Che it Ain't So
There is a character in Jean-Luc Godard's À bout de Souffle who speaks of the path to everlasting fame. "First you become immortal," he instructs, "then you die."
A prime exemplar of the "create a legend/resurrection" method of eternal iconography would be Ernesto (Che) Guevara, the Argentine-born revolutionary who was executed forty years ago today in Bolivia. Death transmogrified him into a symbol of revolution itself. Time has turned him into an empty Warholized emblem that adorns everything from T-shirts to fanny packs to bumper stickers and apparently even a soap with the slogan "Che washes whiter."
In death Guevara has certainly managed to whitewash his image. A cleansing aided by such personality cultisms as the film The Motorcycle Diaries, which portrays Guevara as a young, wide-eyed do-gooder who travels South America looking to right social wrongs. Romanticized and corporate pimped, for most who even know who Guevara was they have no idea what he stood for. They merely accept that he was the South American Martin Luther King.
He was not.
Guevara was a brutal, egotistical killer without the smarts to enact lasting economic reform nor the guile to achieve true insurgent victory. His most significant military achievement -- the taking of Santa Clara during Castro's Cuban revolution -- might have been more a matter of financial bribery than military strategy.
What is in little dispute is the savagery of his tenure as the commander of the La Cabaña Fortress prison. Think of it as Cuba's Abu Ghraib. In a mere five months Guevara oversaw and personally signed off on the execution of as many as 500 people. Men, women, children. Not all merely loyalists to overthrown Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista. Also executed were political prisoners, dissidents, artist, intellectuals and homosexuals. A representative number of the left the revolution was supposed to be lifting up.
His bloody handiwork should come as no surprise. Before Guvera was a soap pitchman from beyond the grave, he was the "The Butcher of la Cabaña" who preached: "hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine."
I'm sure Gandhi would have been proud.
As head of the National Institute of Agrarian Reform, and President of the National Bank of Cuba, Guevara would institute popular reforms that would eventually lead to economic disaster. From the middle 1960s until the Soviet collapse Cuba was subsistent on their largess to a tune of $65 billion to $100 billion annually.
As a military leader Guevara was hardly more impressive. In the Congo he hooked up with a couple of bloody rebels, failed to inspire the people and accomplished little more than putting his own men through a shredder. It was a misadventure Guevara himself described as a "history of failure."
An expedition into Bolivia proved disastrous. Guevara completely misread the situation on the ground, could not incite a popular uprising, was completely abandoned by the Bolivian communists, their Soviet backers and even the Cubans.
Bolivian Rangers took him prisoner on the 8th of October, 1967. He whimpered as they came: "Do not shoot! I am Che Guevara and worth more to you alive than dead."
The Bolivian's figured otherwise. The next day Guevara was executed.
And thus began his ascendancy from abject failure to high icon. A populist, a revolutionary. A man who turned his back on material gains to give instead to the people.
And if you believe that, consider this: when Guevara was captured in Bolivia he was wearing a Rolex watch on his wrist.
Long live the revolution.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
**********
----> A NEW DEFINITION FOR "CHUTZPAH"
When someone who supports the same country that nuked 2 cities and turned 250,000 people to dust ... the same country that fire bombed Dresden and burned 150,000 women and child alive, the same country that killed 15 million Natives because they felt it was their destiny ... the same country that enslaved millions of blacks … the same country whose CIA killed 6 million people since 1950 (John Stockwell) ... the same country that invaded Iraq which has caused 950,000 deaths ...
is upset that CHE had a tribunal and then had a few hundred of Batistas convicted henchmen executed ... hahaha
This is almost as good as the cultural laughing gas that was "Reaganism" :o)
**********
Ridley is an embarassment to Huffpo ...
This dancin in black face bojangler says nothing about the 950,000 dead in Iraq ... and instead soils his tampon over the fact that Che had a tribunal and 200 of Batistas henchmen were shot lolol = give me a freaking break
Batista was a dictator ... who killed thousands ... so Castro & Che come to power ... and after those were convicted of running the torture chambers - he had them shot. It's pretty simple really.
Didn't the US support the hanging of Saddam ? Doesn't the US have the death penalty ? Hell Idaho and other western states I believe even use the firing squad still !
I am suprised Che killed so few ... hell if there was a revolution in the US ... I don't even know where we would stack all the bodies of the blood sucking oligarchs.
The last line of your comment, "hell if there was a revolution in the US...I don't even know where we would stack all the bodies of the blood sucking oligarchs" is exactly what was wrong with not only Che but all the other Communist and Marxist revolutionaries from Mao to Lenin to the Khmer Rouge.
The reason why Ridley didn't mention the hundreds of thousands who have died in Iraq is because this article was not about Iraq, it was about Che and Cuba. This sort of "bait and switch" argument is something I thought was only limited to right-wing wackos, but apparently I'm wrong.
Plus, you really undermine your own credibility by referring to Ridley as a "dancin in black face bojangler". Instead of resorting to cruel name-calling, you should focus on arguing exactly how Che was right. Of course the problem is, he and Castro were wrong. The proof lies in the fact that every year hundreds of Cubans risk their lives and brave the gulf of Mexico in rickety boats to flee Cuba for the US every year.
The fact is, Che and Castro, while having the best of intentions, namely helping the poor, went about it in completely the wrong way. They imposed a "dictatorship of the proletariat", they labeled as enemies of the state those who "committed a crime against the society that is being built" i.e. those who disagreed with them, and they reneged on their promise to hold elections, instead claiming in an Orwellian manner that their revolution, which rejected elections and dissenting opinions, was somehow democratic. You might say that their chutzpah was almost "Bushian".
Folks do have a helluva time staying on subject here.
Thank you for speaking the truth about this murderer Che. I have been studying the myth that has been created about this looser. He was completely the opposite of his myth. He was a killer without conscience. He was a elitist who had no respect for the indigenous people of the Americas, and was a racist against the Cubans of African extraction. Everything he touched was destroyed. Every battle that he was involved in, he lost. He was most eager to send thousands to their death. He was the one who brought back the death penalty to Cuba for non-military citizens.
I am so glad that we progressives are maturing to the point that we not only speak out against the evils of the right but also the evil the mystical demagogues of the left who perverse our true ideals.
Once freed to speak, the victims of Che have spoken out:
Google: "The Che Myth"
Thank you John Ridley for finally setting the record straight. I see people on this post are angry or I guess just in denial because they don't want their radical idealism shattered which for so long had partly rested on the image of a man who was a hard-line Stalinist(do some research before you question that). Or had a young boy executed because the boy was caught stealing Food. A man who sentenced to death his own comrades who didn't except the socialist system. I guess their is no difference between a radical and a fascist. The comments on this post alone prove that.
Absolutely ridiculous article, is this guy a guest blogger? Nice timing as well, lets put out a piece of hogwash loaded with logical fallacies on the anniversary of Che's death. At least the majority of comments here have taken Ridley to task regarding this shoddy piece of writing; Mr Ridley, can you name any of the sources you used for this article? Can you provide your readers with a little historical context? Your comment regarding Che's oversight of La Cabana which reads "...execut
VIVA CHE!
selekta. Why do you not read his biography. It's linked. He's a regular, and he's a liberal, oh, one with a mind that works - rather than always following the pack.
What Bautista did was terrible. But in all fairness to Ridley, he was not talking about Bautista. This article was about Che. I don't think that Ridley was somehow saying that what Bautista did was okay.
The fact is that your comment is the type that belongs on Hot Air or Free Republic in that it was void of any refutation of any argument that Ridley made. Can anyone deny that Che summarily executed many so-called "enemies of the state"? Can anyone deny that Che and Castro rejected democracy? Can anyone deny that they completely rejected dissent and branded as enemies those who did dissent? And can anyone deny that communism and Marxism were complete failures? I mean, name one communist country that has succeeded? It's why the Soviet Union and the Iron Curtain no longer exist. Cubans have voted with their boats by fleeing Cuba through the gulf of Mexico in droves every year. It's why the Chinese have become capitalist in all but name. Why? Because capitalism has lifted far more people out of poverty and enriched China exponentially more that Mao's communism, whic was a total failure that did not life the Chinese out of poverty and in fact made their poverty worse.
I, for one, cannot defend anyone, whether it is Saddam Hussein or Fulgencio Bautista or Dick Cheney or Che Guevara, who rejects democracy, criminalizes dissent, and summarily executes those who don't have the same economic or political philosophy.
Take a look at Robert Scheer's eaasy here on HuffPo- nuff said. My mention of Bautista was to provide some sorely missed context to Ridley's claims.
Whatever you think of his life, here's a rather more accurate account of his staged death, by one of the men who received the order to kill him and willingly obeyed:
http://new
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. While Che Guevara's heart was in the right place-helping the poor-the methods he subscribed to were appalling.
In "Socialism and Man in Cuba", Guevara casually and approvingly wrote of, among other things, "the "dictatorship of the proletariat operating not only on the defeated class but also on individuals of the victorious class"
as well as of an elite revolutionary "vanguard" which had the exclusive power to implement "punishments on those who commit a crime against the society that is being built".
Not to mention, his partner in the revolution, once proclaimed, "The revolution has no time for elections. There is no more democratic government in Latin America than the revolutionary government", or more famously, "Elecciones, para que? (Elections? What for?)"
That Guevara and Castro would advocate dictatorship, label as enemies those who "commit a crime against the society that is being built", i.e. anybody who disagreed with their political and economic views, and disregard elections or dissent while proclaiming their revolution to be somehow "democratic" is deplorable and must be rejected, regardless of how pure their intentions were. Mao Zedong and the Khmer Rouge also led revolutions based on the premise of helping the poor and correcting economic injustice, yet they killed untold millions of people in the process while managing to sink their people even deeper into poverty.
The fact remains that, to paraphrase the famous axiom about democracy, "capitalism is the worst form of economic system except for all the others". (Mind you I'm not talking about the laissez faire capitalism advocated by Republicans but the fair play capitalism advocated by FDR). The proof is in the pudding. Who can that China has lifted more people out of poverty and exponentially enriched itself through economic liberalization than Mao ever did with his Marxist policies and philosophy? And why do you think that people are willing to risk their lives and flee Cuba on rickety boats to come to America? Why don't you see any Americans risking their lives fleeing the US to go to Cuba?
Who should the reader believe: The philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre who wrote "Being and Nothingness", met Che and considered him to be "the most compete human of his time"? Or should we believe Mr. Ridley who it seems know nothing about Che, revolution or oppression and authored "Three Kings"....
Sockman..h
How about reading complete historical texts?
SARTE while a nothingness exponent establishing meaning meaningless as meaning itself is viewed with suspicioun. Anyone never been abused with the hypocrisy of truth opposite its developing absurdity is not the norm. CHE authorized by SARTE, okay, but remember they were dysfunctional. Within the established power truth to the current rules of their times. Rebels like kids sees the hypocrisy of their parents, living the lie of tribal doctrine within/governing an abusive family.
Che it is so....than
Thank you Mr. Ridley for an unusual post here at Huffington.
What is not so unusual is that the average reader here does what they always do when they disagree (not that the disagreement is usually based in knowledge) with the writer, a commenter, or the subject at hand.
Rather than welcome the chance to consider other facts and view on issues - they smear and attack and call other vile names.
How in the world, did the liberals in this country - those that should embrace the thrill of discussion - ever become so insignificant?
Missing responses on these boards are:
Wow!
How's that?
I never considered that.
I never heard that before - where can I find out more.
That's an interesting view - but I disagree with you, because.
I believe you to be mistaken - here's why.
I've learned something today, that I did not know before.
I may have to reconsider how I have felt on that.
Thank you.
Warmest regards to all.
Huh. Interesting. I was not aware of all that. Very interesting.
From now on, every person I see wearing that T-shirt and showing that poster on their wall, will have to answer some questions.
Weronika, Well, I'll be. Just goes to figure - there is always a solid human out there that prooves one wrong.
Thank you.
Ridley must of got his information from David Horowitz. Maybe he should write for him on FrontPageMag.
Che is a hero who fought against oppression and imperialism around the world.
Other than his competence at murdering bound, gagged and blindfolded men, Che Guevara failed spectacularly at everything he attempted in his life. First he failed as Argentine medical student. Though he's widely described as a Medical doctor by his hagiographers (Castaneda, Anderson, Taibo, Kalfon) no record exists of Ernesto Guevara's Medical degree. When Cuban-American researcher Enrique Ros inquired of the Rector of the University of Buenos Aires and the head of its Office of Academic Affairs for copies or proof of said document, Ros was variously told that the records had been misplaced or perhaps stolen.
In 1960 Castro appointed Che as Cuba's "Economics Minister." Within months the Cuban peso, a currency historically equal to the U.S. dollar and fully backed by Cuba's gold reserves, was practically worthless. The following year Castro appointed Che as Cuba's Minister of Industries. Within a year the nation was rationing food, closing factories, and hemorraghing hundreds of thousands of it's most productive citizens from every sector of its society, all who were grateful to leave with only the clothes on their back.
Che himself eventually confessed to his multiple economic errors and failings.
Che's most famous book is titled Guerrilla Warfare. His famous photo is captioned "Heroic Guerrilla.
the Battle of Santa Clara--despite what those early versions of Jayson Blair reported-- was a puerile skirmish. Che Guevara's own diary mentions that his column suffered exactly one casualty (a soldier known as El Vaquerito) in this ferocious "battle." Other accounts put the grand total of rebel losses as from three to five men. Most of Batista's soldiers saw no reason to fight for a crooked, unpopular regime that was clearly doomed. So they didn't fire a shot, even those on the famous "armored train," that Guevara supposedly attacked and captured.
Today that armored train features as a major tourist attraction in Santa Clara. The train, loaded with 373 soldiers and $4M worth of munitions, was sent from Havana to Santa Clara in late December of 1958 by Batista's high command as a last ditch attempt to halt the rebels. Che's rebels in Santa Clara bulldozed the tracks and the train derailed just outside of town. Then a few rebels shot at it and a few soldiers fired back. No one was hurt. Soon some rebels approached brandishing a truce flag and one of the train's officers, Enrique Gomez, walked out to meet them. Gomez was brought to meet Comandante Guevara.
"What's going on here!' Che shouted. "This isn't what we agreed on!"
Gomez was puzzled. "What agreement?" he asked. Tyrned out, unbeknownst to the troops inside, the train and all its armaments had been sold, fair and square, to Guevara by it's commander Colonel Florentino Rossell, who had already hightailed it to Miami. The price was either $350,000 or $1,000,000, depending on the source.
Actually Che had every reason to be upset. Actual shots fired against his troops? Here's another eye-witness account regarding Che's famous "invasion" of las Villas Province shortly before the famous "battle" of Santa Clara.
Get your facts straight. I will not buy your capitalist spin in hopes to rewrite history.
Since you are doing your research, if in fact you are, by the texts of the Proprogandists of the CIA, YOU MAY NOT LIE TO ME AND EXPECT ME TO SAY YOU HVE IT RIGHT.
What we do know is this, American Imperialists have been fucking up the world including South and Central America for some time as if it were its destiny. Hear me now, Hear me clear. You do not have my permission to act on my behalf whether it be your lies or your brawn. You want to hang on to to your scared past so as not to embrace a future that may not place you on top of the food chain. Go fuck yourself.
Hugo Chavez is an American Hero, albeit a South American.
Bush is a criminal against the human race, just not yet convicted.
These periodic rediscoveries and de-mythologizing of el Che remind me that he had one very unusual admirer: William F. Buckley, dean of the conservative right and occasional spy novelist. In a long-forgotten novel, published waaay back in the 80s, See You Later Alligator, Che Guevara came across as a man whose intelligence and courage equalled (or perhaps exceeded) that of Buckley's near-omnipotent CIA hero, Blackford Oakes. I've always found that passing strange.
-----> THE TRUTH ABOUT THOSE CHE HAD SHOT
One of the first tasks of the triumphant Cuban revolutionaries in 1959 was to establish justice for the thousands of Cuban families whose sons and daughters, mothers, fathers, and neighbors had been tortured and slaughtered on the streets and in the dungeons of the Dictator Batista's regime. The martyred dead numbered at least 20,000 in a country then of 6 million (the equivalent of over 650,000 dead in a country the size of the US at the time). Justice had already begun with the end of the regime as spontaneous retributions took place against known torturers and murderers whose cover and protection had vanished.
Che was assigned the task of establishing a just and fair but also transparent and certain justice and to bring the process under revolutionary control, ensuring due process, defense lawyers, and fair proceedings. This was done in an exemplary way. Popular, public tribunals were organized. Volumes of public testimony were given, with horrific testimony of the most vile tortures and bestial murder recorded and made public. Some 200 of the worst torturers and murderers of the US-backed Batista tyranny were shot by firing squads. No one has ever offered a shred of evidence that anyone innocent was executed.
... THE END
* Anything else is a lie spread by CIA killers, Miami ex Cuban Mafia, predatory plutocrats, and former Cuban Oligarchs.
216 DOCUMENTED VICTIMS OF CHÉ GUEVARA IN CUBA: 1957 TO 1959
http://www
What I love is going to a rock concert and seeing Che t-shirts. The guy wanted to ban rock music. The guy was anti-capitalism. So you buy a t-shirt, a PRODUCT, with his image and wear it to an event that he wanted banned.
I would gladly trade 1 million yessa massa Ridleys for 1 Che Guevara.
Christ claims to have come to bring a sword for the oppressed ... and Che brought it !
che, a cold-blooded murderer who executed thousands without trial, who claimed that judicial evidence was an "unnecessary bourgeois detail," who stressed that "revolutionaries must become cold-killing machines motivated by pure hate," who stayed up till dawn for months at a time signing death warrants for innocent and honorable men, whose office in La Cabana had a window where he could watch the executions –today his T-shirts proudly adorn people who oppose capital punishment!
viva la robolucion!
You mean he brought oppression.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
