US. They sent School of the Americas trained commandos into the region and Che was executed. End of Che.

Then there was Che who waged his campaign. The US saw his ideals as dangerous, and they used the domino theory to make him a threat to the US. They sent School of the Americas trained commandos into the region and Che was executed. End of Che.

Ahh Yes, 'The Domino Theory'. You would think that if Communism was as bad as the US made it out to be there would not have been so much fear about so many countries 'turning red' - due to the lack of popular support.

I wish there had been some better poll options. i said he had a few good ideas.

but i guess what i mean is: I respect his ideology very much. he clearly saw what was going on and in that way was very perceptive, and he proposed a solution. however i remain questioning of his methods. i do not know much of the precise details of his revolutionary activities but he killed people. I remain uncertain about whether i agree with this, or whether his actions were justified, or nesecary. This is a point on which many of his admirers stumble. i guess it is important to consider what he was fighting for, and the corrupt, exploitative leaders he was seeking to overthrow.

but i do have a poster of him on my wall. and i'm a student. I guess his image as something of an educated revolutionary appeals to the students, and his dedication to his ideas inspire those of us who oppose the system in some way.

I cannot say i would know how he would feel about his image being marketed like that. i am aware that he did fancy himself something of a hero figure. If his image is held true by people who genuinely admire his ideas and is inspired to become involved in his causes, one hopes nonviolently, i am sure he would not take offense.

Just my opinions.

Jay

....inspired to become involved in his causes, one hopes nonviolently....nonviolemtly?
How can you be a Revolutionary Guerrillero Leader...And try to nonviolently defeat the Imperial Armies....

Without Jedi Mind bending powers......

Hero? Bah. Murderous commie thug.

His face no more belongs on posters and tshirts than does a Rohm, a Bormann, a Himmler or a Heydrich.

HerHis face no more belongs on posters and tshirts than does a Rohm...I have a Rohm poster :D

I like Che, his beliefs (though a little too Stalinistic for my tastes, but either way), and the fact that he actually stood up for what he believed in. He envisioned a perfect marxist utopia and the only way to achieve it was through revolutionary tactics to overthrow the oppressive imperalist American-puppet governments. I admire the fact that, even though he failed, he tried to reach his goal.

I, too, have a poster of him in my room, plus two t-shirts of him.

Hasta la Victoria Siempre.

There were people who got on some unseaworthy boats to get away from the guy, if that's what you're asking. When he was involved in the Cuban revolution, he was as bad as most fascists. If you got your name brought up in an unfavorable way, they were coming to get you. If you actually came face to face with the man, you might as well prepare to meet your maker. A lot of people met him once, and his face was the last one they saw.

Ask a cuban what they think of him, maybe.

Che managed to lead one of the most successful guerrilla warfare operations ever.

If you mean that last one in Bolivia: Bull's excrement. It went wrong from the start, mainly because local people were too afraid to support him. His rebels didn't even speak the native language! Last of his strikes against government ruled places were done to obtain some medicine - he was asthmatic.

But he did do one thing right: he died. As a martyr and an icon he is immortal and usefull for various people with something to rebel against, almost no matter what they represent. Not something you can say about Fidel.

Che? Che was a stupid, pig-headed ass with no value for human life. The man spent his time saying how there were no Marxist nations when he had no clear idea of what Marxism was (otherwise he wouldn't have targeted agrarian nations for his 'revolucions'). He was just a war pig with an opinion. He didn't care what the people of the countries that he was conquering wanted. He didn't think they knew what they wanted (sounds a bit fascist to me). Che was just a murderous warlord. And for all you ardent 'communists' (you bring shame upon the term) who think Che died for his beliefs, he didn't, he died [i]killing[i] for his beliefs. Communism isn't about slaughter or revolution or takeover; it's about helping up those who are down, not killing them in the name of a Black-Flag-Red-Star.

Umm...Marxist Communism has to start with a Revolution, otherwise it doesn't work. The Proletariat have to rise up against the oppression of the Bourgeoisie and kick them out. Once the class system has been abolished, a Communist system can be established...only it would never work because the lower classes don't wanna overthrow the upper classes, they wanna be them, hence the existence of the 'middle class'.

This is probably waaaay off topic, but I wore a Che shirt to this deli, and the people who worked there and owned it were Iranian and had all these pipes and bongs for sale. They saw my shirt and said that they'd give a discount for me and my dad anytime we wanted any bongs or something. :p

I think he was a good man, with a shady side (though, the same could be said of a lot of soldiers in general). Out of principle though, I won't pay for shirts/posters/coffee mugs/boxer shorts/novelty condoms with his image on them, it just doesn't feel right to me to idolise a socialist who wouldn't want that.

This is probably waaaay off topic, but I wore a Che shirt to this deli, and the people who worked there and owned it were Iranian and had all these pipes and bongs for sale. They saw my shirt and said that they'd give a discount for me and my dad anytime we wanted any bongs or something. :p

Ha! that's pretty cool.

The man had a vision, and went out to achieve it.

That's more than most of you will ever do.

Maybe he wasn't very good at it, and he died trying, but he at least tried. Maybe he would have been more successful if the USA had minded its own business

He was one of the greatest capitalist tools of all time.Put his face on anything and it will sell.

He's overrated.

And the U.S. caused their own little problem with Cuba themselves. They wouldn't listen to the Cubans who complained, so the people revolted.

He was one of the greatest capitalist tools of all time.Put his face on anything and it will sell.

Sadly, so true...

Murderous communist pig. Glad he's dead.

Damn stupid Commie.

He would be cool if he wasn't a commie.I thought you voted "I dunno anything about him".

Murderous communist pig. Glad he's dead.
So I take it you will not be seeing the film on the 27th.

So I take it you will not be seeing the film on the 27th.
Ha ha. No plans to.

Ha ha. No plans to.
My sister's dead excited about it.

To tell the truth, I used to be one of those Che fanatics. But I kinda cooled when I moved away from comminism and read about his life.

I always thought the worst thing Che did was break up with Sonny.

I always thought the worst thing Che did was break up with Sonny.
I think this only deserves a

:rolleyes:/:D

He was a communist. Communism is awful.

If he had been a resistance fighter against the Soviets, then I could admire him.

If he had been a resistance fighter against the Soviets, then I could admire him.Like Bin Laden do you mean?

Like Bin Laden do you mean?

Touche.

I voted for option #6. He recognised the USSR as a sham socialist country, ruled by an oligarchy who lived the high life while the people suffered.

And why do you have that poster in your room?
I think it's a really good group of images.

As for the man himself, I liked his ideas but not his actions. He was blind in his ideology, which ended up making him into a terrorist.

Che Guevara:

- Oversaw mass murder of dissidents
- Urged Castro to fire nuclear missiles at Amercan cities in the 1962 missile crisis
- Trained Bolivian terrorists (sorry, "freedom fighters") in the mid-60s

Now I know that the people that Che was fighting were as bad and worse, but that doesn't make what he did OK.

I'm not some right-winger trying to take a stab at the left. I am socialist too, but I also am fairly pacifist. I hate militia groups who kill civilians for political purposes.

- Urged Castro to fire nuclear missiles at Amercan cities in the 1962 missile crisis They were Soviet missiles, not Cuban.

I like the guy. If he could overthrow an imperialist dictator with only 82 men then that proves he's got balls.

A little off topic but who do you think honestly killed him?

1)Bolivian counter revolutionary
2)Bolivian payed to kill him by the USSR who he criticised repeatedly
3)Bolivian hired by Castro, who realised that Che was more popular than him, especially since criticsing Fidel

Oversaw mass murder of dissidents
Can you source that? I certainly concede it is possible, but I would like to read it myself before coming to conclusions.

Urged Castro to fire nuclear missiles at Amercan cities in the 1962 missile crisis
I can't find anything on this attributed to Guevara. What I did find, was that Castro suggested a strike upon the USA in the event of a full scale US invasion of Cuba, on the grounds that the USA would be willing to use nuclear weapons itself in such a situation (Though he also conceded that far more likely the US would only employ limited airstrikes)

Trained Bolivian terrorists (sorry, "freedom fighters") in the mid-60s

Yes, well, peaceful protest doesn't get far in undemocratic regimes as we have witnessed time and time again. I'm sure that if I must quote an example, the US war of independence suffices.

Now I know that the people that Che was fighting were as bad and worse, but that doesn't make what he did OK.
Perhaps not. But he did witness many of the injustices towards the South American poor personally, and who can say how that would change a man?

I'm not some right-winger trying to take a stab at the left. I am socialist too, but I also am fairly pacifist. I hate militia groups who kill civilians for political purposes.

I prefer pacifism and a democratic route to socialism, but in some countries and situations, that option is not available.

I like the guy. If he could overthrow an imperialist dictator with only 82 men then that proves he's got balls.

A little off topic but who do you think honestly killed him?

1)Bolivian counter revolutionary
2)Bolivian payed to kill him by the USSR who he criticised repeatedly
3)Bolivian hired by Castro, who realised that Che was more popular than him, especially since criticsing Fidel None of the above.

US trained Bolivian soldiers executed Che.

Yeah, but you have wonder, why would the Americans want him dead? Do empires NEVER LEARN not to create martyrs?

Nice beret.Needs a haircut.

I can't find anything on this attributed to Guevara. What I did find, was that Castro suggested a strike upon the USA

Yes, well, peaceful protest doesn't get far in undemocratic regimes as we have witnessed time and time again. I'm sure that if I must quote an example, the US war of independence suffices.
1. Who do you think gave him the idea? It was also Guevara who convinced Castro to set up a full socialist economic system in Cuba. Previously, Castro had only wanted moderate socialism, to still allow private enterprise.

2. India? Ghandi's people never fired a shot.
South Africa? In SA, the anti-apartheid activists used terrorism to try to get what they wanted in the 1960s. That didn't work. Peaceful means did work in the late 80s.

I can't source my calims on the internet. I learned them from those posters. You know, the ones with a pic of Che and a list of his achievements.

Umm...Marxist Communism has to start with a Revolution, otherwise it doesn't work. The Proletariat have to rise up against the oppression of the Bourgeoisie and kick them out. Once the class system has been abolished, a Communist system can be established...only it would never work because the lower classes don't wanna overthrow the upper classes, they wanna be them, hence the existence of the 'middle class'.

Umm you're forgetting that the proles (as george orwell put it) have to rise up against by themselves. Che had no realization that the people he was conquering had thoughts too.

And he was going about it all wrong, everybody was. The Manifesto was aimed toward industrial nations' (specifically of europe) factory workers, not agrarian nations' farmers. That's one of the reasons why communism has never worked well in the world. The other reason it has never worked is because someone was always appointed at a leader. The manifesto never mentions any type of supreme ruler. In fact, it details that because of the communal system, there needs to be no leader.

Also, whenever Che conquered a country, he never bothered to help that country develop. He just kind of let it lay to ruin and take the people that would be helping the nation establish a firm commune with him to seige upon other desperate nations. The man had no sense of leadership outside of the military realm, and that's why he sucked at communism.

Like Bin Laden do you mean? Like Bin Laden without all the Islamic extremism and terrost activities.

never mentions any type of supreme ruler. In fact, it details that because of the communal system, there needs to be no leader.

The communal system does not work on any type of large scale, so a leader had to be appointed.

The Manifesto ignored human greed when it argued a communal system could work.

Umm....this poll seems a bit loaded..........where's the "Homer Simpson with a Machine Gun" option? Che was a murdering Commie chimp.....

Me!

Umm....this poll seems a bit loaded..........where's the "Homer Simpson with a Machine Gun" option? Che was a murdering Commie chimp.....

Me! Then 'I don't know anything about him' seems like the option for you.

Then 'I don't know anything about him' seems like the option for you.

No, I know plenty about him. He was a Communist stooge who, for whatever reason, has been glorified as a hero by the Left. I guess they're no stranger to glorifying murderers......

Me!

Idol of idiotic communist kids.

1. Who do you think gave him the idea? It was also Guevara who convinced Castro to set up a full socialist economic system in Cuba. Previously, Castro had only wanted moderate socialism, to still allow private enterprise.

2. India? Ghandi's people never fired a shot.
South Africa? In SA, the anti-apartheid activists used terrorism to try to get what they wanted in the 1960s. That didn't work. Peaceful means did work in the late 80s.

1. Well, Che did convert Castro to communism. Fidel was a nationalist originally. But I still think its fairly obvious, if Fidel didn't think of using those weapons himself and needed Che to think up the idea, i'm not sure he has the mental capacity to dress himself.

2. Fair point. It's unfortunately not always the case though- India is an exception because Britain did not have the capability post WW2 to hold off an armed rebellion (which could easily have escalated) and South Africa is one because it was diplomatically isolated by the 1980's and had little choice. Bolivia in the 60's was quite the opposite and pretty close to the USA.

No, I know plenty about him. He was a Communist stooge who, for whatever reason, has been glorified as a hero by the Left. I guess they're no stranger to glorifying murderers......He was no more a 'murderer than George Washington was and he did not own a single slave.

A meaningless communist idol, an idealist man fighting for the worst idea ever conceived that brougt him to betray his former medical mission into killing people for no reason except perverted thoughts.

He was no more a 'murderer than George Washington was and he did not own a single slave.

No, there's a difference there. George Washington fought for freedom; Che fought for tyranny.....

Me!

He also never really had that a great impact on communist revolutions, except in Cuba. Everywhere else he failed.

No, there's a difference there. George Washington fought for freedom; Che fought for tyranny.....

Me!

Yes, fighting for an end to the repressive governments of South America and to bring about a workers' utopia. What a selfish bastard

Yes, fighting for an end to the repressive governments of South America and to bring about a workers' utopia. What a selfish bastard

No, fighting to bring down 'opressive' regimes in South America and instate his own oppressive Communist regime to torture and kill even more people. What a kind person. :rolleyes:

Me!

No, fighting to bring down 'opressive' regimes in South America and instate his own oppressive Communist regime to torture and kill even more people. What a kind person. :rolleyes:

Me!

Oh I'm sorry, Batista wasn't oppressive at all was he? I mean, America would only support somebody who was elected fairly and treated his people with respect.

You!

What do you think of the guy?
Classic full-corrupt communist, now the posterboy for communism lite as practised by college students.

He was no more a 'murderer than George Washington was and he did not own a single slave.
He supported the idea of re-education camps for people who disagreed with him.

Idol of idiotic communist kids.
I agree with that, although probably not in the same way you do.

I don't think that communists are idiots, but I think that the commercial communism of Che and the teenagers who go around calling each other "comrade" is pretty absurd.

He supported the idea of re-education camps for people who disagreed with him.I am well aware that Guevara was an authoreterian communist and I do not agree with many of his views, but he was no more of a 'murderer' than any judge or soldier.

I agree with that, although probably not in the same way you do.

I don't think that communists are idiots, but I think that the commercial communism of Che and the teenagers who go around calling each other "comrade" is pretty absurd.
That has nothing to do with Che, but rather with the cooptation of his image.

Che would have been a good leader if he actually led something other than a 'liberation front' (a cliched euphemism for militia). He conquered then left. If he had led a country, rather than just destroyed it, we might have been able to see what type of man he was. However, because he never stopped to develop, well, he was just a war mongering prick who brings shame unto Marxism.

I know very little about him.

He looks cool though :p

I don't like his methods, but I support his ideals (the non-violent social equality kinda stuff). And he has the coolest beard since Marx.

Che would have been a good leader if he actually led something other than a 'liberation front' (a cliched euphemism for militia). He conquered then left. If he had led a country, rather than just destroyed it, we might have been able to see what type of man he was. However, because he never stopped to develop, well, he was just a war mongering prick who brings shame unto Marxism.Actually, he was an economic minister in Castro's cabinet for some years. And hi did not 'destroy a country': he helped liberate it from a brutal and corrupt regime. Batista, his predecesers and his American masters destroyed Cuba.

Actually, he was an economic minister in Castro's cabinet for some years. And hi did not 'destroy a country': he helped liberate it from a brutal and corrupt regime. Batista, his predecesers and his American masters destroyed Cuba.

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT CUBA!! I'm talking about all of the south american countries he helped to 'liberate.' He went on a rampant seige. look at all of theose countries now. how come we dont learn about him in high school?

Che is a mixed bag.

One one hand, one has to admire the fact that an asthmatic medical student who had barely ever held a gun before would run off to a country he'd never even visited to fight for the freedom of people he barely knew anything about. One also has to admire his success and heroism in this regard; supposedly, despite his accused asthma, this guy ran across ground raked by enemy machine gun fire to capture positions and seized an armored train of weapons and ammo that was crucial to the revolutionary struggle.

Che should also be admired for not blindly accepting the Soviet Union's line and policies. Thanks to Castro's short sightedness, Cuba became as bound economically to the USSR as it was to the US before, and imperialism is still imperialism even if it's flying the hammer and sickle. Because of the USSR Cuba became dependant on Soviet aid and was prevented from moving its agriculture away from monocultural sugar producton, at Moscow's strong "insistance", hence today's economic crises. To put it briefly, Che saw through this and called 'bullshit'.

On the other hand, Guevara made a series of ideological and practical errors. The most important of these was his theory of focoism. Namely, this held that a small focal group of guerilla fighters could begin armed struggle immediately and from that point draw in the support of the masses. You didn't have to prepare any groundwork like propaganda, creating base areas of mass support, or anything really; hell, your troops didn't even have to be from the same country. You just grabbed a few guys and some guns in a place where conditions are shitty, started shooting, and hoped the masses would follow your example.

Compare this to Mao's theory of protracted people's war, in which one develop and strengthens ones forces and one's support among the masses before striking out at enemy targets, working one's way towards the cities from the countryside. He acknowledged that the only way to win in such a situation is to develop the consciouness and support of the broad masses of people before you start serious fighting.

To put it another way, in Guevara's focoism armed struggle kicks off the general revolution. In Protracted People's War, you need a general revolutionary consciousness before you can begin armed struggle.

Let's compare the record; every focoist revolution has been defeated, except for Cuba. Completely and utterly annihilated. Every Protracted People's War, on the other hand has either succeeded (china), is winning (nepal), or has defied all attempts by the central government to extinguish it (Indian Naxalites, Peru.. the former gaining speed, and the latter refusing to die despite really shit odds).

On a final note, whoever said that Che was a butcher should keep in mind that the people he killed post-revolution were almost all torturers, murderers, or high officials in the Batista regime. Most of them got trials, summary as they were, but excuse me if my sympathy level is loooow. Karma's a bitch, ain't it?

So yeah, that's my take on the guy.

Che is a mixed bag.

One one hand, one has to admire the fact that an asthmatic medical student who had barely ever held a gun before would run off to a country he'd never even visited to fight for the freedom of people he barely knew anything about. One also has to admire his success and heroism in this regard; supposedly, despite his accused asthma, this guy ran across ground raked by enemy machine gun fire to capture positions and seized an armored train of weapons and ammo that was crucial to the revolutionary struggle.

Che should also be admired for not blindly accepting the Soviet Union's line and policies. Thanks to Castro's short sightedness, Cuba became as bound economically to the USSR as it was to the US before, and imperialism is still imperialism even if it's flying the hammer and sickle. Because of the USSR Cuba became dependant on Soviet aid and was prevented from moving its agriculture away from monocultural sugar producton, at Moscow's strong "insistance", hence today's economic crises. To put it briefly, Che saw through this and called 'bullshit'.

On the other hand, Guevara made a series of ideological and practical errors. The most important of these was his theory of focoism. Namely, this held that a small focal group of guerilla fighters could begin armed struggle immediately and from that point draw in the support of the masses. You didn't have to prepare any groundwork like propaganda, creating base areas of mass support, or anything really; hell, your troops didn't even have to be from the same country. You just grabbed a few guys and some guns in a place where conditions are shitty, started shooting, and hoped the masses would follow your example.

Compare this to Mao's theory of protracted people's war, in which one develop and strengthens ones forces and one's support among the masses before striking out at enemy targets, working one's way towards the cities from the countryside. He acknowledged that the only way to win in such a situation is to develop the consciouness and support of the broad masses of people before you start serious fighting.

To put it another way, in Guevara's focoism armed struggle kicks off the general revolution. In Protracted People's War, you need a general revolutionary consciousness before you can begin armed struggle.

Let's compare the record; every focoist revolution has been defeated, except for Cuba. Completely and utterly annihilated. Every Protracted People's War, on the other hand has either succeeded (china), is winning (nepal), or has defied all attempts by the central government to extinguish it (Indian Naxalites, Peru.. the former gaining speed, and the latter refusing to die despite really shit odds).

On a final note, whoever said that Che was a butcher should keep in mind that the people he killed post-revolution were almost all torturers, murderers, or high officials in the Batista regime. Most of them got trials, summary as they were, but excuse me if my sympathy level is loooow. Karma's a bitch, ain't it?

So yeah, that's my take on the guy.

Hmm...A good assessment. Very thoughtful.

That was Andy Warhol that made that image of Che? I knew there was something I liked about the picture.


No ,clever, he didn't, he got the picture and filled in his different features with block colour in his usual soup pot painting talentless style. Until now i have not read one single comment that actually describes the man and who he was. Please people if you are interested go out of your way to read Che's "Bolivian Diary" to understand the hardships that that man and his comrades endured to try and free a country that he had no allegience to what so ever, how he tryed to spread communism through the poor regions of Latin America and Africa, his immediate efforts were fruitless due to certain lack of support from Fidel, but what he tryed to achive made for an inspiring story and in 1967 when he was murdered by his Bolivian captors his legend was only being born.

Viva Che.

Umm you're forgetting that the proles (as george orwell put it) have to rise up against by themselves. Che had no realization that the people he was conquering had thoughts too.

And he was going about it all wrong, everybody was. The Manifesto was aimed toward industrial nations' (specifically of europe) factory workers, not agrarian nations' farmers. That's one of the reasons why communism has never worked well in the world. The other reason it has never worked is because someone was always appointed at a leader. The manifesto never mentions any type of supreme ruler. In fact, it details that because of the communal system, there needs to be no leader.

Also, whenever Che conquered a country, he never bothered to help that country develop. He just kind of let it lay to ruin and take the people that would be helping the nation establish a firm commune with him to seige upon other desperate nations. The man had no sense of leadership outside of the military realm, and that's why he sucked at communism.




I'm sorry i know i posted the last one too, but i cannot let this go unanswered. "Conquered?" who exactly do you think he was?
He wasn't Ghengis Khan. He set out to help people be free from the rule of opressive right wing governments. He only operated in Cuba, The congo then Bolivia, then he was murdered by the Bolivian Army while a Prisoner of war, please can people stop posting wrong things on the Thread. Thank you.

Oh I'm sorry, Batista wasn't oppressive at all was he? I mean, America would only support somebody who was elected fairly and treated his people with respect.

You!


I'm with DHomme on this one, the guy did alot of good for the Cubans, that Batista and U$A didn't really seem to care about, but he wasn't much of a ruler, more like just a revolutionary, kinda like Poncho Villa.