Celebrate the Death Day

[Sundae]

Is Che still seen as a hero by the disaffected youth of America?
I'm a little surprised.
He didn't really get a foothold here, except on an occasional t-shirt or poster by someone who didn't really know who he was, but man he fucked the system, right? He lived fast and died beautiful, right? Fucking cool, man.

I might be wrong about making a UK-wide statement- I'd need Dani and Monster to verify that- but certainly round here he was seen as a terrorist.

Nothing like having your cities blown up and civilians blown apart to turn you off terrorists.

BTW I can actually see how privation in South America would make the populace hail a hero out of a murderer. If you're out of options you take the hand that's proffered, no matter how bloody it is. It doesn't make him a hero though.

[Elspode]

In as much as Youth needs an anti-authority figure, I think they'd be better off with James Dean. At least he just fucked, drank and drove himself to death.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

Is Che still seen as a hero by the disaffected youth of America?
I'm a little surprised.

Yes, go to any widely known leftists site. I would also be interested to see how many of these kids would react if faced with a true revolution that would undermine their current social status.

Originally Posted by Ibram

revolution - good.
violent revolution complete with killing sprees and thuggery - bad.

This post is too vague to fully tell but keep in mind that a non-violent revolution will have very little effect on a power hungry, usually violent oppressor. Change can happen non-violently within a system (see United States), but to completely overthrow a system, one has to be willing to use violence to get it.

For example, lets say we have a stable caste system set up in a country with two levels, an upper caste and lower caste. In order to get rid of the caste system, violence will be necessary (disregarding outside forces). But, as you pointed out, there is a HUGE difference between killing the counter-revolutionaries who will fight to defend the current system and just killing the entire upper caste.


For the record, I have no interest in Che.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Change can happen non-violently within a system (see United States), but to completely overthrow a system, one has to be willing to use violence to get it.

The only problem I see with that philosophical approach is that the state is usually willing to up that anti and answer the violence with violence. Hence the all to common development of quasi-state sponsorship of death squads. Esp common in Central and South America.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

Is Che still seen as a hero by the disaffected youth of America?
I'm a little surprised.
He didn't really get a foothold here, except on an occasional t-shirt or poster by someone who didn't really know who he was, but man he fucked the system, right? He lived fast and died beautiful, right? Fucking cool, man.

I might be wrong about making a UK-wide statement- I'd need Dani and Monster to verify that- but certainly round here he was seen as a terrorist.

Nothing like having your cities blown up and civilians blown apart to turn you off terrorists.

BTW I can actually see how privation in South America would make the populace hail a hero out of a murderer. If you're out of options you take the hand that's proffered, no matter how bloody it is. It doesn't make him a hero though.

I've always had a soft spot for Che Guavara. I think he was ruthless and violent, but then he was trying to overturn a ruthless and violent enemy. He was a fascinating and charismatic man, very clever. To point at him and say he was extreme is to ignore the extremities that created his mission. Nobody had clean hands. I admire his courage and determination.

In truth, Sundae, I think the Che has a mixed image here. There are plenty of Che t-shirts and he is still something of an icon to the left...but not an uncomplicated one. I think he is admired for what he tried to do, dared to do. But people are rarely pure heroes or out and out villains. I think even for those who admire him, or see in him the symbol of continued struggle, they also see the ruthless killer. He is seen as both a revolutionary and a terrorist. I don't think he's viewed as negatively here as in the States. There's more of an air of tragedy to his image here.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

I've always had a soft spot for Che Guavara. I think he was ruthless and violent, but then he was trying to overturn a ruthless and violent enemy. He was a fascinating and charismatic man, very clever. To point at him and say he was extreme is to ignore the extremities that created his mission. Nobody had clean hands. I admire his courage and determination.

In truth, Sundae, I think the Che has a mixed image here. There are plenty of Che t-shirts and he is still something of an icon to the left...but not an uncomplicated one. I think he is admired for what he tried to do, dared to do. But people are rarely pure heroes or out and out villains. I think even for those who admire him, or see in him the symbol of continued struggle, they also see the ruthless killer. He is seen as both a revolutionary and a terrorist. I don't think he's viewed as negatively here as in the States. There's more of an air of tragedy to his image here.

One man's Freedom Fighter is another man's Terrorist. Same could have been said about any person or group who used violent means to overthrow a sitting government. It just depends on who you choose to support whether or not you choose to ignore or downplay the violent acts and elevate and glorify the "courage and determination". Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mugabe, Pancho Villa, Osama Bin Laden, Pervez Musharraf, Ho Chi Minh, the history is endless. But of course you know this as a history major.