It’s called Fabian socialism. Very slowly now since the 1960s, even the 50s it has been creeping into our society. Some of us more enlightened beings (Babalusians) have taken notice and are against it. Sadly the grand majority of the American public is too stupid, ignorant, lazy, or already brainwashed to do something about it.
Below is a picture from Cuba – where even those wahoos that are opposed to Castro still want Barry to win!
Wow, you people will even use photoshopped pictures to make your point. Or, are we supposed to believe that this guy posed, got up, switched Hitler for Obama and came back and struck the exact same pose of the camera?
Typical conservatives: you don’t care if the evidence is completely made up as long as it helps your argument.
Actually BoricuaEnLaUna – I’m not a conservative. I’m simply a humanist who finds those who support blood thirsty murderers the likes of Che Guevara to be . . . well . . . pretty sick cats.
You support Che Guevara and Fidel Castro, you support Pinochet, Hitler, Pol-Pot and the rest of their lot. A dictatorship is a dictatorship is a dictatorship. Think about it – this man is a JUDGE and yet he displays a poster showing a man who championed extra-judicial executions (murders). What does that tell you?
Don’t make assumptions before you know what you’re talking about (typical conservative).
And please, don’t get on my for posting a photoshopped image to make a point – it’s obvious that it’s photoshopped since it appears directly above the original image below. It’s not as if I’m emailing this to the world.
And exactly what are you saying is “made up?”
The poster of Hitler? that doesn’t appear in the USAToday story:
it is the Obama-Hope poster. In fact, here’s the caption:
Lourain County Common Pleas Judge James Burge speaks in his office in Lorain, Ohio as posters of Che Guevara and Barack Obama hang on his wall.
That said, I find it highly ironic that a judge who set aside lethal injection death penalties would have a poster of Che, who executed many people without so much as caring about whether he was causing them any pain…
I just have a problem with establishing a connection between Obama and Hitler, as the doctored photograph implicitly does. I think it’s the kind of immature and offensive stunt that someone like you would denounce as the cheapest sort of discourse if it was aimed at someone of your liking.
As for my support of dictators, I’m sorry to tell you that’s not the case. I know how facile it is to assume that anyone who dares to disagree with you is a murder-loving communist, but it’s just not true. As far as how anyone could harbor some admiration for someone like ‘Che’ Guevara, I will simply the say the following:
It is possible, perhaps even commendable, to admire someone for their commitment to a strongly held belief in freedom even while abhorring many of the actions committed by that person. Frankly, I’ve always believed that those who would love nothing better than to see Cuba freed from the iron grip of a tyrant would at least have to partially respect a man who once fought for that very same reason.
I realize this is probably too nuanced an argument to understand for the “WE ARE GOOD! YOU ARE BAD! END OF STORY!” crowd that you so obviously belong to. I mean, you’re probably the kind of guy who believes Batista was a pretty good guy. Oh well, go ahead, go on your little rant now about what an awful person I am.
Boricua, I don’t think you’re an awful person, I just think you are seriously misguided. If I were to use the “logic” of your “nuanced” argument, it would be perfectly fine to admire John Wayne Gacy’s artwork and ignore the fact that he was a serial killer.
But even if your “nuanced logic” were to be used in the case of che guevara, you would fall way short. The butcher of La Cabaña never fought for the freedom of anyone. He fought for power. He fought to wrest power from other dictators so that he could be the one in power. That, my nuanced friend, is not commendable.
Anatasio, he is offended by your comparison of the Messiah with Hitler. Replace the picture of Hitler with Stalin or Lenin. He may feel better…
By the way, Boricua, for your information, Hitler’s party was the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, or NSDAP). Just thought you should know. Here a socialist, there a socialist, everywhere a socialist, socialist…
It’s your Gacy analogy that’s misguided. You can’t equate admiring someone for their ideology with admiring someone because they’re a good singer or some such other ultimately insignificant quality.
While, obviously, Guevara and Castro’s dream of freedom eventually spiraled into the despicable dictatorship of today, I choose to believe that there was a dream of freedom in the first place, one that he pursued with awe-inspiring conviction against seemingly unsurmountable odds. You can choose to believe otherwise; that the passion for liberty he so eloquently wrote and spoke about were lies masking his true tyrannical intentions. We would have to agree to disagree. Though, I will say, considering that he was involved in revolutionary efforts in countries other than Cuba, it seems unlikely that he was trying to unite Latin American states beneath his mighty iron fist.
I think it would do people like yourself a world of good to, instead of dismissing ‘Che’ as an awful murdered out of hand, denounce his horrible acts while accepting that he once stood for something noble and, twisted as his vision may have become, there is indeed something admirable about someone who fought for his beliefs so valiantly.
George:
No, I wouldn’t feel better if it were Stalin or Lenin, though it would be a better image if the intention truly was to convey the “here, there and everywhere a socialist” message. After all, when I see Hitler I don’t think “socialist”, regardless of the party’s name, and I would guess most people don’t either.
But you and I are both smart enough to know that wasn’t the intended message: it was to make a connection between Hitler and Obama in any way, shape or form. I’m not an Obama-phile (hell, I’m not even an American) but I find it offensive because of the hypocrisy — as I said above, if it were someone you like being connected to Hitler, you would scream bloody murder.
Finally, thank you for making my point that you, and so many of your like-minded friends, respond to any sort of disagreement or criticism by claiming that the person who doesn’t see eye to eye with them is a murder-loving communist. Truly a great way to have an intelligent discussion.
Che “stood for something noble”?!
“[g]uevara and [c]astro’s dream of freedom”?!
You really are “en la luna.” It’s just doesn’t cover it to call you a fool, a useful idiot, or a fellow traveler. Are you really that fucking stupid and ignorant of history?
You don’t see Hitler as a “socialist” because you don’t know jack-shit about history. Before opening your mouth to give an unenlightened opinion about something you obviously know nothing about, read a few books about the revolutionary movements of the early 20th century. You’ll be shocked at what you discover.
“Finally, thank you for making my point that you, and so many of your like-minded friends, respond to any sort of disagreement or criticism by claiming that the person who doesn’t see eye to eye with them is a murder-loving communist. Truly a great way to have an intelligent discussion.”
If it smells like shit, it’s shit. You’ve been wallowing in it for so long it smells like rose-water to you. But you know what? It’s still shit.
The reality is that Anatasio can post whatever he wants but I think the analogy is to put Hitler where Che is in the picture not where Obama is.
Boricua, obviously the “nuance” of my argument was lost on you, but let’s forget about that because as I mentioned before, the analogy does not really apply in your case. Let’s concentrate on the more glaring “nuances” of your argument:
“You can choose to believe otherwise; that the passion for liberty he so eloquently wrote and spoke about were lies masking his true tyrannical intentions. We would have to agree to disagree. Though, I will say, considering that he was involved in revolutionary efforts in countries other than Cuba, it seems unlikely that he was trying to unite Latin American states beneath his mighty iron fist.”
So che, the man who signed the execution orders in La Cabaña prison, Stalin II, was really a good guy fighting for freedom gone bad? Was this before or after he started calling himself Stalin II? And if it is the latter, was Stalin just another good guy gone bad, too? Why don’t you enlighten us with your nuanced explanation?
Dear George,
While I’m quickly falling in love with all your pet names for me (I especially love “fucking stupid”, it really puts a smile on my face), assuming that I’m ignorant and using a lot of curse words is just a way of not engaging my ideas. So, unless you have something more to offer as an argument than that cute little righteous indignation, I don’t really believe that I have anything more to say to you.
Wallowing in shit,
Ignorant Commie
Please. Spare me your outraged sensitivity. Anyone who praises murderous motherless bastards the way you did is nothing if not fucking stupid. It fits you like a glove.
Boricua, why don’t you answer Alberto? Or did the cat get your tongue?
Sorry to disappoint you, George, but I simply didn’t see Alberto’s comment before posting mine. Though I, again, thank you for the kind words; they really do make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
I will gladly answer Alberto — I wouldn’t deny my tocayo a response:
There is absolutely no justification for the massacre at La Cabaña, just like I think his choice of nom de guerre was, shall we say, unfortunate. And, if you’ll read carefully, I never called Guevara a “good guy”. I simply said that I believe he once fought to free his people from oppression. It is unfortunate that the Castro regime turned oppressive in turn, and, again, there is no justifying certain atrocities. That does not stop me from admiring the idea of “Hasta la victoria, siempre.”
I’ll be candid. I am Puerto Rican (as you’ve undoubtedly guessed by my monker; my nation has spent 500 years without tasting freedom. And I feel ashamed that so few of my compatriots share the dream of Puerto Rican independence that I share. I am surrounded everyday by people who are unwilling to believe in or pursue independence because they are afraid that it might mean all McDonald’s will disappear from the island. So, I am intrinsically drawn to someone who was willing to fight (literally) to the death for his beliefs and who wrote so eloquently about the importance of fighting for freedom. Does that make me biased? Sure, but you’re all biased too. Does it make me ignorant? Maybe; but I’m well aware of the horrible things in Che’s biography, including (for example) his persecution of homosexuals…something not even Che-hating conservatives like to mention since so many are busy persecuting homosexuals, themselves. I think it just means that my personal experience has made me value certain things above others — again, something that could surely be said about any of you. I hope that helps explain where I’m coming from a little bit.
“His people”? He was from Argentina, not Cuba. I think we have a little more insight into this monster than you do. After all, he didn’t apply the coup de grace to sixteen year old Argentine boys or Puerto Ricans did he? No. He did that to Cubans, Boricua. He killed Cubans. So fuck off.
I’d like to see what happens to Puerto Rico when the gravy train ends and you get your wish.
Puerto Ricans are born with something that almost every person living in this hemisphere wishes he had. American citizenship.
Whoops, you caught my slip up. Of course, few people could doubt that a strong part of Guevara felt Cuban in spirit.
Also, I didn’t realize that only Cubans were allowed to have an opinion. I apologize. Are there any other conditions you’d like to impose?
Your flippancy is an insult to the blood your hero spilled.
The United States receives more of an economic advantage from their control of Puerto Rico’s trade and the beneficial tax conditions for businesses than they give up in federal aid. That, my friend, is fact.
Will there be tough times when Puerto Rico is finally independent? Of course — though it’s hard to imagine things being much worse than they are now. Will it allow Puerto Rico to join the global economy and eventually be stronger for it in the way that many other similar countries (small, former colonies, good education levels, strong tourism, manufacturing and business sectors) have? Absolutely.
And, sorry, I don’t worship the United States or its citizenship, and would gladly give it up to see Puerto Rico be truly free.
Flippancy is my response to insults from strangers on the Internet. Truce? 🙂
“I just have a problem with establishing a connection between Obama and Hitler, as the doctored photograph implicitly does.”
It does nothing of the sort. In fact, that is why I specifically put the image of Adolf OVER that of Obama. My comparison is to Che, not to Hitler. Yours is a completely illogical, irresponsible argument.
I’ll tell you another thing Boricua: would you like to understand why I am so angry by your support for someone lik Che Guevara? Because “Anatasio” comes from my cousin – who was murdered at the age of 27 with a baby on the way by guess who? Che Guevara at La Cabana prison. Know why? Because he had SPOKEN NEGATIVELY against the regime. Know what else? THERE WAS NO TRIAL. So yes, I get pretty damn angry when some asshole who knows absolutely nothing about what he’s talking about spouts his mouth off and by way of that – says that the memory of our murdered brothers and sisters is irrelevant.
There is nothing nuanced in your argument. You sir, are cold-blooded asshole. All the information on Che Guevara is out there. This is the 21st century. There is an internet. There are books. For crying out loud – there are well over 11 million Cubans you could speak with. But know, you have to hold on to some absurd image of a man WE – the Cuban people – refer to as the Butcher of La Cabana because of the crimes he committed. But YOU see fit to deny all the crimes committed against the Cuban people simply because it doesn’t fit your sexy image of David fighting against Goliath.
Take your head out of your ass.
Again, you make assumptions. I – unlike a lot of the other folks at Babalu (and I do respect their opinions) – think Obama truly does mean well. I have absolutely nothing against the man. His intentions are indeed noble.
This had nothing to do with Obama – and everything to do with a hypocrite – namely that asshole of a judge.
Sorry for the language folks but I have absolutely had it with this nonsense – this unabashed hatred of an entire nation of mostly innocent folks by individuals you like Boricua.
Open a damn history book.
No truce. Read CubaWatch’s comment again and you’ll have an idea at why your statements are so repulsive to us why they are deserving of my expletive-filled tirade. Actually, after reading Anatasio’s comment, I think I may have been too nice.
Boricua, your incredible and undoubtedly supernatural ability to delve into the psyche of a deceased murderer, decades dead, is uncanny. It is amazing how you know with such certainty that che’s original intentions were good. Please forgive us for doubting your innate ability to see what is in a dead man’s heart and soul, whom you have never met, nor obviously, know much about.
You have to understand that our view is clouded by the blood of the thousands of Cubans who died because of che. Therefore, we cannot channel his spirit to find out that he really had good intentions and didn’t mean to kill one, two, three… hundreds of innocent men, women, and children.
“And, sorry, I don’t worship the United States or its citizenship, and would gladly give it up to see Puerto Rico be truly free.”
Chico, go live in Cuba then: You can experience the “freedom” you crave, and you don’t have to force your brethren to give up a Big Mac every so often. Deal?
BTW, Boricua, I proudly shook the hand of the man who hunted down your piece of shit hero in Bolivia in 1967.
Very quickly:
In none of my comments have I denied, justified, excused, or done anything but admit Che’s many atrocities. And while I understand that it’s more convenient for you all to ignore that and strengthen your argument with the assumption that I support murder, you’re really just side-stepping the argument. I believe in some of the *ideas* that he espoused, even while strongly condemning some of the *methods* he utilized in pursuing them — any intelligent person could make that distinction. So, disagree with me (as you obviously do) about his intentions and whether they are worthy of admiration. But do not brand me as a friend of murderous despots when I have, over and over, clearly stated how abhorrent I find some of Che’s actions to have been even while I respect his commitment to his cause.
“BTW, Boricua, I proudly shook the hand of the man who hunted down your piece of shit hero in Bolivia in 1967.”
Well, aren’t you special. By the way, I thought you were against executing people without trial…
Actually, the government of Bolivia, the nation your hero was trying to destabilize, gave the order. The world is a much cleaner place thanks to them.
Execution is still execution; the fact that it was ordered by a government is even worse. Then again, what could we expect of the right wing, American puppet government that Che was trying to help liberate Bolivians from?
I guess the right-wing despots are OK, only the leftist ones are evil.
I’m as happy that Eichmann was “liberated” from Argentina and sent back to Israel as I am about che meeting his maker in Bolivia. I detest ’em both. But you? You’re a commie, through and through.
First of all, I feel the need to apologize for the typos in my above statement. That was written rather quickly in a fit of . . . well . . . disgust. That said, I think you get the point I was trying to make.
What is so shocking about all of this is the fact that Boricua – who seems to be a rather intelligent fellow – can actually believe Che Guevara was out to “help his fellow man.” The only man Che Guevara was out to help was himself.
A real man of the people that Che was – he died with a Rolex submariner on his wrist and what was one of the first things he did after helping Fidel seize control of the island? Capture the largest mansion he could find – Tarara – for himself.
And who was the fellow who had a window cut into his office at La Cabana so he could better see the murders taking place in the execution yard? El Che.
Che, Fidel – both of these men were into preserving their own power and manipulating all those around them in order to build myths around themselves for self-serving reasons.
Read his diaries . . . the talk of “loving” the act of killing, etc . . . this is some very twisted stuff.
Sorry Boricua – no free pass. A murder’s a murderer. I have no patience for this argument anymore. I’m bowing out. In the end, you and those like you are irrelevant. When the new day dawns on the Pearl of the Antilles – I for one – plan on forgetting all about you.
That’s it. I’m done.
Good night.
Was it not che who said he liked the smell of gun powder and blood? Wait, here’s the quote from his diary:
“I will dip my weapons in blood and, crazed with fury, I will cut the throats of my defeated enemies. I can already feel my dilated nostrils savoring the acrid smell of gunpowder and blood, of death to the enemy.”
Savoring? And this was BEFORE he even left Argentina, before he joined the revolution, you know, while he was forming his intentions. Noble? I think not. I think that speaks volumes about what his intentions were- and remember that he trained to be a doctor, and ended up taking lives instead of saving them.
Che was in Bolivia to de-stabilize the country and turn it into another Cuba. They rightfully did the world a favor by executing the mass murdering psychopath. Your real problem is your inability to judge. Let me tell you something, Che, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, the Castro’s, etc, etc, have NO redeeming qualities, none, nada, nunca. Their crimes against humanity cancel out everything, get it? Sex offenders who violate and murder children also describe themselves as “loving” kids. Here’s a little moral quiz for you. Would you go to a Jewish blog and comment about all the good Hitler did, even though he murdered 6 million people? If your answer is no, ta da! You get it, the same rule applies to Che. If you don’t get it then you’re morally bankrupt, and we’ve put up with enough of your insults.
It is amazing how people can derive such false conclusions, such as Che’s initial intentions being good, or an implication that the US somehow subjugates Puerto Rico, especially with no evidence whatsoever.
I guess the answer is supporting an agenda at all costs, even if it means creating outright lies and somehow justifying outright murder due to some mythical initial “good” intent.
His only intent was to seize power under the guise of “social justice” and unfortunately some, such as our Boricua friend have taken the bait..Very sad..
I believe in some of the *ideas* that he espoused, even while strongly condemning some of the *methods* he utilized in pursuing them — any intelligent person could make that distinction.
We understand the distinction, Boricua. We simply reject it. Would you let someone get away with saying that they agreed with some of the ideas that Hitler espoused, while condemning his methods? No, you wouldn’t. The ideas that Che espoused were tainted from the start, and the methods he used were merely the “logical” (if I can soil that word by associating it with this mass-murdering thug) means to accomplishing them. Communism REQUIRES butchery.
As they say in programming, “that’s not a bug, that’s a feature.”
The left and communists have done a great job of adorning, packaging and hyping nothing more than a gigantic turd (communism) and making people believe it is something it is not.
We however see through this, as we have lived it.
Our boricua friend indicates that Che had “ideas” and that he supports those “ideas” but just not the method “murder” to achieve them.
Could those “ideas” mean universal poverty (except of course for the communist leaders).
Could another of those “ideas” mean total lack of freedom? What about total lack of respect for private property (except of course their own).
Is this really “social justice”?
What about promising elections, then reneging? What about reaching power under false pretenses, to put it mildly, could even this be one of those “ideas”?
You notice the word “ideas” was mentioned but never explained.
Now Obama uses the word “change” and “yes we can” but there are no true details.
Let me just respond to Evil Otto as a way of responding to all of you:
I’m glad you understand the distinction, and I respect your right to reject it. Obviously, I have some beliefs about Che’s ideas and intentions that severely conflict with yours. I’m willing to admit that I could be wrong (something that very few of you would do, I’m sure) I just don’t think I am.
People have been throwing around Hitler’s name a lot and I think he’s another good example of being able to make distinctions. Hitler was, in the words of one of my favorite comedians “a mass-murdering fuckhead”, obviously one of the most evil men of our times. However, this fact does not magically erase his admirable skills as a leader, orator and military tactician. To deny such would be turning a blind eye to reality. Now, these are not “redeeming” qualities in the sense that they don’t even come close to making up for all of his despicable ideas and acts. But intelligent people can make the distinction and admire and study his loquaciousness, his battle plans, etc. without losing sight of the fact that the man was a monster.
I suppose now I’m going to get called an anti-semite…
I’m glad you understand the distinction, and I respect your right to reject it. Obviously, I have some beliefs about Che’s ideas and intentions that severely conflict with yours.
The thing is, people here have already posted evidence that Che’s “ideas and intentions” were brutal and foul, and yet the best you can come up with is is to allow us to have beliefs that “severely conflict.”
No. That’s not going to cut it. You talk above about “freedom,” yet choose to defend someone who had absolutely no belief in freedom whatsoever. NONE. Che would have had no problem putting you up against the wall.
I’m willing to admit that I could be wrong (something that very few of you would do, I’m sure) I just don’t think I am.
We’ve ALREADY proven you wrong, on more than one occasion. The fact that you refuse to admit it is irrelevant.
People have been throwing around Hitler’s name a lot and I think he’s another good example of being able to make distinctions.
Hitler was, in the words of one of my favorite comedians “a mass-murdering fuckhead”, obviously one of the most evil men of our times. However, this fact does not magically erase his admirable skills as a leader, orator and military tactician.
Here’s the deal: YES IT DOES. Hitler’s evil actions foul each and every one of his so-called “admirable” skills and actions.
What you are basically arguing is the tired old saying that was trotted out by the Stalinists in the 1930s and 1940s… “you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.” Time and time again the useful idiots (a term supposedly coined by Lenin) of the west would counter accusations of Stalin’s brutality by pointing out how wonderful the result was going to be. That is, when they could be bothered to confirm Stalin’s atrocities at all. It’s is a variation of “the ends justify the means.” It’s also similar to the argument pro-fascist Italians used about Mussolini… “at least he made the trains run on time.” Oh, sure Che (or Hitler, or Stalin, or Pol Pot) was a brutal mass-murdering psychopath, but he did some good things too!
SO WHAT?!? His actions taint everything he did. What Che deserves, Boricua, is to lie in his grave unremembered, and certainly not idolized as some sort of frikkin’ freedom fighter.
To deny such would be turning a blind eye to reality.
Sorry, no. You don’t simply get to tell us that to deny that is to deny reality… you are arguing an opinion, and we can and do deny it. Argue your point, but don’t try and declare the debate over.
Now, these are not “redeeming” qualities in the sense that they don’t even come close to making up for all of his despicable ideas and acts.
But intelligent people can make the distinction and admire and study his loquaciousness, his battle plans, etc. without losing sight of the fact that the man was a monster.
Oh, really? I can “study” Hitler and Che without admiring them at all.
I suppose now I’m going to get called an anti-semite…
No, just a fool. You came in here hero-worshiping Che (“Frankly, I’ve always believed that those who would love nothing better than to see Cuba freed from the iron grip of a tyrant would at least have to partially respect a man who once fought for that very same reason.“), got your ass handed to you, and now you’re desperately trying to make us believe that you admire the good Che did while hating the bad. Someone who had knowledge of Che’s beliefs and actions would never have tried to pass him off as a freedom fighter.
Boricua,
Was Hitler a great orator? Unfortunately,Yes..
Was Hitler a great motivator.. Unfortunately, yes.
So was Stalin and Mao, both great murders that murdered many more than Hitler.
This does not say they have redeeming factors in any way..
Fidel, unfortunately has the “gift of gab” and he used it to perpetrate evil.
Unfortunately some of these people have great skills to perpetrate evil – Che included. On that account we agree. However, that is not what you said.. What you said was that he had some “ideas” that you actually liked as some redeeming factors.
If you would like to clarify those “ideas”…?
People like you and people like me are practically different species…it’s like trying to reason with a baboon. We don’t even agree on the definition of the most basic of concepts, and I certainly refuse to accept anything that has been posted by a bunch of partisan hacks as “evidence”.
Regardless, I’ve gotten all I wanted to get out of this discussion. Cheers, friends.
BoricuaEnLaLuna- you spew the same old leftist cool aid bullshit, and are unable to tell the difference between belief and opinion, and facts, i.e. the truth.
Boricua,
Even Baboons would have more intelligence than to try to come in here and praise Che in any fashion. Like entering a synagogue while praising Hitler. What did you expect?
Maybe you can find a radical discussion board more to your liking and intelligence (or lack of it?) – macheteros.com? Granma.cu?
Oh and, put your money where your mouth is,, If Che’s ideas are so good, fuck off and go live in Cuba and see the “evidence” for yourself.
For a bunch of un-nuanced “baboons,” as you like to put it, Boricua, they sure did a good job of shredding your arguments to bits.
Perhaps you should go to another forum further down the evolutionary scale, your odds may be better.
Oh, looks like we weren’t properly dazzled by Boricua’s brilliance.
People like you and people like me are practically different species…
Communists and fascists ARE good at declaring others to be a different species… glad to see you don’t disappoint.
it’s like trying to reason with a baboon.
You’re not reasoning, you’re FEELING. You don’t have an argument, so you simply declare your opponent a “baboon.” Makes it less embarrassing to admit that you got your ass handed to you, I suppose.
We don’t even agree on the definition of the most basic of concepts,
Like “freedom?”
and I certainly refuse to accept anything that has been posted by a bunch of partisan hacks as “evidence”.
Heh heh, good to see you won’t let anything penetrate the shell of ignorance you’ve managed to build around your beliefs. If we’re mere “partisan hacks” then there’s no need to actually examine anything we’ve said, no need to THINK. Above you said “I’m willing to admit that I could be wrong,” but it turns out you’re NOT willing.
Regardless, I’ve gotten all I wanted to get out of this discussion. Cheers, friends.
“Waaaaah, I’m going to take my ball and go home!!!” Looks like we got a little too close to making you examine what you believe. Can’t have that, now, can we?
Boricua, what you are is a follower. You attach great and pure motives to someone, and then can’t allow yourself to suffer disappointment if that person turns out to be less than you thought. Even when forced into understanding you insist on trying to salvage something good out of the Great Leader‘s actions. You are the textbook example of someone who would have gleefully followed Mussolini, Hitler, or Stalin, had you been born in their countries. Tyrants don’t operate in a vacuum… they need people like you to do their dirty work, to get rid of the “baboons,” the sub-humans, the “other.”
In the end, though, we’ve won. You can deny it, but we just put a chink in the armor of your beliefs. You’ll remember that you ran, that you couldn’t cut it in a debate with the “baboons.”
Have a nice day, comrade.
I have never posted before; however, I feel so strongly about this issue that I signed up. I am an American mother of four children who has made damn sure that each and every one of them will know the true story of Che Guevara. It makes me ill when I see young people today blindly wearing merchandise supporting such a monster. In most instances, these young people are simply ignorant of the facts regarding Che. If they bothered to check their facts first, I doubt that most of them with half a brain would find Che’s actions so romantic. Young people today are exposed to biased fluff stories regarding Fidel and Che. One prime example is the movie The Motorcycle Diaries, starring Gael Garcia Bernal. What a ridiculous joke this movie was. It simply left out all of the atrocious acts committed by Che, presenting him as an altruistic champion of the people. A more accurate picture of both Fidel and Che is told through Andy Garcia’s movie The Lost City. Mr. Garcia obviously bothered to check his facts. I am stunned and saddened that many in American society simply accept as fact the garbage that is portrayed in movies about Fidel and Che. There is a brand new “epic” by the director Steven Soderbergh, which just debuted at the Cannes film festival, where its star, Benicio del Toro, really thinks that Che was a hero. I saw an interview where del Toro praised Che, and, of course, there was no mention of the cold-blooded murder of innocent Cubans whose only “crime” was to speak out for what they believed in. I get just as angry when I see fluff new stories on Cuba, such as when Dan Rather visits his old friend Fidel and reports on such ridiculous bullshit as Cubans being able to buy cellphones, microwaves, and are now free to stay in Cuba’s hotels. Gee, I’m sure that, in the year 2008, that ordinary Cubans are dancing in the streets since they can now buy a microwave. Or can they? No, because THEY CANNOT AFFORD IT. What a joke. COMMUNISM AND SOCIALISM DON’T WORK PEOPLE!!! Those who seize all of the power, FIDEL AND CHE, get all of the benefits and the ordinary people, you know, the one’s that the “revolution” was supposed to help, are SCREWED. A good source of information would be to read Che’s diaries, where he really shows his true colors. I am so tired of this crock about his “noble ideals.” His methods were anything but. Wake up people, Che and Fidel are the oppressors. It’s easy for people who don’t actually live in Cuba to believe in this absurd ideal of equality for all in Cuba that Fidel and Che were supposed to bring about. Idiots such as Michael Moore only add confusion to the issue when they claim that Cuba has a wonderful and free health care system. To see what sort of health care is available to the average Cuban, do a search on you tube and see what you come up with. It is a real eye opener. The “ideals” are just that, ideals. They don’t exist. I don’t understand how, outside of Cuba, the reputation of Fidel Castro, and the memory of Che Guevara, after all these years, are not seen for what they truly are, but, rather, through rose-colored glasses. If all those who sport Che merchandise and believe in his “noble ideals” would be forced to live in Cuba as regular Cubans do for just one year, I would venture to guess that “viva la revolution” would be exposed for the empty slogan that it is.
Mariposa08,
Very well said…Amen
BoricuaEnLaLuna:
“Frankly, I’ve always believed that those who would love nothing better than to see Cuba freed from the iron grip of a tyrant would at least have to partially respect a man who once fought for that very same reason.”
Considering that Che was on Fidel’s side, while supporting or participating in the execution of thousands in support of Fidel’s regime, this is rather comical. Che did all he could to support the “iron grip of a tyrant” named Fidel.
“People like you and people like me are practically different species…it’s like trying to reason with a baboon.”
Yes, it is difficult to reason with someone who maintains that those who want to “see Cuba freed from the iron grip of a tyrant” named Fidel should “partially respect” Che , who in life was a willing participant in Fidel’s regime and in death is an icon of Fidel’s regime.
BoricuaEnLaLuna and those of his ilk remind me of Bill Murry in MEATBALLS: Yes, Che and Stalin killed millions of innocent people but…it just doesn’t matter! It just doesn’t matter!
Folks,
It’s called Fabian socialism. Very slowly now since the 1960s, even the 50s it has been creeping into our society. Some of us more enlightened beings (Babalusians) have taken notice and are against it. Sadly the grand majority of the American public is too stupid, ignorant, lazy, or already brainwashed to do something about it.
Below is a picture from Cuba – where even those wahoos that are opposed to Castro still want Barry to win!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eunheui/1046767197
Wow, you people will even use photoshopped pictures to make your point. Or, are we supposed to believe that this guy posed, got up, switched Hitler for Obama and came back and struck the exact same pose of the camera?
Typical conservatives: you don’t care if the evidence is completely made up as long as it helps your argument.
Actually BoricuaEnLaUna – I’m not a conservative. I’m simply a humanist who finds those who support blood thirsty murderers the likes of Che Guevara to be . . . well . . . pretty sick cats.
You support Che Guevara and Fidel Castro, you support Pinochet, Hitler, Pol-Pot and the rest of their lot. A dictatorship is a dictatorship is a dictatorship. Think about it – this man is a JUDGE and yet he displays a poster showing a man who championed extra-judicial executions (murders). What does that tell you?
Don’t make assumptions before you know what you’re talking about (typical conservative).
And please, don’t get on my for posting a photoshopped image to make a point – it’s obvious that it’s photoshopped since it appears directly above the original image below. It’s not as if I’m emailing this to the world.
And exactly what are you saying is “made up?”
The poster of Hitler? that doesn’t appear in the USAToday story:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-06-10-ohio-lethal-injection_N.htm?csp=34
it is the Obama-Hope poster. In fact, here’s the caption:
Lourain County Common Pleas Judge James Burge speaks in his office in Lorain, Ohio as posters of Che Guevara and Barack Obama hang on his wall.
That said, I find it highly ironic that a judge who set aside lethal injection death penalties would have a poster of Che, who executed many people without so much as caring about whether he was causing them any pain…
I just have a problem with establishing a connection between Obama and Hitler, as the doctored photograph implicitly does. I think it’s the kind of immature and offensive stunt that someone like you would denounce as the cheapest sort of discourse if it was aimed at someone of your liking.
As for my support of dictators, I’m sorry to tell you that’s not the case. I know how facile it is to assume that anyone who dares to disagree with you is a murder-loving communist, but it’s just not true. As far as how anyone could harbor some admiration for someone like ‘Che’ Guevara, I will simply the say the following:
It is possible, perhaps even commendable, to admire someone for their commitment to a strongly held belief in freedom even while abhorring many of the actions committed by that person. Frankly, I’ve always believed that those who would love nothing better than to see Cuba freed from the iron grip of a tyrant would at least have to partially respect a man who once fought for that very same reason.
I realize this is probably too nuanced an argument to understand for the “WE ARE GOOD! YOU ARE BAD! END OF STORY!” crowd that you so obviously belong to. I mean, you’re probably the kind of guy who believes Batista was a pretty good guy. Oh well, go ahead, go on your little rant now about what an awful person I am.
Boricua, I don’t think you’re an awful person, I just think you are seriously misguided. If I were to use the “logic” of your “nuanced” argument, it would be perfectly fine to admire John Wayne Gacy’s artwork and ignore the fact that he was a serial killer.
But even if your “nuanced logic” were to be used in the case of che guevara, you would fall way short. The butcher of La Cabaña never fought for the freedom of anyone. He fought for power. He fought to wrest power from other dictators so that he could be the one in power. That, my nuanced friend, is not commendable.
Anatasio, he is offended by your comparison of the Messiah with Hitler. Replace the picture of Hitler with Stalin or Lenin. He may feel better…
By the way, Boricua, for your information, Hitler’s party was the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, or NSDAP). Just thought you should know. Here a socialist, there a socialist, everywhere a socialist, socialist…
It’s your Gacy analogy that’s misguided. You can’t equate admiring someone for their ideology with admiring someone because they’re a good singer or some such other ultimately insignificant quality.
While, obviously, Guevara and Castro’s dream of freedom eventually spiraled into the despicable dictatorship of today, I choose to believe that there was a dream of freedom in the first place, one that he pursued with awe-inspiring conviction against seemingly unsurmountable odds. You can choose to believe otherwise; that the passion for liberty he so eloquently wrote and spoke about were lies masking his true tyrannical intentions. We would have to agree to disagree. Though, I will say, considering that he was involved in revolutionary efforts in countries other than Cuba, it seems unlikely that he was trying to unite Latin American states beneath his mighty iron fist.
I think it would do people like yourself a world of good to, instead of dismissing ‘Che’ as an awful murdered out of hand, denounce his horrible acts while accepting that he once stood for something noble and, twisted as his vision may have become, there is indeed something admirable about someone who fought for his beliefs so valiantly.
George:
No, I wouldn’t feel better if it were Stalin or Lenin, though it would be a better image if the intention truly was to convey the “here, there and everywhere a socialist” message. After all, when I see Hitler I don’t think “socialist”, regardless of the party’s name, and I would guess most people don’t either.
But you and I are both smart enough to know that wasn’t the intended message: it was to make a connection between Hitler and Obama in any way, shape or form. I’m not an Obama-phile (hell, I’m not even an American) but I find it offensive because of the hypocrisy — as I said above, if it were someone you like being connected to Hitler, you would scream bloody murder.
Finally, thank you for making my point that you, and so many of your like-minded friends, respond to any sort of disagreement or criticism by claiming that the person who doesn’t see eye to eye with them is a murder-loving communist. Truly a great way to have an intelligent discussion.
Che “stood for something noble”?!
“[g]uevara and [c]astro’s dream of freedom”?!
You really are “en la luna.” It’s just doesn’t cover it to call you a fool, a useful idiot, or a fellow traveler. Are you really that fucking stupid and ignorant of history?
You don’t see Hitler as a “socialist” because you don’t know jack-shit about history. Before opening your mouth to give an unenlightened opinion about something you obviously know nothing about, read a few books about the revolutionary movements of the early 20th century. You’ll be shocked at what you discover.
“Finally, thank you for making my point that you, and so many of your like-minded friends, respond to any sort of disagreement or criticism by claiming that the person who doesn’t see eye to eye with them is a murder-loving communist. Truly a great way to have an intelligent discussion.”
If it smells like shit, it’s shit. You’ve been wallowing in it for so long it smells like rose-water to you. But you know what? It’s still shit.
The reality is that Anatasio can post whatever he wants but I think the analogy is to put Hitler where Che is in the picture not where Obama is.
Boricua, obviously the “nuance” of my argument was lost on you, but let’s forget about that because as I mentioned before, the analogy does not really apply in your case. Let’s concentrate on the more glaring “nuances” of your argument:
“You can choose to believe otherwise; that the passion for liberty he so eloquently wrote and spoke about were lies masking his true tyrannical intentions. We would have to agree to disagree. Though, I will say, considering that he was involved in revolutionary efforts in countries other than Cuba, it seems unlikely that he was trying to unite Latin American states beneath his mighty iron fist.”
So che, the man who signed the execution orders in La Cabaña prison, Stalin II, was really a good guy fighting for freedom gone bad? Was this before or after he started calling himself Stalin II? And if it is the latter, was Stalin just another good guy gone bad, too? Why don’t you enlighten us with your nuanced explanation?
Dear George,
While I’m quickly falling in love with all your pet names for me (I especially love “fucking stupid”, it really puts a smile on my face), assuming that I’m ignorant and using a lot of curse words is just a way of not engaging my ideas. So, unless you have something more to offer as an argument than that cute little righteous indignation, I don’t really believe that I have anything more to say to you.
Wallowing in shit,
Ignorant Commie
Please. Spare me your outraged sensitivity. Anyone who praises murderous motherless bastards the way you did is nothing if not fucking stupid. It fits you like a glove.
Boricua, why don’t you answer Alberto? Or did the cat get your tongue?
Sorry to disappoint you, George, but I simply didn’t see Alberto’s comment before posting mine. Though I, again, thank you for the kind words; they really do make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
I will gladly answer Alberto — I wouldn’t deny my tocayo a response:
There is absolutely no justification for the massacre at La Cabaña, just like I think his choice of nom de guerre was, shall we say, unfortunate. And, if you’ll read carefully, I never called Guevara a “good guy”. I simply said that I believe he once fought to free his people from oppression. It is unfortunate that the Castro regime turned oppressive in turn, and, again, there is no justifying certain atrocities. That does not stop me from admiring the idea of “Hasta la victoria, siempre.”
I’ll be candid. I am Puerto Rican (as you’ve undoubtedly guessed by my monker; my nation has spent 500 years without tasting freedom. And I feel ashamed that so few of my compatriots share the dream of Puerto Rican independence that I share. I am surrounded everyday by people who are unwilling to believe in or pursue independence because they are afraid that it might mean all McDonald’s will disappear from the island. So, I am intrinsically drawn to someone who was willing to fight (literally) to the death for his beliefs and who wrote so eloquently about the importance of fighting for freedom. Does that make me biased? Sure, but you’re all biased too. Does it make me ignorant? Maybe; but I’m well aware of the horrible things in Che’s biography, including (for example) his persecution of homosexuals…something not even Che-hating conservatives like to mention since so many are busy persecuting homosexuals, themselves. I think it just means that my personal experience has made me value certain things above others — again, something that could surely be said about any of you. I hope that helps explain where I’m coming from a little bit.
“His people”? He was from Argentina, not Cuba. I think we have a little more insight into this monster than you do. After all, he didn’t apply the coup de grace to sixteen year old Argentine boys or Puerto Ricans did he? No. He did that to Cubans, Boricua. He killed Cubans. So fuck off.
I’d like to see what happens to Puerto Rico when the gravy train ends and you get your wish.
Puerto Ricans are born with something that almost every person living in this hemisphere wishes he had. American citizenship.
Whoops, you caught my slip up. Of course, few people could doubt that a strong part of Guevara felt Cuban in spirit.
Also, I didn’t realize that only Cubans were allowed to have an opinion. I apologize. Are there any other conditions you’d like to impose?
Your flippancy is an insult to the blood your hero spilled.
The United States receives more of an economic advantage from their control of Puerto Rico’s trade and the beneficial tax conditions for businesses than they give up in federal aid. That, my friend, is fact.
Will there be tough times when Puerto Rico is finally independent? Of course — though it’s hard to imagine things being much worse than they are now. Will it allow Puerto Rico to join the global economy and eventually be stronger for it in the way that many other similar countries (small, former colonies, good education levels, strong tourism, manufacturing and business sectors) have? Absolutely.
And, sorry, I don’t worship the United States or its citizenship, and would gladly give it up to see Puerto Rico be truly free.
Flippancy is my response to insults from strangers on the Internet. Truce? 🙂
“I just have a problem with establishing a connection between Obama and Hitler, as the doctored photograph implicitly does.”
It does nothing of the sort. In fact, that is why I specifically put the image of Adolf OVER that of Obama. My comparison is to Che, not to Hitler. Yours is a completely illogical, irresponsible argument.
I’ll tell you another thing Boricua: would you like to understand why I am so angry by your support for someone lik Che Guevara? Because “Anatasio” comes from my cousin – who was murdered at the age of 27 with a baby on the way by guess who? Che Guevara at La Cabana prison. Know why? Because he had SPOKEN NEGATIVELY against the regime. Know what else? THERE WAS NO TRIAL. So yes, I get pretty damn angry when some asshole who knows absolutely nothing about what he’s talking about spouts his mouth off and by way of that – says that the memory of our murdered brothers and sisters is irrelevant.
There is nothing nuanced in your argument. You sir, are cold-blooded asshole. All the information on Che Guevara is out there. This is the 21st century. There is an internet. There are books. For crying out loud – there are well over 11 million Cubans you could speak with. But know, you have to hold on to some absurd image of a man WE – the Cuban people – refer to as the Butcher of La Cabana because of the crimes he committed. But YOU see fit to deny all the crimes committed against the Cuban people simply because it doesn’t fit your sexy image of David fighting against Goliath.
Take your head out of your ass.
Again, you make assumptions. I – unlike a lot of the other folks at Babalu (and I do respect their opinions) – think Obama truly does mean well. I have absolutely nothing against the man. His intentions are indeed noble.
This had nothing to do with Obama – and everything to do with a hypocrite – namely that asshole of a judge.
Sorry for the language folks but I have absolutely had it with this nonsense – this unabashed hatred of an entire nation of mostly innocent folks by individuals you like Boricua.
Open a damn history book.
No truce. Read CubaWatch’s comment again and you’ll have an idea at why your statements are so repulsive to us why they are deserving of my expletive-filled tirade. Actually, after reading Anatasio’s comment, I think I may have been too nice.
Boricua, your incredible and undoubtedly supernatural ability to delve into the psyche of a deceased murderer, decades dead, is uncanny. It is amazing how you know with such certainty that che’s original intentions were good. Please forgive us for doubting your innate ability to see what is in a dead man’s heart and soul, whom you have never met, nor obviously, know much about.
You have to understand that our view is clouded by the blood of the thousands of Cubans who died because of che. Therefore, we cannot channel his spirit to find out that he really had good intentions and didn’t mean to kill one, two, three… hundreds of innocent men, women, and children.
“And, sorry, I don’t worship the United States or its citizenship, and would gladly give it up to see Puerto Rico be truly free.”
Chico, go live in Cuba then: You can experience the “freedom” you crave, and you don’t have to force your brethren to give up a Big Mac every so often. Deal?
BTW, Boricua, I proudly shook the hand of the man who hunted down your piece of shit hero in Bolivia in 1967.
Very quickly:
In none of my comments have I denied, justified, excused, or done anything but admit Che’s many atrocities. And while I understand that it’s more convenient for you all to ignore that and strengthen your argument with the assumption that I support murder, you’re really just side-stepping the argument. I believe in some of the *ideas* that he espoused, even while strongly condemning some of the *methods* he utilized in pursuing them — any intelligent person could make that distinction. So, disagree with me (as you obviously do) about his intentions and whether they are worthy of admiration. But do not brand me as a friend of murderous despots when I have, over and over, clearly stated how abhorrent I find some of Che’s actions to have been even while I respect his commitment to his cause.
“BTW, Boricua, I proudly shook the hand of the man who hunted down your piece of shit hero in Bolivia in 1967.”
Well, aren’t you special. By the way, I thought you were against executing people without trial…
Actually, the government of Bolivia, the nation your hero was trying to destabilize, gave the order. The world is a much cleaner place thanks to them.
Execution is still execution; the fact that it was ordered by a government is even worse. Then again, what could we expect of the right wing, American puppet government that Che was trying to help liberate Bolivians from?
I guess the right-wing despots are OK, only the leftist ones are evil.
I’m as happy that Eichmann was “liberated” from Argentina and sent back to Israel as I am about che meeting his maker in Bolivia. I detest ’em both. But you? You’re a commie, through and through.
First of all, I feel the need to apologize for the typos in my above statement. That was written rather quickly in a fit of . . . well . . . disgust. That said, I think you get the point I was trying to make.
What is so shocking about all of this is the fact that Boricua – who seems to be a rather intelligent fellow – can actually believe Che Guevara was out to “help his fellow man.” The only man Che Guevara was out to help was himself.
A real man of the people that Che was – he died with a Rolex submariner on his wrist and what was one of the first things he did after helping Fidel seize control of the island? Capture the largest mansion he could find – Tarara – for himself.
And who was the fellow who had a window cut into his office at La Cabana so he could better see the murders taking place in the execution yard? El Che.
Che, Fidel – both of these men were into preserving their own power and manipulating all those around them in order to build myths around themselves for self-serving reasons.
Read his diaries . . . the talk of “loving” the act of killing, etc . . . this is some very twisted stuff.
Sorry Boricua – no free pass. A murder’s a murderer. I have no patience for this argument anymore. I’m bowing out. In the end, you and those like you are irrelevant. When the new day dawns on the Pearl of the Antilles – I for one – plan on forgetting all about you.
That’s it. I’m done.
Good night.
Was it not che who said he liked the smell of gun powder and blood? Wait, here’s the quote from his diary:
“I will dip my weapons in blood and, crazed with fury, I will cut the throats of my defeated enemies. I can already feel my dilated nostrils savoring the acrid smell of gunpowder and blood, of death to the enemy.”
Savoring? And this was BEFORE he even left Argentina, before he joined the revolution, you know, while he was forming his intentions. Noble? I think not. I think that speaks volumes about what his intentions were- and remember that he trained to be a doctor, and ended up taking lives instead of saving them.
Che was in Bolivia to de-stabilize the country and turn it into another Cuba. They rightfully did the world a favor by executing the mass murdering psychopath. Your real problem is your inability to judge. Let me tell you something, Che, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, the Castro’s, etc, etc, have NO redeeming qualities, none, nada, nunca. Their crimes against humanity cancel out everything, get it? Sex offenders who violate and murder children also describe themselves as “loving” kids. Here’s a little moral quiz for you. Would you go to a Jewish blog and comment about all the good Hitler did, even though he murdered 6 million people? If your answer is no, ta da! You get it, the same rule applies to Che. If you don’t get it then you’re morally bankrupt, and we’ve put up with enough of your insults.
It is amazing how people can derive such false conclusions, such as Che’s initial intentions being good, or an implication that the US somehow subjugates Puerto Rico, especially with no evidence whatsoever.
I guess the answer is supporting an agenda at all costs, even if it means creating outright lies and somehow justifying outright murder due to some mythical initial “good” intent.
His only intent was to seize power under the guise of “social justice” and unfortunately some, such as our Boricua friend have taken the bait..Very sad..
I believe in some of the *ideas* that he espoused, even while strongly condemning some of the *methods* he utilized in pursuing them — any intelligent person could make that distinction.
We understand the distinction, Boricua. We simply reject it. Would you let someone get away with saying that they agreed with some of the ideas that Hitler espoused, while condemning his methods? No, you wouldn’t. The ideas that Che espoused were tainted from the start, and the methods he used were merely the “logical” (if I can soil that word by associating it with this mass-murdering thug) means to accomplishing them. Communism REQUIRES butchery.
As they say in programming, “that’s not a bug, that’s a feature.”
The left and communists have done a great job of adorning, packaging and hyping nothing more than a gigantic turd (communism) and making people believe it is something it is not.
We however see through this, as we have lived it.
Our boricua friend indicates that Che had “ideas” and that he supports those “ideas” but just not the method “murder” to achieve them.
Could those “ideas” mean universal poverty (except of course for the communist leaders).
Could another of those “ideas” mean total lack of freedom? What about total lack of respect for private property (except of course their own).
Is this really “social justice”?
What about promising elections, then reneging? What about reaching power under false pretenses, to put it mildly, could even this be one of those “ideas”?
You notice the word “ideas” was mentioned but never explained.
Now Obama uses the word “change” and “yes we can” but there are no true details.
Let me just respond to Evil Otto as a way of responding to all of you:
I’m glad you understand the distinction, and I respect your right to reject it. Obviously, I have some beliefs about Che’s ideas and intentions that severely conflict with yours. I’m willing to admit that I could be wrong (something that very few of you would do, I’m sure) I just don’t think I am.
People have been throwing around Hitler’s name a lot and I think he’s another good example of being able to make distinctions. Hitler was, in the words of one of my favorite comedians “a mass-murdering fuckhead”, obviously one of the most evil men of our times. However, this fact does not magically erase his admirable skills as a leader, orator and military tactician. To deny such would be turning a blind eye to reality. Now, these are not “redeeming” qualities in the sense that they don’t even come close to making up for all of his despicable ideas and acts. But intelligent people can make the distinction and admire and study his loquaciousness, his battle plans, etc. without losing sight of the fact that the man was a monster.
I suppose now I’m going to get called an anti-semite…
I’m glad you understand the distinction, and I respect your right to reject it. Obviously, I have some beliefs about Che’s ideas and intentions that severely conflict with yours.
The thing is, people here have already posted evidence that Che’s “ideas and intentions” were brutal and foul, and yet the best you can come up with is is to allow us to have beliefs that “severely conflict.”
No. That’s not going to cut it. You talk above about “freedom,” yet choose to defend someone who had absolutely no belief in freedom whatsoever. NONE. Che would have had no problem putting you up against the wall.
I’m willing to admit that I could be wrong (something that very few of you would do, I’m sure) I just don’t think I am.
We’ve ALREADY proven you wrong, on more than one occasion. The fact that you refuse to admit it is irrelevant.
People have been throwing around Hitler’s name a lot and I think he’s another good example of being able to make distinctions.
Hitler was, in the words of one of my favorite comedians “a mass-murdering fuckhead”, obviously one of the most evil men of our times. However, this fact does not magically erase his admirable skills as a leader, orator and military tactician.
Here’s the deal: YES IT DOES. Hitler’s evil actions foul each and every one of his so-called “admirable” skills and actions.
What you are basically arguing is the tired old saying that was trotted out by the Stalinists in the 1930s and 1940s… “you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.” Time and time again the useful idiots (a term supposedly coined by Lenin) of the west would counter accusations of Stalin’s brutality by pointing out how wonderful the result was going to be. That is, when they could be bothered to confirm Stalin’s atrocities at all. It’s is a variation of “the ends justify the means.” It’s also similar to the argument pro-fascist Italians used about Mussolini… “at least he made the trains run on time.” Oh, sure Che (or Hitler, or Stalin, or Pol Pot) was a brutal mass-murdering psychopath, but he did some good things too!
SO WHAT?!? His actions taint everything he did. What Che deserves, Boricua, is to lie in his grave unremembered, and certainly not idolized as some sort of frikkin’ freedom fighter.
To deny such would be turning a blind eye to reality.
Sorry, no. You don’t simply get to tell us that to deny that is to deny reality… you are arguing an opinion, and we can and do deny it. Argue your point, but don’t try and declare the debate over.
Now, these are not “redeeming” qualities in the sense that they don’t even come close to making up for all of his despicable ideas and acts.
But intelligent people can make the distinction and admire and study his loquaciousness, his battle plans, etc. without losing sight of the fact that the man was a monster.
Oh, really? I can “study” Hitler and Che without admiring them at all.
I suppose now I’m going to get called an anti-semite…
No, just a fool. You came in here hero-worshiping Che (“Frankly, I’ve always believed that those who would love nothing better than to see Cuba freed from the iron grip of a tyrant would at least have to partially respect a man who once fought for that very same reason.“), got your ass handed to you, and now you’re desperately trying to make us believe that you admire the good Che did while hating the bad. Someone who had knowledge of Che’s beliefs and actions would never have tried to pass him off as a freedom fighter.
Boricua,
Was Hitler a great orator? Unfortunately,Yes..
Was Hitler a great motivator.. Unfortunately, yes.
So was Stalin and Mao, both great murders that murdered many more than Hitler.
This does not say they have redeeming factors in any way..
Fidel, unfortunately has the “gift of gab” and he used it to perpetrate evil.
Unfortunately some of these people have great skills to perpetrate evil – Che included. On that account we agree. However, that is not what you said.. What you said was that he had some “ideas” that you actually liked as some redeeming factors.
If you would like to clarify those “ideas”…?
People like you and people like me are practically different species…it’s like trying to reason with a baboon. We don’t even agree on the definition of the most basic of concepts, and I certainly refuse to accept anything that has been posted by a bunch of partisan hacks as “evidence”.
Regardless, I’ve gotten all I wanted to get out of this discussion. Cheers, friends.
BoricuaEnLaLuna- you spew the same old leftist cool aid bullshit, and are unable to tell the difference between belief and opinion, and facts, i.e. the truth.
Boricua,
Even Baboons would have more intelligence than to try to come in here and praise Che in any fashion. Like entering a synagogue while praising Hitler. What did you expect?
Maybe you can find a radical discussion board more to your liking and intelligence (or lack of it?) – macheteros.com? Granma.cu?
Oh and, put your money where your mouth is,, If Che’s ideas are so good, fuck off and go live in Cuba and see the “evidence” for yourself.
For a bunch of un-nuanced “baboons,” as you like to put it, Boricua, they sure did a good job of shredding your arguments to bits.
Perhaps you should go to another forum further down the evolutionary scale, your odds may be better.
Oh, looks like we weren’t properly dazzled by Boricua’s brilliance.
People like you and people like me are practically different species…
Communists and fascists ARE good at declaring others to be a different species… glad to see you don’t disappoint.
it’s like trying to reason with a baboon.
You’re not reasoning, you’re FEELING. You don’t have an argument, so you simply declare your opponent a “baboon.” Makes it less embarrassing to admit that you got your ass handed to you, I suppose.
We don’t even agree on the definition of the most basic of concepts,
Like “freedom?”
and I certainly refuse to accept anything that has been posted by a bunch of partisan hacks as “evidence”.
Heh heh, good to see you won’t let anything penetrate the shell of ignorance you’ve managed to build around your beliefs. If we’re mere “partisan hacks” then there’s no need to actually examine anything we’ve said, no need to THINK. Above you said “I’m willing to admit that I could be wrong,” but it turns out you’re NOT willing.
Regardless, I’ve gotten all I wanted to get out of this discussion. Cheers, friends.
“Waaaaah, I’m going to take my ball and go home!!!” Looks like we got a little too close to making you examine what you believe. Can’t have that, now, can we?
Boricua, what you are is a follower. You attach great and pure motives to someone, and then can’t allow yourself to suffer disappointment if that person turns out to be less than you thought. Even when forced into understanding you insist on trying to salvage something good out of the Great Leader‘s actions. You are the textbook example of someone who would have gleefully followed Mussolini, Hitler, or Stalin, had you been born in their countries. Tyrants don’t operate in a vacuum… they need people like you to do their dirty work, to get rid of the “baboons,” the sub-humans, the “other.”
In the end, though, we’ve won. You can deny it, but we just put a chink in the armor of your beliefs. You’ll remember that you ran, that you couldn’t cut it in a debate with the “baboons.”
Have a nice day, comrade.
I have never posted before; however, I feel so strongly about this issue that I signed up. I am an American mother of four children who has made damn sure that each and every one of them will know the true story of Che Guevara. It makes me ill when I see young people today blindly wearing merchandise supporting such a monster. In most instances, these young people are simply ignorant of the facts regarding Che. If they bothered to check their facts first, I doubt that most of them with half a brain would find Che’s actions so romantic. Young people today are exposed to biased fluff stories regarding Fidel and Che. One prime example is the movie The Motorcycle Diaries, starring Gael Garcia Bernal. What a ridiculous joke this movie was. It simply left out all of the atrocious acts committed by Che, presenting him as an altruistic champion of the people. A more accurate picture of both Fidel and Che is told through Andy Garcia’s movie The Lost City. Mr. Garcia obviously bothered to check his facts. I am stunned and saddened that many in American society simply accept as fact the garbage that is portrayed in movies about Fidel and Che. There is a brand new “epic” by the director Steven Soderbergh, which just debuted at the Cannes film festival, where its star, Benicio del Toro, really thinks that Che was a hero. I saw an interview where del Toro praised Che, and, of course, there was no mention of the cold-blooded murder of innocent Cubans whose only “crime” was to speak out for what they believed in. I get just as angry when I see fluff new stories on Cuba, such as when Dan Rather visits his old friend Fidel and reports on such ridiculous bullshit as Cubans being able to buy cellphones, microwaves, and are now free to stay in Cuba’s hotels. Gee, I’m sure that, in the year 2008, that ordinary Cubans are dancing in the streets since they can now buy a microwave. Or can they? No, because THEY CANNOT AFFORD IT. What a joke. COMMUNISM AND SOCIALISM DON’T WORK PEOPLE!!! Those who seize all of the power, FIDEL AND CHE, get all of the benefits and the ordinary people, you know, the one’s that the “revolution” was supposed to help, are SCREWED. A good source of information would be to read Che’s diaries, where he really shows his true colors. I am so tired of this crock about his “noble ideals.” His methods were anything but. Wake up people, Che and Fidel are the oppressors. It’s easy for people who don’t actually live in Cuba to believe in this absurd ideal of equality for all in Cuba that Fidel and Che were supposed to bring about. Idiots such as Michael Moore only add confusion to the issue when they claim that Cuba has a wonderful and free health care system. To see what sort of health care is available to the average Cuban, do a search on you tube and see what you come up with. It is a real eye opener. The “ideals” are just that, ideals. They don’t exist. I don’t understand how, outside of Cuba, the reputation of Fidel Castro, and the memory of Che Guevara, after all these years, are not seen for what they truly are, but, rather, through rose-colored glasses. If all those who sport Che merchandise and believe in his “noble ideals” would be forced to live in Cuba as regular Cubans do for just one year, I would venture to guess that “viva la revolution” would be exposed for the empty slogan that it is.
Mariposa08,
Very well said…Amen
BoricuaEnLaLuna:
“Frankly, I’ve always believed that those who would love nothing better than to see Cuba freed from the iron grip of a tyrant would at least have to partially respect a man who once fought for that very same reason.”
Considering that Che was on Fidel’s side, while supporting or participating in the execution of thousands in support of Fidel’s regime, this is rather comical. Che did all he could to support the “iron grip of a tyrant” named Fidel.
“People like you and people like me are practically different species…it’s like trying to reason with a baboon.”
Yes, it is difficult to reason with someone who maintains that those who want to “see Cuba freed from the iron grip of a tyrant” named Fidel should “partially respect” Che , who in life was a willing participant in Fidel’s regime and in death is an icon of Fidel’s regime.
BoricuaEnLaLuna and those of his ilk remind me of Bill Murry in MEATBALLS: Yes, Che and Stalin killed millions of innocent people but…it just doesn’t matter! It just doesn’t matter!