FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


CHE GUEVARA - a revolutionary or a terrorist






CHE GUEVARA - an honourable freedom fighter /or/ a 'terrorist'
freedom fighter
61%
 61%  [ 11 ]
terrorist
33%
 33%  [ 6 ]
i dont know who he is
5%
 5%  [ 1 ]
Total Votes : 18

somnific
your vote and your reasoning would be most appreciated
gonzo
where is the option "murdering marxist punk"?




http://che-mart.com/store.php
somnific
sigh. in my opinion this poll makes for a good acid test of the type of people frequenting this forum.

thank you , for your input gonzo.
polarBear
SO much ignorance floating in the air... Ernesto Guevara de la Serna, El Che, was just a person. But along the years his image and legacy got severely distorted, to the point that nowadays there are two Che's : The mythic Che and the human Che.

The mythic one is the freedom fighter -without caring about the cost of it-, co-leader of the guerrilla that kicked out all the Batista-loving gusanos from Cuba -which by that time was the ****** of USA-, and who died trying to free the bolivian peasants from the US-supported dictatorship.

There's also a human being, asthmatic, that traveled along South America to find that there was -for him- too much injustice being openly practiced, and supported. He felt that capitalism was the cause of it. And so decided that instead of whining and moaning he was to do something about it, and did it. The best way he could, and with every single breath.

There's a lot to read and write about this person if you don't want to look like a 9-years-old-tard-with-a-keyboard like gonzo. And I encourage all of us to do it, including myself, so I will keep posting here with all the information I can find.
gonzo
polarBear wrote:
like a 9-years-old-tard-with-a-keyboard like gonzo. .


ouch. not.


personal attacks are strictly forbidden.
somnific
let us know what your reasoning is gonzo.
biga57
I do not like commies at all, but I do not consider El Che a Terorist.

Terrorists are those who do not think twice when it comes to kill innocent people , women , kids, babies.

El Che might have been a killer for sure but not like a terrorist killer like a modern Jihadist Terrorist.
Spartacus
El Che was definately not a terrorist, but I dont think the term "Freedom Fighter" applies to him either. Che was just a man, no greater or less than any other men, who saw a country in need of help. Nobody can contest that there were severe class problems, they can only say that they disagree with Che's method of fixing them. In my opinion, so what? At least he tried. That is the mark of a true patriot.
somnific
a true patriot ? ...no. thats an ugly word. it had nothing to do with flags and nations. he was a humanist in that respect. patriotism is something you need to de-program from yourself, its a word which is used as a trigger, a word used to absolve yourself of responsibility, a word used to put distance between horror and reality.

revolutionary is more apt than freedom fighter , you're right.

his goal was to unite the south americas and get the indigenous indians what they deserved, as their own land was taken from under them.



the fact is , his ideals were pure and true. whereas the USA's ideals are filth , and deceitful. yet death and fighting can be attributed to both.......che was noble. the USA is an ugly machine that makes me sick, there is so much history that gives me heartburn....I cant stand the place.


still waiting to hear your reasoning , GONZO. should be good for a chuckle.
maclui
In my opinion he is one of those necessary myths latin americans invent to have heroes and a sense of decent history. Trying to outshine the poor achievements in democracy and wellfare, and The agachona (I will not translate it because I do not think there is a better word.) nature of the race.
Ok maybe you do not agree with me but do not get mad ok.
polarBear
and the basis of such a wonderful and well spoken thought are...?
somnific
the whole point of this thread was to see who , out of the out-spoken rightwing bigots frequenting this site could find fault in che guevara , and what wacky logic they might use to validify such fault.

so far, two people have voted him a terrorist , and neither of them have given the slightest valid reason.

the fact is , they CANT.

the secondary object of this post was to highlight the fact that commonly perceived 'terrorists' are not always that.


che guevara is a martyr, and the cia arranged his execution. the american tax dollar.
SunburnedCactus
It doesn't help that you try and force people to choose from two extremes of opinion. I mean, you may not think much of him, but wouldn't mean you'd call him a terrorist, and it wouldn't make you a "rightwing bigot".
somnific
heh , you;re wrong. Im not trying to pidgeon hole people into categories.

the fact is, there ARE right wing bigots using this site. and THEY are the ones I refer to.


if you feel you dont know enough about him , the option is there.

the usa labels him a terrorist, thats why that option is there. and the rest of the people who actually know anything about him refer to him as a hero, a revolutionary, a freedom fighter.


you're also freely available to say what you know about him, ...a right you havent choosen to excercise. you've chosen to complain instead. and i'm still waiting for people to concoct reasons to suggest he;s anything but a righteous individual.

so...i dont see what your problem is.
maclui
You know what?? Whatever the purpose of this thread, it is so stupid whatever you are trying to find out. Do you want to know about che Guevara or not??? Do you even care?? No one will give you his personal opinion if you are acting as a know-everything frustrated sociologist. Did not you find a more intelligent way to argue with some body?
DX-Blog
In my eyes Che, as a person, is definately a hero. No doubt about it. I am disgussed to see though that companies are now using him as a capitalistic product, the very one thing he fought against.
maclui
Quote:
companies are now using him as a capitalistic product

Let me ask you something: If no capitalist dude would have shown you an image of Che guevara in a t-shirt or some other garment would you still know something about him? And do not tell me that he is in history text books because in most countries like mine he is not.
anathematic
What's your point maclui ? That only the stuff you are taught at school is relevant ? You know, theres plenty of literature available on Che Guevara.

Sure, his image is a over-used cliche at this stage - but thats hardly to the detriment of his character. It says alot about you, the ignorant, people who have no idea what he is about. The photographer who took that picture made it free of copyright - he had good intentions. Its morons who pay top dollar for his face on a t-shirt , helping the wheels of capitalism turn and no doubt roll over the disadvantaged in some way.


So, do yourself a favour and read about him. Learn something, and relent from taking cheap shots at one of the 20th centuries most righteous people.
DecayClan
First of all, we should define what exactly a "Terrorist" is.
Thats not easy.It depends on the point of view.For example, is Osama bin Laden a terrorist for his own people?no.They don't consider him as a terrorist.
For the US Che is a terrorist.
How do we know what he did???from school?Ha!They make history the way they like it!And where i leave(Greece) we are under the influence of US, so i believe that they just adopted the US Version about his life.What do the people in Cuba learn about his life?Do they learn they same things that we do?I strongly doubt.So, we can't have a reliable source, from were we can be informed for his EXACT actions...Even when we know the exact actions, we can be lead to a conclusion which will have a format like that:
1.For X he was a terrorist...
2.For Y he wasn't
3.If we thing that terrorism is F, hten he was
4.If we believe that terrorism is G then he is not
5...
6...
and so on.
Such questions, can't have a specific answer...And they can't be answered with a "yes" or "no"
>>>...?...<<<
maclui
Quote:
The photographer who took that picture made it free of copyright


The photographer haa. Do you know the name of the photographer?? You Well educated Che Admirer?

Quote:
theres plenty of literature available on Che Guevara.


So get some and serve yourself.

Let me ask you something: Do you have Che Guevara stuff?? Did you buy it or made it yourself? In denial of capitalism many absurd things have been said and done.

By the way the image you see of CHe Guevara is not a picture, it is painting made by a painter not a photographer. Have you ever heard of Andy Warhol?? He did it. It is called Pop Art.
DX-Blog
maclui wrote:
Quote:
companies are now using him as a capitalistic product

Let me ask you something: If no capitalist dude would have shown you an image of Che guevara in a t-shirt or some other garment would you still know something about him? And do not tell me that he is in history text books because in most countries like mine he is not.

My history text books hardly tell anything about communism and marxism either, just a 4 weeks brief period in the 3rd grade which gives you a minor introduction. Because I found it interesting I read a lot about it myself. Che Guevara was one of the people which you will come up to by reading about that.

Seeing his face on a 150€ bag on the other hand is not something which will tell me who he is, a lot of people don't even know who's face it is which is being displayed on shirts, bags and more. It's not the merchandizing which teaches you about Che Guevara or any thing about history, it is the research which you do by yourself.
a.han
maclui wrote:

By the way the image you see of CHe Guevara is not a picture, it is painting made by a painter not a photographer. Have you ever heard of Andy Warhol?? He did it. It is called Pop Art.


Actually it was a photo done by Alberto Korda and Jim Fitzpatrick did the original print verson that was modified.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che_Guevara_%28photo%29
gonzo
somnific wrote:
let us know what your reasoning is gonzo.


knowledge of unadulterated history is sufficient.

somnific wrote:
hthe fact is, there ARE right wing bigots using this site. and THEY are the ones I refer to.


So its dandy if YOU are intolerant? Gotcha.



DX-Blog wrote:
I am disgussed to see though that companies are now using him as a capitalistic product,


delicious irony


DecayClan wrote:
It depends on the point of view


and this is where your "thinking" runs into trouble.
polarBear
Quote:

knowledge of unadulterated history is sufficient.
Present me that history and its respective sources and let me see if it's unadultered. Until then, you are talking nonsense.

I defy you to do it.
anathematic
DecayClan wrote:
First of all, we should define what exactly a "Terrorist" is.
Thats not easy.It depends on the point of view.For example, is Osama bin Laden a terrorist for his own people?no.They don't consider him as a terrorist.
For the US Che is a terrorist.
How do we know what he did???from school?Ha!They make history the way they like it!And where i leave(Greece) we are under the influence of US, so i believe that they just adopted the US Version about his life.What do the people in Cuba learn about his life?Do they learn they same things that we do?I strongly doubt.So, we can't have a reliable source, from were we can be informed for his EXACT actions...Even when we know the exact actions, we can be lead to a conclusion which will have a format like that:
1.For X he was a terrorist...
2.For Y he wasn't
3.If we thing that terrorism is F, hten he was
4.If we believe that terrorism is G then he is not
5...
6...
and so on.
Such questions, can't have a specific answer...And they can't be answered with a "yes" or "no"
>>>...?...<<<


what a disturbing reply. I dont know about you in greece, but I like to know the ABSOLUTE TRUTH. or as close to that as possible. Your rationalisations are childish. The fact is , he IS either one or the other. And he is a hero, he is the revolutionary. Those that label him a terrorist are the liars and everything they stand for is BASED on a lie. Why ? dont you see..these are the questions that you MUST answer to find the truth, before your children;s children look back in history and wonder why we didnt do anything when we could have.

as for maclui..and gonzo....you two have to be kids. because still, you have presented no evidence as to why you think he's a terrorist.

back to maclui, do you realise how stupid you make yourself look ?
Quote:
Let me ask you something: Do you have Che Guevara stuff?? Did you buy it or made it yourself? In denial of capitalism many absurd things have been said and done.

By the way the image you see of CHe Guevara is not a picture, it is painting made by a painter not a photographer. Have you ever heard of Andy Warhol?? He did it. It is called Pop Art.


its too frightening to even laugh at. you absolute bafoon.

if you could even just muster together a semblence of an argument.....but as yet, we are still in the gutter waiting for you to make a valid point


thank you a.han , for saving me the bother of putting him straight.
a.han
pleasure
gonzo
polarBear wrote:
I defy you


you really shouldn't.



polarBear
Show me your unaltered truth or keep being SO ignorable.
anathematic
it says alot about the people posting on this forum. When you're trying to discuss some other issues involving the usa, and perhaps usa foreign policy, and they insist on labeling che guevara a terrorist, without elaborating or giving any valid reason. not that they could anyways, but I find it hard to take them seriously on other issues if its obvious they are either completely brainwashed or just dishonest and pigheadedly so. if they were smarter, they would say 'ya che was a revolutionary, so what' and keep espousing their opinions on other issues. but when they lie about the obvious, it makes everything they say seem the same. and rightly so I think.

maclui-

The Maryland Institute College of Art called Korda's photo, "The most famous photograph in the world and a symbol of the 20th century."


straight from the american horses mouth - you fat american slob.
Garside
Many of you insist on declaring the sides as black and white, but as has also been mentioned, how can any of us possibly have a clear and unadultered truth to support our reasoning?
I'm sure that many of the people posting on this page live in countries that support your liberties, and your freedom of opinion and freedom of speech.

But, terrorism, by the US state department's definition is:
unlawful, premediated politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.
With this however, many issues arise, how does one determine what a sub-national group is?
The majority population? or the Government, which may be controled or influenced by external factions.

but, Che fought and died for what he believed in above all else, and at the end of the day,
that makes him a man in my books. Not someone dirtied by the scum of opinion that is labelled upon him, or the groups or beliefs associated with him, such as communism,
but a man, who did what he believed was right.
deanhills
Garside wrote:
but, Che fought and died for what he believed in above all else, and at the end of the day,
that makes him a man in my books. Not someone dirtied by the scum of opinion that is labelled upon him, or the groups or beliefs associated with him, such as communism,
but a man, who did what he believed was right.
You may also have to ask, how many people died at his hands? And do you think the "noble" character of the person who was responsible for those deaths, defined the victims in a "noble" way? I see him as a brutal freedom fighter and a murderer rolled up in one person. He did not have much regard for human life.
Quote:
As the only other ranked Comandante besides Fidel Castro, Guevara was an extremely harsh disciplinarian who unhesitatingly shot defectors. Deserters were punished as traitors, and Guevara was known to send execution squads to hunt down those seeking to go AWOL. As a result, Guevara became feared for his brutality and ruthlessness. During the guerrilla campaign, Guevara was also responsible for the often summary execution of a number of men accused of being informers, deserters or spies.

Source: Wikipedia
gandalfthegrey
I find it interesting that the individual who created the discussion and the first person to post are both banned know.

Anyways, like all political figures, things are not so cut and dry, and likely was both a freedom fighter and a murderer/'terrorist'. These popular opinion attacks on Che Guevera as being a murderer and terrorist started from that largely popular facebook group "Che Guevara was a murderer and your t-shirt is not cool!" The debate is interesting, though rather a largely a philosophical one. Who Che was fighting were corrupt despots, who were themselves murderers and despots. To categorize people into categories just cheapens the debate. I am a pacifist quaker, and thus would never participate in or condone violence, but I also accept that unjust conditions exist that make some feel it necessary to resort to violence in order to protect their freedom, or the freedom of others.

I also find it rich that Conservatives want to bash Che Guevera, and yet they distance themselves from the likes of Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. All three of them were fighting racist, colonialist, conservative power structures. Gandhi, King and others choose non-violence, while Che, Malcolm X and some choose active resistance, which could include violence. Conservatives don't care about violence/non-violence, nor do they care about changing the conditions that provokes some to violence. They only care about scoring cheap political points and retaining their power.
deanhills
gandalfthegrey wrote:
I also find it rich that Conservatives want to bash Che Guevera, and yet they distance themselves from the likes of Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. All three of them were fighting racist, colonialist, conservative power structures. Gandhi, King and others choose non-violence, while Che, Malcolm X and some choose active resistance, which could include violence. Conservatives don't care about violence/non-violence, nor do they care about changing the conditions that provokes some to violence. They only care about scoring cheap political points and retaining their power.
With respect gandalfthegrey, if one read his record of how he conducted himself in his army, he was completely ruthless and did not have much regard for human life. No compassion. I most certainly would not put him in the same category as Gandhi or Martin Luther King. The fact that he was a freedom fighter, I can accept. But the way he conducted himself with his troops, and his ruthless way of killing people blindly, with the least suspicion, without verifying their guilt, that part does make him a murderer in my eyes, to the equivalent of the Nazis. He went past boundaries of proper conduct and used his power with very little regard to human life.
Bikerman
I presume that when you say 'read his record' that you might have read a few sources on him...I have only read Jon Lee Anderson's biography and bits and bobs from other sources, so I'd welcome any new suggestions.
Related topics
Chavez: U.S. will 'bite the dust' if it invades
Do you see what I see?
[OFFICIAL] Favourite Author
Wise/Good/Cool random phrases.
DELETED CHE GUEVARA POLL - what the fuck ?
CHE GUEVARA - a revolutionary , or a terrorist - explain.
Personne célèbre décédée que vous aimeriez rencontrer?
Favorite Philosophers
Explain your current avatar!
[var] Que opinan de AMLO?
[fotos]Sets de fotos del Che y otras hierbas...vuelven!!
American bashing
103 historical guests - how many can you spot?
National Institute for Civil Discourse - what ever for?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.