Che Guevara - The Racist

Quotes from The Motorcycle Diaries (the book):

You have to be retarded to believe that.
The man fought for liberty of ALL races in Cuba , he even gave his life.
The population in Cuba is mostly of afrikan origin..how does that sound?

"Prefiero morir parado que vivir en rodillas"

Que viva la revolución!

reply to post by gusan

---

Gusan - these are actual quotes from the book, spoken by Che himself in his younger years. The only defence there is for it was that he was young at the time.

Sorry to expose your saviour as distasteful.

before political correctness, casual racism and prejudice were fairly common. i think you'ld be hard pushed to find a public figure you couldn't find some reason to call racist before the 1980's.

ghandi
churchill
roosavelt

pick your favorite and type their name and "racism" into google and you'll probably get results.

that's the way the world was, sexism, racism & homophobia were the norm rather than the exception, even good men held abhorrent beliefs as truth. it shows how far we've come.

Yes pieman. It also suggests that the only reason people aren't openly racist anymore is because political correctness put a stop to free speech.

Fact remains - this icon of the 'left' was more racist than most of the 'left's modern opponents. Poetic justice.

well, what does that prove except that the "left" is progressive, constantly striving to improve themselves and society, to stamp out prejudice and inequality, where ever it is. doesn't seem like a negative trait to me.

actually, if you read the book, or even a synopses, you'ld know that the point of the book is the change of beliefs he experiences over the coarse of the journey.

in later life, che spent time in the congo, risking his life for the freedom of black people. even if you're right, and he remained a racist, he was still willing to risk his life for the sake of the freedom of those he hated. sounds admirable.

i can't see how "poetic justice" would really be an appropriate term. seems to me, if he did have racist beliefs, he sums up the ideal of "the left". freedom before prejudice.

reply to post by pieman

---

Poetic justice, because the type of person who often worships Che quite predictably uses the common argument about senior BNP officials, as an example, being members of the National Front in their youth.

Besides, I simply thought this thread might be enlightening for a few people. I'm not trying to demonise Che - I actually admire the man for making a difference. But this little bit of evidence gives enormous perspective to the modern-day clash of 'right' and 'left', whereby almost anything can be deemed 'racist' and is subsequently pounced on by 'left wing' activists. The perspective offered by this just goes to signify how loosely the term 'racist' is now used. If a prominent figure were now to make comments as openly racist as Che Guevara's, they'd be deemed so 'far right' that they'd make the BNP look like George Galloway's Respect party.

As ever, I only seek to help people open their eyes to the ridiculousness of 'left' and 'right', and the hypocrisy of the 'liberal' establishment.

yeah, but there is a fundamental difference between the two.

the BNP is a nationalist party, che was an internationalist.
che, i believe, proved his redemption through openness and action, BNP officials don't seem to be very redeemed.
che inherited a social order of racism and rose above it, the BNP inherited a social order based on equality and seek to undermine it.

i don't think there is any comparison between the two, if anything you are just highlighting the difference between "right" and "left".

reply to post by pieman

---

That's one way of looking at it. Another is that both Che and Griffin broke away from what was accepted mainstream thought. Che turned from racism to 'internationalism' because he believed it would better the world. Griffin turned from modern liberalism/globalism to nationalism because he believes it will better the world. Your personal politics, pieman, do not negate the well-meaningness of someone else's. Though I suspect you consider nationalism 'evil' in any case.

Furthermore your analogy doesn't really fit because the grounds on which Griffin is labelled a 'racist' rather than merely a well-meaning ethno-nationlist are usually based on what he has done and said in his past. So he, like Che, has since become less racist also.

che sacrificed himself to make the world better for others where griffin would sacrifice others to make the world better for himself.

it's not about personal politics, i'm just saying it the way it looks to me and i don't think nationalism is particularly evil. there's nothing wrong with feeling good about you national culture. the problem arises when some sort of unrealistic, rose tinted, nostalgic vision of the past is used as a justification to oppress others.

to be honest, i really just don't get nationalism or national pride, having pride in the achievements of people from your general geographic location suggests you don't have anything of your own to be proud of.

reply to post by pieman

---

You contradicted yourself a bit there.

How has Griffin made the world better for himself? Death-threats, public and media scorn, violent attacks, prosecutions? If he were in it for selfish reasons it seems to me he could have chosen far more obvious political paths.

i said griffin would, i mean he would given the chance.

what are we talking about here? guevara or griffin?
you have pointed out a few off hand statements made in the motorcycle diaries, none of which seem particularly hateful, and seem to be suggesting that they make any criticisms of griffin and the BNP null and void.

i can't see how that would work.

criticism of griffin is based on what he said, his defense shouldn't be what someone else, from thousands of miles away, said 50 years ago.

I suppose Griffin just serves as a great highlight of the contradictions in common 'left wing' activism. Out of interest, can you provide one quote of Nick Griffin's which is more racist than the above by Che Guevara?

I realise I may be coming off as some kind of Nick Griffin fan or apologist here. Just like to clarify this isn't the case. He just popped up as a useful scapegoat for this thread I suppose.

So how does everyone feel about Che killing an estimated 4,000 people without the rule of law or due process of law? How do you hero worship someone who fought farmers for their land, lived in the largest house in Cuba after the "revolution", and was quite a Stalinist? Personally I can't think of anything associated with Che Guevara that is positive whatsoever.

That's not true. The other defense is that that's how people thought at the time.

Things have changed, for the better, and I'd like to think that people can truly move above politics appreciate the change that has taken place over the past few decades.

reply to post by justinsweatt

---

Thank you justinsweatt for bringing us back on point. I don't seek to blindly criticise Che because he has a different political worldview than I do, but if we can, objectively, I'd like to establish whether he really was the admirable man so many young 'revolutionaries' take him for.

sometimes maybe, but if you despise you own culture and origins you will never be able to really respect the others.

reply to post by justinsweatt

---

except the iconic image you're ripping off in your avatar!!





i think you need to question weather most people do think he's admirable. this thread is three days old and so far no-one has seemed all that shocked by what has been revealed.

i think your assumption that all left leaning people "worship che" is insanely wide of the mark.

te above image represents an archetype of youthful revolution, i don't think che, or what he believed, has anything got to do with it.

[edit on 18/9/09 by pieman]

reply to post by pieman

---

Well excuse me, my personal experiences and observations simply indicate that Che is and has long been highly revered by many self-righteous members of my generation.

That this thread has attracted few replies doesn't really tell much, as with ATS there are so many factors other than the subject matter or importance of a thread that dictate how successful a thread will be.

reply to post by Cythraul

---

No worries and I like the idea of this discussion. Personally, I've read his works and I still find very little of his material that I find much to agree with.

I think you should be aware what sort of power an image can have and how it can undermine the tenants of the whatever ideals the group proposes. The problem with seeing that photo is that it does not evoke anything to me other than the exact opposite. It actually disgusts me that you have a group of young people going to shows and reading the thoughts of a mass murderer, especially when those very young people profess to have such feeling for the groups of people that may be class different, sexually different, or theologically different. The very fact that Che Guevara was quite explicit in his hatred for homosexuals and those "against" the state makes me not take seriously the message of whatever movement you might want me to become involved in.