Honoring “Che”
Put forth on October 5, 2007 by XicanoPwr
Posted in Blogging, Misc, activism
Next week will be the 40th anniversary of Ernesto “Che” Guevara’s death. Guevara was executed by the Bolivian Army after his capture in the village of La Higuera on October 9, 1967. Here are some really nice photos from Reuters.
Bolivian President Evo Morales speaks in front of a portrait of Ernesto “Che” Guevara made with coca leaves, at the presidential palace in La Paz.
Cuban President Fidel Castro stands next to a portrait of the late revolutionary leader Ernesto “Che” Guevara in Havana.
A masked Palestinian stands by a poster of legendary guerrilla Che Guevara in Bethlehem.
Humberto Lopez, known as “Che” of Caracas is a community leader who supports Hugo Chavez’s government, dresses and looks like the Che Guevara.
“Hasta la victoria, siempre!” - Ernesto “Che” Guevara
Related posts
Tags: Che Guevara | 
Print This Post
|
This is the blog of Edmundo "XicanoPwr" Rocha, a social worker, an activist, freelance writer and founder and editor of The Sanctuary. My interests include: immigration reform, critical race theory and it's interaction with equality/inequality and freedom/oppression as they relate to the experiences of people of color in the Americas.
Para Justicia y Libertad is a Latino-centered political blog focusing on the humanistic perspective of politics, history, and society as they relate to the Latina/o community throughout Texas and the United States.
Entries (RSS)
15 Responses to “Honoring “Che””
15 Comments
You can follow any responses to this entry through the
Comments (RSS) feed.
Honoring Che? A more noble gesture would have been to honor Pinochet. Seriously.
You should remove Hispanic from your tag and change it to CoconutPundit. Pinochet was a creation of the Nixon Administration and Reynolds Metals, Inc. Che invented himself, and then gave himself to world revolution. Something you obviously have no comprehension of.
That is one side of the coin…the other is that Pinochet gave Latin America its strongest economy and Che gave it its poorest.
Of course they are both murderers and neither should be honored…but if you had to choose one, Id choose the murderer that left a good economy behind.
Che was iconic, but didn’t actually accomplish much himself. He didn’t brutally rule a country for 17 years, murdering thousands of his own people, as Pinochet did.
Of course Stalin and Mao were both murderers and neither should be honored. But if you had to choose one, I guess you, HispanicPundit, would choose Mao, since China’s economy is growing faster than Russia’s.
Conservatives’ claims to be the “true” defenders of human rights are somewhat undermined by their persistent defense of the murderer Pinochet.
Now why am I not surprised. I thought my uncle was an uber-conservative, but you out do him. If we are talking about favoring leaders who are mass murders for being able to develop a strong economy, then Hitler would have to be on top of your list. Lets face it, he did lead Germany out of their economic slump. Germany’s economy was in a mess when Hitler was elected Chancellor in January 1933. Look at the drop in unemployment during his “economic miracle.”
January 1933 - 6 million
January 1939 - 302,000
I guess one what bring down unemployment is by giving them a very simple choice: do whatever work is given to you by the government or be classed as “work-shy” and put in a concentration camp.
But lets look at your hero shaw we. In 1973, the year General Pinochet with the help of the CIA seized the government, Chile’s unemployment rate was 4.3%. Ten years after, with Chile putting into place free-market modernization, unemployment reached 22%. Real wages declined by 40% under military rule. Yeah, real strong economic powerhouse there.
Here is another miracle to consider. In 1970, 20% of Chile’s population lived in poverty. By 1990, number of destitute had doubled to 40%.
yave begnet,
You write, “Che was iconic, but didn’t actually accomplish much himself”.
Not true, Che supported the hardline pro-Soviet faction of the Cuban revolutionaries, and that side won. He also presided over the Cuban revolutions first firing squads. He was the founder of Cuba’s labor camps, and Che himself personally executed many dissidents (anti-communist, the good guys!), sometimes in front of their children.
In other words, Che is directly responsible for the sad economic performance and human rights record of Cuba. Hardly a person to celebrate.
You also write, “Of course Stalin and Mao were both murderers and neither should be honored. But if you had to choose one, I guess you, HispanicPundit, would choose Mao, since China’s economy is growing faster than Russia’s”.
No, actually China and Russia (under Mao and Stalin, respectively) are both economic and human rights disasters…strongly matched in reaching the absolute lows of economic performance and, more importantly but strongly related, human rights abuses.
The reason that China’s economy is now growing so fast is not because of Mao’s policies, but because of Deng Xiaoping’s policies, policies that are fundamentally contrary to communist teaching…Deng’s policies of slowly (you can’t do it rapidly, dictators wouldn’t allow it) transforming China to one of a capitalist economy from one of a communist is the reason China is growing so rapidly. Free trade, property rights, and the movement of prices are now dramatically more a part of China than they were under Mao…and so you get China’s great growth.
Or to put it another way, it was only from China adopting Pinochet type policies, as opposed to Che sponsored policies, that is making China grow so rapidly - and in doing so, bringing millions of people out of poverty yearly. Which is, again, another reason to celebrate Pinochet over Che.
Liberals’ claims to be the “true” defenders of human rights are somewhat undermined by their persistent defense of the murderer Che.
XP,
You write, “If we are talking about favoring leaders who are mass murders for being able to develop a strong economy, then Hitler would have to be on top of your list”.
I apologize, I wasn’t clear in my comparison, I didn’t mean to imply that the economy is the sole indicator. My (implicit) point was also the number of innocent deaths. Pinochet is roughly responsible for about 3, 000 deaths (of which, a large amount were commies, the bad guys), which is roughly the same number of deaths that can be attributed to Che (of which, a large amount were anti-commies, the good guys). So bringing in Hitler, irrespective of his human rights record is no longer a valid comparison.
With that said, it is undoubtedly true that Chile is one of, if not the, strongest economies in Latin America and Cuba the opposite. Chile has a higher standard of living, a higher nutritional intake, greater job opportunities and more overall wealth than most countries in Latin America - especially Cuba.
In other words, to compare Chile you have to compare first to Latin America as a whole (a place with large unemployment, poverty, and low standard of living) and then rank each country accordingly - and when you do that, you will see that Chile is near (if not right at) the top and Cuba is at the bottom.
This is why, for example, you don’t have people risking life and limb to get out of Chile, while many Cubans do that yearly trying to get out of Cuba.
The Washington Post puts it best:
So again, if you hate all dictators, fine, I respect that point of view and tend to share it myself. But please don’t come to me wearing your pro-Che paraphernalia and than get offended when I say Pinochet is largely responsible for why Chile is the strongest economy in Latin America. For more on this see here.
Michaelr:
Why always the name calling and the insults?
Dude where are you getting your stats. Unemployment? please Cuba unemployment rate is at 1.9 compared to Chile which stands at 7.8.
And according to the UN Human Poverty Index Chile(3.7) is only 4 spots higher than Cuba(4.7).
The Human Development Report, see here, has Chile as the highest ranking Latin American country, significantly higher than Cuba.
The European Economist Magazine writes:
Sure, Michelle Bachelet is referred to as a ’socialist’ and her party is considered ‘centre-left ‘ but don’t let the name fool you, in Chile there is an overall broad consensus on many of Pinochets economic reforms from ALL political parties. For example, all political parties support free trade, hard money (ie. low inflation), including Bachelet with her support for the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas. Even issues like social security privatization are significantly ahead of where they are in the U.S. Nobody in Chile, for example, is talking about taking away private pensions, instead they are trying to figure out how to cover people who did not have to make mandatory contributions due to the fact that they were self-employed, issues like that.
So if all of the above makes Michelle Bachelet a socialist, what does that make members of the Democratic Party here in the United States where 93% of Democrats voted against the tiny CAFTA bill, communists? In the United States Michelle Bachelet would clearly be on the right side of the political spectrum.
In addition to the above, money is not everything, as I said before, Chile also ranks significantly higher than Cuba in human rights record, political freedom, and the ability to leave the country.
Lastly, all of this assumes that Cuba’s communist party is telling the truth in its statistics, something I highly doubt (else, why the large level of Cubans risking life and limb trying to escape?). It’s important to remember that all previous communist countries from China, Vietnam, North Korea former Cambodia, former East Germany, and of course the former USSR (a close ally of Cuba) have been known to grossly exaggerate their statistics - many times, the news only getting out after the fact. But of course, every single time the left has believed the statistics (I am reminded of Chomsky’s denial of the Khmer Rouge atrocities and the lefts constant proclamation that the USSR parallels, and sometimes exceeds, the United States in its treatment and wellbeing of its citizens - reminds you of Cuba today?) and I expect the same today.
Doh! I just re-read my response and realized my link is wrong - the Human Development Report, is here, and has Chile as the second highest ranking Latin American country, significantly higher than Cuba.
Che’s writing is great, and his youthful ideology was promising, but he became a madman when he got power. He was a true revolutionary the way the neocons are today, willing to wage eternal war for la causa.
Che’s writing is great, and his youthful ideology was promising, but he became a madman when he got power. He was a true revolutionary the way the neocons are today, willing to wage eternal war for la causa.
I can’t stand to see Fidel anymore, though. Cuba just depresses me. Fidel should just hand over complete power and retire. His time is up.
Big vote in Costa Rica, though.
hey XP, my comment above still hasn’t been accepted. Did it get lost in the filter? Would you like me to repost it?
There are so many mislead individuals who believe Dr. Guevara was a murderer or a tyrant but in all actuality he was an angle of mercy. Dr. Guevara means much more to those who’ve had to strugle because of the real tyranny caused by capitalism and capitalistic ideals then those who have never truly struggled at all.
Amos Hijos:
hasta la victoria siempre
viva socilismo
viva cuba
viva venezuela
The reason that Chile’s economy appears to be doing better, statistics wise, is due to their capitalist ideals, handed down to Pinochet during his attack on Chile’s democracy, thanks to Big Brother (USA). Pinochet was a hired gun, probably trained at Ft. Benning, GA. like most paramilitary contras are and were. The US heads of commerce, not government appointed or elected officials mind you, are the reason for coup attempts world wide, when against a leftist leader. Shit I wouldn’t put it past us to have something to do with Bhutto’s death.
Anyone who thinks the US does anything without the nod from global banks like Chase, National City are sadly mistaken and should do some homework on what actually makes this country tick, economically, right before, during, and after the Great Depression. Why did the Great Depression happen in the first place. Read Presidental notes and government employee notes before reading anything else on the matter.
Speak your mind
Comment Policy: First time comments are moderated. Please be patient.