< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Jun-19-13|| ||Nightsurfer: Better late than never ... on the occasion of commemorating the 85th birthday of <Ernesto Che Guevara> on June 14th, 2013: <HASTA SIEMPRE, COMANDANTE>!|
|Jun-19-13|| ||Jim Bartle: I'll go out and slaughter a few innocents in his honor.|
|Jun-19-13|| ||twinlark: That's gross, Jim.|
|Jun-19-13|| ||TheFocus: Has anyone seen the picture of John Lennon and Che jamming on the guitars?|
I don't know the back-story.
|Jun-19-13|| ||Jim Bartle: Sorry, twinlark, it was intended to indicate my opinion of Che and what he did.|
|Jun-19-13|| ||OhioChessFan: I second JB's opinion.|
|Jun-19-13|| ||twinlark: No worries, Jim. I think you're wrong about Guevara, but we're all entitled to our opinion.|
|Jun-19-13|| ||Jim Bartle: I'm on the left, as you know, twinlark, but however idealistic, he caused a lot of deaths.|
|Jun-19-13|| ||twinlark: <Jim> OK, I'll bite. Whose deaths did he cause?|
|Jun-19-13|| ||Jim Bartle: Twinlark, there were a lot of killings in Bolivia and other countries. I'm taking a night bus in a little while, so will answer another day.|
|Jun-19-13|| ||Jim Bartle: Thought I could find a reliable article on his brutality, but a quick search gives me only freerepublic, Michelle Malkin and other rightwing sites I could never trust.|
|Jun-19-13|| ||Lupara: Posted without comment:
|Jun-19-13|| ||mojonera: Oh El Sh%@ Guevara , el mejor comunista , es un comunista muerto .|
|Jun-19-13|| ||twinlark: <Lupara>'s link to the article by "Alvaro Vargas Llosa" is very interesting. Personally, I'm not a great supporter of Che Guevara, but his life and times seem to have caused heavily polarised opinions.|
Portions of the left sanctify him as a saint and hero, while the right, or portions of it, demonise him as a cold blooded murderer and all round bad guy.
Not surprising I guess, as a communist icon will always generate this sort of polarisation in a world which hasn't really shed its cold war mentality.
The article by Alvaro Vargas Llosa certainly provides some food for thought about the shadier sides of the Guevara's character and activities, but I'll take the article with a grain of salt at this stage, especially given the clearly emotional denigration of Llosa's subject of study.
It has no citations or sources, and a scan of Llosa's connections include discussions with Sean Hannity amongst others about Venezuela's "terrorist" links (ie its ties with Syria and Iran)...so I'll take this and other articles both for and against Guevara with a pinch of salt.
I still await a genuinely non-partisan and scholarly examination of the life and times of Che Guevara. I suspect that given the unendingly obscurantist nature of political ideology, and its ubiquity, then and since, that I'll be waiting in vain.
|Jun-20-13|| ||Jim Bartle: Hey, there's Internet on the bus.
Alvaro Vargas Llosa is a well-known conservative in Peru, the son of the "national intellectual," and former conservative politician Mario Vargas Llosa.
As campaign manager he is generally blamed for his father's shocking loss in the 1990 presidential election.
|Jun-20-13|| ||twinlark: Gets me thinking about historical figures. Hitler, Stalin, Shaka Zulu, Genghis Khan, Mao Zedong and other villains still have their supporters, while saints such as Gandhi, Mandela, Mother Theresa, and Florence Nightingale have vehement detractors.|
Whether we consider someone a hero or villain, worthwhile or useless, good or bad seems contingent upon the basic values to which we adhere, and any philosophies and beliefs which we construct out of these values, and upon our interpretation of the facts as we know them.
I can quite easily accept that Che Guevara did a number of unsavoury things, including personally executing political opponents and being a Marxist puritan intolerant of any straying from that party line yet...
he helped oust a dictator and enact useful reforms that endure to this day
- Gandhi's philosophy of passive resistance and commitment to non-violence gained independence for India yet...
he thought Hitler was not as bad as depicted and slept with young girls
- Mother Theresa aided thousands of the poorest of the poor yet...
she was a hard nosed tyrant, intolerant of any way but hers
- Mandela lead a lifelong and successful struggle to bring down South African apartheid yet...
he sold South Africa and its revolution out to the corporations
- Mussolini was a dictator yet...
he made the trains run on time
- Nobel left a legacy of rewarding excellence yet...
he invented dynamite
- Hitler was an anti-semitic genocide yet
...he restored national pride and is responsible for the peoples' car - the Volkswagen and the Autobahn
- Lincoln freed the slaves and preserved the Union yet...
he was a racist and suspended habeas corpus
- Stalin was a tyrant who terrorised and killed millions yet..
he grew the Soviet economy into the industrial age and into a superpower from a primitive agrarian economy
- Pablo Escobar was the most notorious drug lord ever yet...
he provided more essential infrastructure and assistance to local villages than the government ever did
- Al Capone was a violent gangster, heading up organised crime yet...
he gave generously to charity
- Obama kept most of his campaign promises - http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m... - yet...
every Tuesday he personally approves the targets drones will attack and destroy, along with anyone near them.
Sometimes I think "f**k 'em all!"
Solzhenitsyn got it right with his famous aphorism that evil could so easily be excised if it stopped at a country's borders, but the reality is that the line between good and evil runs through the heart of every person.
|Jun-20-13|| ||Absentee: <twinlark: Gets me thinking about historical figures. Hitler, Stalin, Shaka Zulu, Genghis Khan, Mao Zedong and other villains still have their supporters, while saints such as Gandhi, Mandela, Mother Theresa, and Florence Nightingale have vehement detractors.>|
This statement already implies a judgement of value.
|Jun-20-13|| ||Diademas: Nice post <twinlark>, just one thing:
How is inventing dynamite a "bad" thing?|
|Jun-20-13|| ||chancho: It explodes.|
|Jun-20-13|| ||twinlark: <Absentee> <This statement already implies a judgement of value.>|
Indeed. Pretty much my whole point.
|Jun-20-13|| ||Absentee: <twinlark: <Absentee> <This statement already implies a judgement of value.>|
Indeed. Pretty much my whole point.>
Which makes the rest of your post moot.
|Jun-20-13|| ||Eyal: <Mother Theresa aided thousands of the poorest of the poor yet... |
she was a hard nosed tyrant, intolerant of any way but hers>
I think it's quite usual that saintly figures, which do "good deeds" on a grand scale, are actually not very "nice" people on a personal level. A relevant quote from Proust's "In Search of Lost Time":
When, in the course of my life, I have had occasion to meet with, in convents for instance, literally saintly examples of practical charity, they have generally had the brisk, decided, undisturbed, and slightly brutal air of a busy surgeon, the face in which one can discern no commiseration, no tenderness at the sight of suffering humanity […] the face devoid of gentleness or sympathy, the sublime face of true goodness.
|Jun-20-13|| ||twinlark: <Absentee> <Which makes the rest of your post moot.>|
A few examples to support and illustrate my opening generalisation, which draws on popular opinion/received wisdom, surely add to the strength and depth to my proposition. Also the conclusion of my post is not easily derived from the first paragraph, so that is also clearly not moot.
Functionally, the body of my post also provides a few points of observation and even discussion, as are illustrated in the responses.
So I would conclude that your assertion is probably not correct, except, perhaps, for yourself.
In any event, I'm puzzled by your comment: why make such a point?
|Jun-20-13|| ||perfidious: <Eyal>: The quote from Proust calls to mind a column I read in the Boston Herald many years ago from Don Feder, the premise of which was that numerous figures who championed liberal causes, the 'brotherhood of man', etc, could be very difficult to deal with, as one person to another. The only person whose name he mentioned that I can think of at the moment was Lillian Hellman.|
|Jun-20-13|| ||Jim Bartle: Many criminals with power and a need for good PR do good works in their cities or countries.|
Maybe the thing that made Pablo Escobar most popular in Medellin is that he bought the local football team and paid to get the best players. I think the Ochoa family owned America de Cali as well.
Colombia and its league teams were very successful in the 80s and 90s, and Escobar got a lot of credit. Many of the best players had at least some connection to him. (Sort of like Yankee players and Steinbrenner?)
National team goaltender Rene Higuita even went to jail for arranging the ransom payment in a kidnapping.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·