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.

Comments

[BUCKSBOWLBOUND]

Che was a classic example of the disasterous and bloody failure which is communism. Cuba is still suffering its effects and will until Castro, that other great hero of radicals everywhere, is finally dead as well.

[Ono4Hoopono]

The Rolex watch thing? You’re kidding, right?

If you're a revolutionary in the field or in command of any kind of military endeavor, you want a good timepiece. And back then, a Rolex wasn't so much a sign of the bourgeoisie as it was an exceptional and reliable watch...probably self-winding. U.S. pilots wore them, including my friend’s dad. Korea and WWII. Chuck Yeager is said to have sworn by them.

Being that watch repair guys are hard to find in the jungle, Rolex would be a good choice.

[politicky]

Dude,
The CIA wanted him dead. It was one of the few things they "succeeded" at. How many followers (foreign agents) did the CIA get killed?

Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA
http://www.amazon.com/Legacy-Ashes-History-Tim-Weiner/dp/038551445X

[kellygrrrl]

JFK

[politicky]

The Kennedys loved the CIA. Doesn't make much sense to me, but then I don't understand why some people need to keep reptiles as pets, either.

[Thorn]

Christ. Please.

[Ono4Hoopono]

I think we owe it to history to be very cautious both when someone is made into a folk hero, and equally cautious someone tries to take down a hero, especially with the kind of undocumented vehemence and certitude that you proffered in this piece.

You provided absolutely no traceable historical sources or documentation. And that is of particular concern, even considering the limited space and time you have available to make your point. I hung in there with you to see if I could learn anything new, but I don't know how anyone of your age or mine can say with such brazen confidence that they know who Che Guevara was, especially from the comfort of American soil.

From what I've gleaned about Che, and some of it has made me angry in that I don't think the end justifies the means, he MAY and probably did have grandiose qualities, and it seems as if he certainly did kill in cold blood, which makes it profane to compare him with Dr. Martin Luther King. But he MAY also have been a battle-hardened visionary with a sense of nobleness toward his cause, driven by suffering he saw that we have no knowledge of.

As a study in humanity, it would be more useful to know what drove Che, than to trash him or idolize him, because he is a man who committed his life early and deeply into something he believed in, and it was not an easy path he chose.

In getting to a better understanding, I hate having to go with, "The truth is probably somewhere in between," as we so often have to settle for nowadays with so much extremism. I'd rather have us each strive for the integrity of our words before they come out of our mouths, or our word processors, myself included.

Whether or not we agree with his agenda or his tactics, he is a historical figure worth the effort of getting right in our historical analysis.

[Boadicea]

Glad I read this blog, only because i had the privilege of reading your comment. Thanks.

[Tiger]

I agree.

[guajiro]

You know, HuffPo ought to consider you as a guest blogger and then have a survey of those who visit this site as to whether you ought to replace Ridley. I, like you and many others, come to this site because the quality of discussion on the issues by the bloggers here is unparalled. Except for Ridley. He hardly has any sources to back his opinions, as you noted; "You provided absolutely no traceable historical sources or documentation".
Ridley seems to think that by simply being obstinate and taking the contrarion point of view he has somehow expanded our horizons for discussion and in the process benefited society. What possible good could it do society if someone says the water is wet and I say it's dry. If you're listening HuffPo, I recommend Ono4hoopono for guest blogger!!

[Veronica]

Thanks for this eloquent reply. I never ceased to be amazed by the lack of documentation provided by the "Che-as-Hitler" crowd. I also dislike the "truth is somewhere in the middle" line, but ironically, it's really just an oversimplified way of expressing that things AREN'T usually that simple, there are always shades of gray. What Che critics such as John Ridley seem to get wrong is that anyone who doesn't share their own, rigid view of the Che Guevara issue does not necessarily lack the ability to see nuance. Ridley talks down to us, all the while assuming his audience is a group of naive Che t-shirt wearing morons.

[zizyphus]

Hana hou!

[barkingdog]

Ah! So Che was in it for the Rolex! That clears up a lot. (Not surprising; I heard Bolivar was only in it for the babes.)

Do us all a favor, Mr. Ridley. Post a list of your heroes (if you have any) so we can rip them all a new one.

Do we have to use facts? Or is hearsay bullshit and a lot of attitude sufficient?

[steamboat]

Recommended reading: 'Exposing Che Guevara'. The guy was a phony. He spoke in front of the UN in '62 and said "trials by jury are bourgeoisie. Just execute people you don't trust is far more economical." The man may have been responsible for as many as 11,000 executions in a 3-month period. Sorry folks, but Pinochet was a Sunday School teacher in comparison. And the nut WANTED the Cuban Missile Crisis to become full-scale war. He was badgering the soviets and Castro to launch. The man was nuts. Again, get this book.

[PADDYWHACK]

steamboat,if we'd had Cheney then we would 've launched dude.

[brewhaha]

Ehh, Bolivar was a creole who could care less about the plight of the poor or Indian populations. Don't really get why communist pussies always use him as an example.

[truthseeker123]

This is nothing but distortion of facts. Look at the big Celebrations that are being held across the Americas to commemorate Che's death by poor people which also happened to be the vast majority of the population. I wonder what prompts people to distort history this way?

[Ike]

More on Ridley's lies:

The process of bringing to justice the worst criminals of the hated Batista regime led to an orgy of hypocrisy and phony moral outrage in the big-business press and among Democratic and Republican politicians in the United States. The highly orchestrated propaganda campaign was the pretext for turning public opinion, which had been very sympathetic to Fidel Castro and the rebel cause, against the Cuban Revolution as radical social reforms began to be implemented which affected US business interests and US economic and financial domination of the island.

Washington and the big-business media’s crocodile tears for Batista’s torturers and murderers stands in sharp contrast to their approval or silence towards the mountains of corpses piled up by US-backed military regimes and death squads in Latin America and the Caribbean before and especially after the Cuban Revolution from Trujillo and Somoza to Pinochet and the Argentine generals.

It is a contemptible lie to say that children, artists, intellectuals, and gays were executed at La Cabana. As for torture in Cuba the only cases ever documented (even Amnesty International which is hostile to Cuba politically has never alleged torture) are in the US colonial vestige of Guantanamo.

VIVA CHE!

[sorenmeetsdylan]

Ah yes, that ezplains why any Cuban outside of Fido's inner circle would mutilate his or her genitals for the chance to leave. What unvarvished malarkey.

[guajiro]

Link please.

[Veronica]

Great imagery-mutilated genitals! Wow! Too bad you don't have a shred of evidence to back up your statement. What unvarnished malarkey.

[HISTORYandETHICS]

...(continue paragraph 2)... to Zapata, to Caranza, attempted assassinations of Castro, the U.S. led coup that killed Salvador Allende, the massacre of "El Mozote" in El Salvador, U.S. support of the "Contras" in Nicaragua...

Unless of course the "Communist Death Squads" align with the U.S. government, then they become "Freedom Fighters"

[Veronica]

I talked to Elian Gonzalez's kidnappers in Miami and their heads actually exploded when I pointed these facts out to them . Go figure. I bet they would have loved Ridley's take, though.

Your post was too complicated...the Che/Cuba issue would best be summarized with a Gloria Estefan song.

[TheDoomed]

The same people who idolize Che are the ones also wearing Chairman Mao shirts. Seriously ignorant people exist on both sides, let us never forget this.

[HISTORYandETHICS]

Why are those people seriously ignorant? "Socialism is no more evil than Christianity."-Kurt Vonnegut (A Man Without A Country) Look what individuals have done in the name of both. If you wear Mao/Che T-shirts and support a cause (such as) agrarian reform- this makes you ignorant? Sarcasm and demagoguery show weakness in your own comments/arguments because instead of support they offer distraction.

[sorenmeetsdylan]

My dear little boy/girl,

Marxists/Communists/Socialists so far exceed the onetime excesses of Christianity that the comparison is ignorant. Anyone who still celebrates anything that followed in the wake of Karl Marx is complicit in murder and dehuminization.

[willfarnaby]

It couldn't have been easy for Che, putting his very life on the line while delivering a swift kick to the The World's Perpetual #1 Terrorist Nation And Proud Of It.

Whatever mistakes Che may have made, he didn't make them as a trillion-dollar perpetual war machine, layered from top to bottom with self-serving psychopathic gangsters.

[brewhaha]

It obvioulsy wsn't easy. He got his ass fucked up big time, bro. USA/CAPITALISM/NOT BEING AN ARROGANT COMMI-DOUCHEBAG ALL THE WAY!

[thetruthmustbetold]

Help me on this: we mock Jesus but
praise, idolize Che. Is there a
Moral Compass repairman out there?

[Veronica]

You're right, our Moral Compass is broken...those who make the biggest mockery of Jesus and what he stood for are so often those who claim to be his most ardent followers. These are not the followers of Che.

Hope that helped.

[brewhaha]

I forgot, Jesus rounded up all of his dissenters and had them shot. How could anyone get confused in ther idealogy?

[whomung]

thetruthmustbetold

I don't "mock Jesus" I love Jesus... I just wish his followers were A LOT MORE like him.

Poor Jesus, the most misunderstood man in history

[calpubserv]

Unlike, say, Emiliano Zapata, a reluctant warrior and true Cincinnatus figure who fought for his homeland (Morelia, not Mexico), Che was an abstemious war junkie who traveled to two continents and three different hemispheres in search of people to shoot. And he spoke very disparagingly of the African revolutionaries who did not share his zest for bloodshed.
But you don’t have to take my word for it: Read In Cuba by Ernesto Cardinal or the article “Avenging Angel” from the New Yorker by Alma Guillermprieto.

[aisling]

I would like a comprehensive,well-documented biography of Che Guevera,such as, Patriots", a definitive piece of investigative journalism about the Vietnam War,including relevant interviews from all sides of the conflict,civilian and military. A friend of mine worked closely with Che in Havana,translating Castro's Land Reform Policy, into English. She is a good judge of character. She found Che to be a very fair-minded person and even more intelligent than Castro when formulating policy. Mr. Ridley's article is not documented and thus, an unreliable source of an accurate description of the character he chooses to villify.

[sorenmeetsdylan]

Even more intelligent than Castro? That speaks volumes. Yes, turning a country into a petri dish of squalor is right up there on the intelligence chart, but hey, you Marxists are a funny bunch.

[mae692]

GWB is working on it. New Orleans and Irag are his dry runs.

[HISTORYandETHICS]

Perspective?
How was Cuba before Castro?
Your argument implies that since Castro didn't immediately turn Cuba into a successful economic/hegemonic power that he is "not intelligent". I suggest you compare apples to apples, and look at what Castro has done for Cuba with a historical perspective of what Cuba was like pre-Castro. Then you may criticize.

[Zapatista]

THERE IS ONE ...

Read the 800 + page
Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life by Jon Lee Anderson.

It is seen as the comprehensive and definitive work on the iconic legend.


The history channel even did a documentary on it. Look under Google Video - "The True Story of Che Guevara"


Ridley is a liar

[enrt1]

Thank you! Thank you for the post.

[LarryDavid]

cuba's abu ghraib? i think not. have 500 people been killed in abu ghraib? get real.

[whomung]

We'll never know how many were killed or tortured in Abu Ghraib....

We may never know how many innocent Iraqi's are dead

We do know their country is ruined for money

And we know these same people killed 250,000 latin americans in the 80's

[TJ1776]

Thank you!

I get so sick of the nouveau hippy-liberals and their love affair with this murderous thug.

Freedom is not having your private property stolen from you. Liberty is not being dragged to a reeducation camp. Your rights do not include some undereducated, quasi-soldier jarring you from your slumber and putting a bullet in your brain, all for "the cause."

Freedom fighter? Hardly. Thankfully, he is muerto.

PS...The facts in this post are correct and easily verified. Too bad the "progressives" would rather just scream and cry about the truth.

Jefferson

[Danind]

How can you be so sure?

The problem with "conservatives" is that they consistently vilify the wrong people, and make saints out of those they should vilify.

You and Ridley don't seem to understand that there is in fact a compromise between these seemingly rudimentary communist ideas (taking YOUR private property, dragging YOU to a reeducation camp) are actually good for something besides criticism. The idea of trying to make a society work is the product, not that it has to be done your way or the highway.

[HISTORYandETHICS]

You speak of Freedom, and Liberty. For whom?

In Cuba, during the Batista regime, the poor and uneducated were often put out of work, arrested, or killed for expressing dissent for a system that favored the wealthy and exploited the poor. Your argument supports this system-since you imply Freedom is "not having your private property stolen from you." While this "Freedom" allows for the property owner to exploit and murder those that disagree with the system.

Freedom for property owner-O.K.
Freedom for poor agrarian peasant-not O.K.

I understand now, Thanks.

[Danind]

The idea of freedom isn't quite supreme..... that said, its bounds should be tread upon lightly if it is needed to override this perfect idea of "freedom".

Perfect freedom does not exist, someone always has to pay.

Capitalism cannot continue once property ownership has been abolished or changed, but it isn't that capitalism is absolutely the most free form of government in every respect, especially in its ability to make the members of a capitalist society have difficulty seeing life in any other scenario other than one in which the main focus of life is working and making money. Please stop being absurd, ridiculous, one-sided and self-righteous proselytizers, I beg all of you who think and act this way.

[whomung]

If the "facts" were so easy to verify.... why didn't you bother adding citations to support your claims?

[JCP]

Interesting analogy to Abu Ghraib. So how does that impugn Che? Surely he just had some bad apples guarding the prison.