Che guevara

[GuiltyCubicle]

I bought an 800 page biography on him half a week ago, I'm not very far into it yet.

 

[Swart]

Let you answer that question about Socialist government. I would rather live in a capitalist system where i have the freedom to determine how I give hand outs if any to the "poor". I have no value to country whose ideas that we must support the poor by giving hand outs to them this includes the policies of the United States. These policies are short sighted they just continue the idea that the government is there to support you and provide for you. No give me freedom and the responablity to provide for myself, no thank you to the government programs.

In regruads to that Internet site it was less then forthright. In a free system we would not have likes of Castro and company forevery determining the policies of a country. In truth he is no better then Batista. Do you not think that the people of Cuba are intelligent enough to be able to shape their the way they want it. Is it not time for Castro and company to step down and let the real revolution happen??! Or are they afraid that they might find that the people who at first supported them have a change of mind and want to leave a failed system.

I think you are of the mistaken impression that capitalism=democracy. There are plenty of capitalist countries that are definitely not democratic. There are also socialist countries that are not totalitarian. It is a mistake to assume that social justice equals totalitarianism.

Castro was FAR better that Bautista. I can't say that I would like to live in Cuba, but I would prefer to live there than in Guatemala, El Salvador, Peru or Honduras.

It's important to get away from the misconception that the US supports democratic struggles in forwign countries. The US has overthrown far more democracies in the third world than the Soviet Union ever dreamed of doing. The US military has and continues to serve the interests of US corporations. These are well documented facts that fill several books but receive minimal coverage in the US.

Ask yourself how many members of the Bush cabinet have intimate dealings with US based oil companies. Ask which oil company executive is the administrator of Afghanistan. Which oil companies received the plum contracts for the rebuilding of Iraq?

Its a jigsaw puzzle, but the pieces fit together nicely.

 

[cartridge]

Ohh dear you guys dont know anything, some of you try reading motorcycle diaries, for a real insight in the man.

Did not Lenin and Hitler stand for a "fight against social injustice"?

Do you have any idea who Batista was?

 

[wildthing]

short history of Cuba. By 1929 North American Investments totaled 1.5 billion dollars including 2/3 ownership of the sugar industry. U.S military remained conspiuous at Guantanamo. In 1933 cubans revolted against the dictator and U>S ally Gerardo Machado. In open defiance of U.S. Professor Ramon Grau San Martin became president and declared the Platt Amendment null and void.(Platt agreement stated that Cuba could not make a treaty with another nation that might impair its independence, in practice , this meant all treaties had to have US approval, That is until 1934) His government seized some North American mills and refuse to repay bank loans. US officals plotted with army Sargent Fulgencio Batista to over throw Grau in 1934. Batista era lasted till 1959. Batista was able to attract US investments while align it's self with the US. The US gave Cuba a favored position in the growing market here. American tourist flock to Havana and gave the Cubans a living. The mistake that Castro made was to align himself with the weak and sickly Soviet Union. He should of made peace with the US and his country would not be in the horrible condition that it is in today. Any leader that would swap comerical development for a socialist government gets what he deserves.

 

[wildthing]

I think you are of the mistaken impression that capitalism=democracy. There are plenty of capitalist countries that are definitely not democratic. There are also socialist countries that are not totalitarian. It is a mistake to assume that social justice equals totalitarianism.

Castro was FAR better that Bautista. I can't say that I would like to live in Cuba, but I would prefer to live there than in Guatemala, El Salvador, Peru or Honduras.

It's important to get away from the misconception that the US supports democratic struggles in forwign countries. The US has overthrown far more democracies in the third world than the Soviet Union ever dreamed of doing. The US military has and continues to serve the interests of US corporations. These are well documented facts that fill several books but receive minimal coverage in the US.

Ask yourself how many members of the Bush cabinet have intimate dealings with US based oil companies. Ask which oil company executive is the administrator of Afghanistan. Which oil companies received the plum contracts for the rebuilding of Iraq?

Its a jigsaw puzzle, but the pieces fit together nicely.

Please give a list of thiose Capitalist countries that are totalitiran?
Can you please show me the policies of a socialist country that has not infringe on the rights of others in the name of "social justice". Socal Justice just another name for infrigement.

Your well document facts do not stand the the test of time, Most of it is pure fiction. There source turn out to be nothing not worth the paper they are written on.

You make the comments about Bush and his cabinet. As long as I can make a profit I do not care who is in that cabinet. I rather have someone who has had succus in making money then to have someone from the liberal make believe world who is a business failure.

 

[MatthewG215]

Public education is a government service I dont mind.

 

[Swart]

Please give a list of thiose Capitalist countries that are totalitiran?

Philippines - less so now than when I last went there, when it was under Martial Law. The Marcos regime ruled with terror then.
Argentina - Again, less so now. But before the Falklands war is was a military junta supported by the US.
Chile - The US supported Pinochet's overthrow of the democratically elected government.
El Salvador
Honduras
Guatemala
Taiwan - Although nominally democratic, I have been there, it is a VERY scary place. Not anywhere near as bad as China, however.
Sth Korea - Don't believe me? Ask a Korean!
Singapore - Another country for which I have first hand knowledge. This is a country where 40% of the vote wins the opposition just 1 seat in parliament. Any popular politician who criticises the government is gaoled for defamation.
Indonesia - Elections only recently. The US supported the dictatorship here for many years suppressing the democratic movement.

This is a partial list, there are plenty more. The fact you are not aware of them is a testament to the lack of coverage of news that is unpalatable to the US.

Can you please show me the policies of a socialist country that has not infringe on the rights of others in the name of "social justice". Socal Justice just another name for infrigement.

Firstly, all governments are violent institutions. They are volent roughly to the exntent to which they are powerful. So it is important to compare apples with apples here. Anyway

Sweden is a good example of a thriving socialist democratic state.
Finland
England and Australia both had mixed economies during the 70's but since then the slide has been back to full capitalism with negative consequences for both countries.
Nicaragua
Most of the others have been crushed or beaten down before they could succeed. Examples of this include Spain, Chile, Peru, Granada and East Timor.

Your well document facts do not stand the the test of time, Most of it is pure fiction. There source turn out to be nothing not worth the paper they are written on.

It is the counter claims that not only do not stand the test of time, they do not stand the test of FACT.

It's very easy to stand back and snipe. Lets look at and discuss ONE single instance. I elect East Timor. Let's discuss the active involvement of the United States in supressing the independent government of East Timor.

You make the comments about Bush and his cabinet. As long as I can make a profit I do not care who is in that cabinet. I rather have someone who has had succus in making money then to have someone from the liberal make believe world who is a business failure.

It's a question of conflict of Interest. If you are on the board of directors of a company, and that company receives favours whilst you are in government, that is a conflict of interest.

If the cabinet is populated with people who all share similar backgrounds and interest, one wonders whther or not it is Haliburton who are actually calling the shots.

 

[Swart]

Public education is a government service I dont mind.

What about tertiary education for all?
Public health?
Public housing?

 

[MatthewG215]

What about tertiary education for all?
Public health?
Public housing?

Yes
Yes
Yes

 

[adams apple]

I admire Che Guevara. He fought for what he believed in and tried to make the world a better place as he saw it. he didn't do that well, but at least he tried.
I find it highly ironic that he has become such a big fasion icon recently, with thousands of trendies wearing a t-shirt with him on, probably not even knowing his name.
Oh yeah, plus i sort of fancy him (sorry to lower the tone, but he was a handsom man)

 

[Swart]

Yes
Yes
Yes

 

[ACougar]

http://www.time.com/time/time100/heroes/profile/guevara01.html

Like so many epics, the story of the obscure Argentine doctor who abandoned his profession and his native land to pursue the emancipation of the poor of the earth began with a voyage. In 1956, along with Fidel Castro and a handful of others, he had crossed the Caribbean in the rickety yacht Granma on the mad mission of invading Cuba and overthrowing the dictator Fulgencio Batista. Landing in a hostile swamp, losing most of their contingent, the survivors fought their way to the Sierra Maestra. A bit over two years later, after a guerrilla campaign in which Guevara displayed such outrageous bravery and skill that he was named comandante, the insurgents entered Havana and launched what was to become the first and only victorious socialist revolution in the Americas. The images were thereafter invariably gigantic. Che the titan standing up to the Yanquis, the world's dominant power. Che the moral guru proclaiming that a New Man, no ego and all ferocious love for the other, had to be forcibly created out of the ruins of the old one. Che the romantic mysteriously leaving the revolution to continue, sick though he might be with asthma, the struggle against oppression and tyranny.

 

[KnightOfTheRoundTable]

I suppose that even though he tried to help the poor that should be given to him. But there are so many people who deserve more praise than Che.

For example

Juan Domingo Peron and Evita Peron- Both of these two helped the poor people in Argentina and took them out of poverty and gave the Argentines a good future with housing, hospitals, orphanges, welfare system, education for all, free university education, free healthcare etc...
He was a truly great leader and certainly more successful than Che.
The Argentines recognise the Perons as higher than Che anyday.

 

[Alenci]

I see so many Che Guevara T-shirts at school. You have no idea. Craaaazy.

 

[Megachihuahua]

Che? I know nothing about him or his hat. (No, they're onto me!) I certainly have not seen any animal that looks at all like him.

 

[Lifesaver]

Che Guevara: socialist, revolutionary, terrorist, "guerriller", murderer.

All of those VERY negative traits.

I "kinda" detest what he did and fought for, like I detest the liberal American/European opinion that socialist terrorists are "fighting for the poor", when in reality they are fighting against the poor, and even more against the rich. Their fight is bad for everyone.

 

[ACougar]

Neither Communism nor Capitalism when taken in thier extemes are good for the people. Instead the ideal is to find the perfect point of balance between the two. I'm not in perfect agreement with Che's politics however I am moved by his ideals and his compasion for the poor.

Socialist in the face of exploitation of the poor, revolutionary against injustice and oppression, guerrilla warrior, freedom fighter. He is an American Hero.

Che Guevara: socialist, revolutionary, terrorist, "guerriller", murderer.

All of those VERY negative traits.

I "kinda" detest what he did and fought for, like I detest the liberal American/European opinion that socialist terrorists are "fighting for the poor", when in reality they are fighting against the poor, and even more against the rich. Their fight is bad for everyone.

 

[Lifesaver]

Neither Communism nor Capitalism when taken in thier extemes are good for the people. Instead the ideal is to find the perfect point of balance between the two. I'm not in perfect agreement with Che's politics however I am moved by his ideals and his compasion for the poor.

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by Capitalism. It's a term used so much that I'm not sure it still carries any meaning.
When I speak of it, I mean property rights and freedom to deal one's property.

Socialist in the face of exploitation of the poor,

Socialism is evil in itself. It is not a "friend of the poor", but an enemy of everyone, just more so of the rich.

revolutionary against injustice and oppression

And guess what? His Cuba is more oppressive than Batista's, as bad as it already was.

guerrilla warrior, freedom fighter. He is an American Hero.

guerrilla warrior, yes. Another thing which speaks strongly against the man.
But freedom fighter? Whose freedom did he fight for?

I don't know of his intentions behind it all. But I do know that the causes he fought for are terrible, and the results he got are as bad.

 

[Megachihuahua]

I really don't understand people with the logic that moderation between two extremes is better. Either capitalism or communism seprately work better than socialism,
ims(tupid)o.

But I respect people who have knowledge of how to fight a guerrilla war. It's a lot more difficult than sending 50,000 troops over there and kill everyone. But respect doesn't mean like. Che was niave, at best. I don't have a word for worst.

 

[ACougar]

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by Capitalism. It's a term used so much that I'm not sure it still carries any meaning.
When I speak of it, I mean property rights and freedom to deal one's property.

Capitalism is when those with capital use that capital to enrich themsleves with no consideration for the workers, the people upon who's labor they become rich. It's the economic equivalent of the law of the jungle, those with wealth and power become richer and more powerful while those with little or none become even worse off. Communism is it's opposite, under Communism everyone owns everything. Workers work for thier own beterment and all wealth is distributed equally. Communism isn't so hot either as it doesn't exploit our competative nature or motivate people to excel. Sociallism is balance between these two extreems, instead of being soley responsible to thier shareholders or thier workers bussiness (with government oversight) must do thier best to balance the needs of both.

Socialism is evil in itself. It is not a "friend of the poor", but an enemy of everyone, just more so of the rich.

That's an opinion and your welcome to it, however I am in complete disagreement with you there. It is the only acceptable economic policy.

And guess what? His Cuba is more oppressive than Batista's, as bad as it already was.

Once again we are in complete disagreement, while Cuba could benefit from a little more Capitalism in thier economy the idea that they are worse off now than under Batista is ridiculous.

guerrilla warrior, yes. Another thing which speaks strongly against the man.
But freedom fighter? Whose freedom did he fight for?

Freedom of the working class of course. Guerrilla warfare is the manor in which weaker more poorly equiped militaries fight against more powerful militaries. It worked for us against the British during the Revolutionary war why should we condem it?

I don't know of his intentions behind it all. But I do know that the causes he fought for are terrible, and the results he got are as bad.

His intent was to help the poor exploited workers to throw off the oppression of the big multinational coorperations who who owned everything and exploited labor. It would have been great had he been more sucessful, however he fought the good fight.