Sexy Friends Toronto

Che Guevara

gallo negro

Active member
Dec 17, 2004
1,121
0
36
eastlos
Absolutely. But that does not make me a murder, thief or liar.

And in fact, since you are using the internet I can suggest you are also a beneficiary of many "white" historic atrocities.

How would you feel about the next Che putting a gun to your head for that?
Maybe however time will come when we will have to pay for the iniquities of our forefathers.
As for the internet, don't be simple my friend, beneficiary in regards to standard of living, wealth, best schools...who are the worst treated and living in the slums and the ghetto.
The same way the so called native americans, so called african americans and hispanics of native blood have transgressed the laws of god and are paying for their iniquities of their forefathers, the same too will happen to all other nations, not just the so called white man.
Wow don't know how you can compare che for wanting to kill imperialistic oppressive devils who exploit nations to that comment.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
I think you are being a bit impractical, when you require revolutionaries to obey the rule of law. Are you suggesting that Che should have sued the Batista government and the mafia for human rights violations? And are you suggesting that insurgents need to conduct proper trials, while the oppressing side can kill with impunity. Did Che get a proper trial before the CIA executed him, when he was their prisoner?
Not at all. I don't complain about the revolution proper, which I think was just, I complain about how he executed people after he took power including executing fellow revolutionaries that he felt were not exactly in lock step with his position. The purpose of a revolution should not be to replace one gang of murderous thugs with another, but to replace one gang of murderous thugs with something better.

Both Stalin and Che failed at this. People like them kill the dream of real revolutions more than any reactionary ever could.

And my understanding is that Che was killed by the Bolivian government when the US wanted him alive...but I am sure there is room for debate on that.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
Maybe however time will come when we will have to pay for the iniquities of our forefathers.
As for the internet, don't be simple my friend, beneficiary in regards to standard of living, wealth, best schools...who are the worst treated and living in the slums and the ghetto.
The same way the so called native americans, so called african americans and hispanics of native blood have transgressed the laws of god and are paying for their iniquities of their forefathers, the same too will happen to all other nations, not just the so called white man.
Wow don't know how you can compare che for wanting to kill imperialistic oppressive devils who exploit nations to that comment.
Because Che was happy to kill fellow revolutionaries and innocents as well as his real enemies.

Fortunately I don't believe that the sins of my forefathers will be visited on me and mine. Call me when the great come uppance is on the horizon.
 

lucky_blue

New member
Nov 23, 2010
748
0
0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQcUkd1w_TY&feature=player_embedded

http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/22/exorcising-the-ghost-of-che-gu

http://reason.com/archives/2002/06/01/ches-secret-diary

An essay by Dr. Douglas Young, Professor of Political Science & History at Gainesville State College
February 10, 2009
Hollywood has dutifully churned out yet another cinematic agitprop paean to a leftist “martyr,” this time Ernesto Guevara. So let’s recall the real “Che” and try to discern why many supposedly democratic, civil libertarian liberals still swoon over this Stalinist mass-murderer.

The meticulous myth of Senor Guevara is of a handsome Argentine heroically helping Fidel Castro’s guerrillas liberate Cuba from Fulgencio Batista’s military dictatorship in 1959. Then he became a global revolutionary icon inspiring the downtrodden to rise up everywhere, even personally leading rebel warriors in the Congo before being executed doing the same in Bolivia in 1967. The (communist) party line says Che personifies the selfless humanitarian courageously fighting for “social justice.” He’s the Marxists’ martyred Christ figure replete with pictures of his half-naked corpse riddled with bullet holes. And the classic poster of an angry young Guevara has scarred countless college dorm rooms for over 40 years, putting a face on the eternally young rebel for angry adolescents everywhere.

The real Guevara was a reckless bourgeois adrenaline-junkie seeking a place in history as a liberator of the oppressed. But this fanatic’s vehicle of “liberation” was Stalinism, named for Soviet dictator Josef Stalin, murderer of well over 20 million of his own people. As one of Castro’s top lieutenants, Che helped steer Cuba’s revolutionary regime in a radically repressive direction. Soon after overthrowing Batista, Guevara choreographed the executions of hundreds of Batista officials without any fair trials. He thought nothing of summarily executing even fellow guerrillas suspected of disloyalty and shot one himself with no due process.

Che was a purist political fanatic who saw everything in stark black and white. Therefore he vociferously opposed freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly, protest, or any other rights not completely consistent with his North Korean-style communism. How many rock music-loving teens sporting Guevara t-shirts today know their hero supported Cuba’s 1960s’ repression of the genre? How many homosexual fans know he had gays jailed?

Did the Obama volunteers in that Texas campaign headquarters with Che’s poster on the wall know that Guevara fervently opposed any free elections? How “progressive” is that?

How socially just was it that Che was enraged when the Russians blinked during the 1962 Cuban missile crisis and withdrew their nuclear missiles from the island, thus averting a nuclear war? Guevara was such a zealous ideologue that he relished the specter of millions of Cuban lives sacrificed on the altar of communism, declaring Cuba “a people ready to sacrifice itself to nuclear arms, that its ashes might serve as a basis for new societies.” Some humanitarian.

Che was a narcissist who boasted that “I have no house, wife, children, parents, or brothers; my friends are friends as long as they think like me, politically.” This is a role model for today’s “post-political” voters claiming we should get beyond partisanship?

Adding to the ridiculousness of the Che cult is that he was virtually a complete failure. As a medical doctor, he never even had a practice. When put in charge of the Cuban economy at the start of Castro’s government, his uncompromising communist diktats ran it completely into the ground, from which it never recovered. Humiliated, and also angry that Castro wasn’t fomenting enough revolution abroad, he then tried to lead such quixotic adventures in Argentina, the Congo, and Bolivia, failing miserably everywhere while sacrificing the lives of scores of naïve, idealistic young followers as deluded pawns in the service of his personality cult.

Another reason he fled Cuba in the mid-1960s was the complete mess he made of his private life. Though he preached sexual purity to his colleagues, he was a shameless adulterer who abandoned two wives and many children, some legitimate, others not. As a grandson put it, “he was never home.” The public Che who supposedly had such great love for humanity privately couldn’t stand most folks.

Guevara’s promiscuous communist adventurism was the pattern of a terminal adolescent running away from his problems to get caught up in some heroic crusade against his eternal bete noir, “Yankee imperialism.”

So why do so many well-heeled American libs still admire this thug? Are the young simply ignorant of his execrable record and drawn to the image of the dashing young rebel? Do older progressives feel guilt for their free market prosperity, and showing solidarity with Che absolves them? Do hippies-turned-yuppies get nostalgic for their youthful protests and rationalize that the symbolism of Che as a “social reformer” eclipses his actual horrific human rights record? And are some American Guevaraistas truly dangerous leftists who seek to emulate their icon and destroy our free, democratic, capitalist society? Ask that guy wearing the Che t-shirt.
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
81,508
109,733
113
Sounds like Professor Young has his own little agenda. While I've enjoyed reading the ideas in this thread and am receptive to the idea that many old-style revolutionaries were brutal, impractical tyrants, I think the good professor exagerrates every bad quality he can dig up re Che and gives him no credit for any of his good qualities.

Judging Che by whether he cheated on his wives is pretty irrelevant to the far more important issues in his public life, as is the question of whether he actually practised medicine. So perhaps Young could start by leaving these to one side.

It is probably a given that all pre 1960's Marxists accepted the idea that the bourgeoisie would have to be exterminated in order for the dictatorship of the proletariat to emerge. Hence the taste for mass murder indulged in by Stalin, Lenin and - as I am learning - Che. You don't have to like this and I suspect that none of us do. However, it comes as part of the territory if you are going to study any of these guys. The analysis of who Che was and whether he is an acceptable left wing icon also involves consideration of his self sacrifice and his commitment to struggle in the third world.

So a notable guy and a product of his time, place and ideology, I guess.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,084
1
0
There have been countless genocides, wars, killing, whatever in Africa since the beginning of time. Recent biggies include - Rawanda, Nigeria, Sudan, Ivory Coast, Somalia, Zaire you name it - the list is endless.

Slavery?

It was invented by Africans and still practiced today.

It's always easy to blame white people. So old and so predictable to blame the other guy rather than blame yourself.
Be careful when you make claims that slavery was invented by Africans. I know a few ancient Greeks and Romans that might take you to task on that.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
47,009
5,602
113
Sounds like Professor Young has his own little agenda. While I've enjoyed reading the ideas in this thread and am receptive to the idea that many old-style revolutionaries were brutal, impractical tyrants, I think the good professor exagerrates every bad quality he can dig up re Che and gives him no credit for any of his good qualities.

Judging Che by whether he cheated on his wives is pretty irrelevant to the far more important issues in his public life, as is the question of whether he actually practised medicine. So perhaps Young could start by leaving these to one side.

It is probably a given that all pre 1960's Marxists accepted the idea that the bourgeoisie would have to be exterminated in order for the dictatorship of the proletariat to emerge. Hence the taste for mass murder indulged in by Stalin, Lenin and - as I am learning - Che. You don't have to like this and I suspect that none of us do. However, it comes as part of the territory if you are going to study any of these guys. The analysis of who Che was and whether he is an acceptable left wing icon also involves consideration of his self sacrifice and his commitment to struggle in the third world.

So a notable guy and a product of his time, place and ideology, I guess.
You seem to in some way to have accepted the propaganda that Che was a mass murderer on the scale of Stalin. That is of course completely false. Che was, after the revolution, the government official in charge of the detentions and executions of the defeated murderers. 200 would seem to be a small number by international revolution standards.

Again, I think it is a bit impractical to require revolutionaries to obey the rule of law. It is like suggesting that Che should have sued the Batista government and the mafia for human rights violations, and that insurgents need to conduct proper trials, while the oppressing side can kill with impunity. Che did not get a proper trial before the CIA executed him, when he was their prisoner.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
You seem to in some way to have accepted the propaganda that Che was a mass murderer on the scale of Stalin. That is of course completely false. Che was, after the revolution, the government official in charge of the detentions and executions of the defeated murderers. 200 would seem to be a small number by international revolution standards.

Again, I think it is a bit impractical to require revolutionaries to obey the rule of law. It is like suggesting that Che should have sued the Batista government and the mafia for human rights violations, and that insurgents need to conduct proper trials, while the oppressing side can kill with impunity. Che did not get a proper trial before the CIA executed him, when he was their prisoner.
Funny, I thought I refuted most of that love fest above.

Shall I repost my response for you?

How many murders does it take before you are a "bad" guy?
 

gallo negro

Active member
Dec 17, 2004
1,121
0
36
eastlos
Actually i believe it was the babylonians that started slavery who are now known as ethiopians. From Babylon To Timbuktu by Rudolph A. Windsor states how 1,000 000 black jews fled to Africa to escape persecution. Africans and the so called african americans are two different nations.
This is why i say the powers that be that run this world are truly devils they have stolen a nation's true identity.
Next thing your going to tell me is that those so called Jewish people who are in Israel are the true Jews of antiquity lol. Their nothing but a bunch of Khazar converts.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,084
1
0
Actually i believe it was the babylonians that started slavery who are now known as ethiopians. From Babylon To Timbuktu by Rudolph A. Windsor states how 1,000 000 black jews fled to Africa to escape persecution. Africans and the so called african americans are two different nations.
This is why i say the powers that be that run this world are truly devils they have stolen a nation's true identity.
Next thing your going to tell me is that those so called Jewish people who are in Israel are the true Jews of antiquity lol. Their nothing but a bunch of Khazar converts.
On this we agree. I've never like the hyphenated identities.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
Actually i believe it was the babylonians that started slavery who are now known as ethiopians. From Babylon To Timbuktu by Rudolph A. Windsor states how 1,000 000 black jews fled to Africa to escape persecution. Africans and the so called african americans are two different nations.
This is why i say the powers that be that run this world are truly devils they have stolen a nation's true identity.
Next thing your going to tell me is that those so called Jewish people who are in Israel are the true Jews of antiquity lol. Their nothing but a bunch of Khazar converts.
Africans are a nation?

Are we having an ESL problem?
 

james t kirk

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2001
24,068
3,990
113
Che Guevara is nothing but a murdering Stalinist who did nothing and accomplished nothing - unless you count murdering, torturing, imprisoning, and the taking away of civil liberties as accomplishments to be proud of.
 

gallo negro

Active member
Dec 17, 2004
1,121
0
36
eastlos
no they are not a nation i was just trying to point out that so called Africans and the so called African Americans have different spirits and that they are not from the same nation. Ham was the progenitor of the dark races but not the negroes. All so called Africans are basically Hamites. Now the negroes of the Americas, the west indies and the carribean hmmm their true identiy has been stolen and hidden from them forever.
 

gallo negro

Active member
Dec 17, 2004
1,121
0
36
eastlos
Che Guevara is nothing but a murdering Stalinist who did nothing and accomplished nothing - unless you count murdering, torturing, imprisoning, and the taking away of civil liberties as accomplishments to be proud of.
Really so the same would go for Christopher Columbus who is labelled as a hero by most historians and textbooks
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts