Ericka Andersen goes a little further than most when she bravely
asks a liberal friend what is up with the Che fetish. The
friend answers:
Che was a doctor who took a trip on his bike all around SA and
worked as a volunteer in a rudimentary jungle hospital in Sao
Paolo, Brazil and later decided to change his life goal from
being a physician to being a revolutionary in the name of the
voiceless…
He is the symbol of outrageous bravery who said "Shoot, coward,
you’re only going to kill a man" right before he was executed
and who believed in the immortality of the revolution to save
the masses of unequal citizens.
He and Castro killed many too, but they did it for an ideal, a
belief that many Liberals accepted and preferred to imperialism
deaths. He traveled and spent his life, truly to fight for what
he believe was right, equality of the people and his image is
now ubiquitous…
Equality of the people... to be shot in front of a wall for being
gay? Or to starve?
The left has a morbid fascination with mass murderers, to be
sure. Che, Fidel, Chavez, Lenin have all received plaudits on
account of their tireless struggle for "equality," that is,
"equality" of everyone else. Do all liberals feel this way? Maybe
it's just a majority. But I'm surprised there's no chill effect.
If Tom Cruise's latest flick, Valkyrie, were sympathetic
to Hitler, and showed how Hitler was really just a courageous man
who wanted to bring Germany back to its former glory, the
directors would never heard the end of it (and rightly so!). Yet
what was different about Hitler? He, like Che, sought to
extermine those he deemed unfit. They both did so systematically.
The difference is that one had a fondness for open collars and
cigars, while the other one was big on Wagner.
People who speak well of Pinochet on the right usually make sure
to put it in the context of how he was also a dictator and human
rights violator. But the dialogue from the left rarely gets into
the messy details of Che's life -- they just prefer to ignore the
bad parts and portray it as all unicorn giggles and sparkles.
The reason why so many on the Left -- especially the college-age
crowd -- idolize Che can be seen in that iconic photo by Alberto
Korda: he had movie star-level charisma. You really don't need to
get any deeper than that.
In that picture he is handsome, brooding, soulful, exotic,
youthful yet worldly, thoughtful yet earthy and, above all,
dangerous. In short a real stud.
The fact that he was involved in real-life revolutions only makes
him seem more exciting. The fact that he killed people in the
name of his causes makes him even more of a bad boy.
The love exhibited for Che is not in any way an intellectual
thing. It is libidinal. Anything else is just a rationalization.
tony| 1.6.09 @ 12:22PM
Sean:
I think it runs much deeper than that. Note that most people you
see wearing those Che shirts are college-age kids. These are kids
who have fallen under the spell of their professors, who are
overwhelmingly pre-disposed to favor Marxist revolutionaries like
Che.
I do think you make a point with respect to his picture, which
has become iconic. But the picture only serves to enhance what
has already been taught, that Che was a brave man fighting the
good fight against his oppressors. In a sense, it's easy to
understand why a 20 year old would fall under the spell of the
legend of Che. His true history, that of a murderous thug who,
when captured, whimpered like a baby and offered up his comrades
in exchange for leniency, is completely ignored.
What's not easily understood or explained is the fascination with
many on the left with murderous tyrants like Stalin, Castro, etc.
I suspect some sort of mental disorder, but since I'm not a
trained psychologist, I can only speculate. But I do believe that
many on the left are so hate-filled, they are perfectly willing
to overlook any behavior perpetrated by a fellow traveler if that
behavior is focused on a political enemy or furthers the cause of
the left.
Andrew| 1.6.09 @ 12:39PM
Really? You guys run into a lot of people on the left who like
Stalin and Lenin? When did this run-in with Stalin-loving
liberals supposedly happen? 1949? Or, maybe, are you guys just
making stuff up?
Andrew -- Actually, let's go back to FDR and read a few copies of
the New Republic from that era. Then, let's look at such
luminaries as Paul Robeson, or Alger Hiss. (Or, by extension,
their fans.) Granted, I think Lenin gets more kudos these days
than Stalin, but that's because Lenin used to be the black sheep,
having sold out the Marxist dream once he faced the consequences
of his experiment.
tony| 1.6.09 @ 1:59PM
Andrew:
I believe the word I used was fascination and I stand by it.
Although I'm 43, I attended undergrad and law school in my
thirties, so my experiences are reasonably fresh. I can tell you
that on the typical college campus, there is a fairly widespread
fascination, if not outright reverence, for communism and
communist leaders.
Academia, along with the worldwide green movement, is the home
for all wayward communists. This is easily understood, as
academia is the one area where one's theories and beliefs are not
submitted to the test of practical application.
Young men and women who do not have the benefit of experience and
do not yet have fully formed minds are vulnerable to the
teachings of the middle and old-aged adolescents that have gotten
tenure in major universities. They poison the minds of these
young people with stories of collectivist glories, while
dismissing well known and documented communist atrocities as
inventions of anti-intellectuals and McCarthy-ites.
In time, these young men and women graduate and go out into the
world with a sub-standard education, but with a reverential
attitude towards supposedly heroic figures such as Che. These are
the radicalized folks you see at anti-war rallies waving the flag
of Maoist China and the hammer and sickle. Or maybe they write
books like "Motorcycle Diaries." Perhaps they go to Hollywood,
travel to Cuba, get the royal treatment from Fidel and come back
to proclaim the glory of socialism.
So, yes Andrew, I and many others encounter these types of people
on a daily basis. They wear Che shirts, they dominate academia,
they attend anti-war rallies, they write well known books and
they infest Hollywood. Hell, they even have more than a passing
familiarity with our president-elect.
Agnes D| 1.6.09 @ 2:49PM
Che was very much in vogue when I was in college (as was Fidel
Castro). We wore his T shirts and hung posters of him on our dorm
room walls. How wrong we were.
tony| 1.6.09 @ 5:48PM
Agnes D:
Glad to see you've overcome your education.
Quartermaster| 1.6.09 @ 6:58PM
Che tried to cut a deal to save his life. The main died a coward.
But, he sure was tough when he had people taken to the wall.
Sean Higgins| 1.6.09 @ 11:24AM
The reason why so many on the Left -- especially the college-age crowd -- idolize Che can be seen in that iconic photo by Alberto Korda: he had movie star-level charisma. You really don't need to get any deeper than that.
In that picture he is handsome, brooding, soulful, exotic, youthful yet worldly, thoughtful yet earthy and, above all, dangerous. In short a real stud.
The fact that he was involved in real-life revolutions only makes him seem more exciting. The fact that he killed people in the name of his causes makes him even more of a bad boy.
The love exhibited for Che is not in any way an intellectual thing. It is libidinal. Anything else is just a rationalization.
tony| 1.6.09 @ 12:22PM
Sean:
I think it runs much deeper than that. Note that most people you see wearing those Che shirts are college-age kids. These are kids who have fallen under the spell of their professors, who are overwhelmingly pre-disposed to favor Marxist revolutionaries like Che.
I do think you make a point with respect to his picture, which has become iconic. But the picture only serves to enhance what has already been taught, that Che was a brave man fighting the good fight against his oppressors. In a sense, it's easy to understand why a 20 year old would fall under the spell of the legend of Che. His true history, that of a murderous thug who, when captured, whimpered like a baby and offered up his comrades in exchange for leniency, is completely ignored.
What's not easily understood or explained is the fascination with many on the left with murderous tyrants like Stalin, Castro, etc. I suspect some sort of mental disorder, but since I'm not a trained psychologist, I can only speculate. But I do believe that many on the left are so hate-filled, they are perfectly willing to overlook any behavior perpetrated by a fellow traveler if that behavior is focused on a political enemy or furthers the cause of the left.
Andrew| 1.6.09 @ 12:39PM
Really? You guys run into a lot of people on the left who like Stalin and Lenin? When did this run-in with Stalin-loving liberals supposedly happen? 1949? Or, maybe, are you guys just making stuff up?
J. Peter Freire| 1.6.09 @ 1:19PM
Andrew -- Actually, let's go back to FDR and read a few copies of the New Republic from that era. Then, let's look at such luminaries as Paul Robeson, or Alger Hiss. (Or, by extension, their fans.) Granted, I think Lenin gets more kudos these days than Stalin, but that's because Lenin used to be the black sheep, having sold out the Marxist dream once he faced the consequences of his experiment.
tony| 1.6.09 @ 1:59PM
Andrew:
I believe the word I used was fascination and I stand by it. Although I'm 43, I attended undergrad and law school in my thirties, so my experiences are reasonably fresh. I can tell you that on the typical college campus, there is a fairly widespread fascination, if not outright reverence, for communism and communist leaders.
Academia, along with the worldwide green movement, is the home for all wayward communists. This is easily understood, as academia is the one area where one's theories and beliefs are not submitted to the test of practical application.
Young men and women who do not have the benefit of experience and do not yet have fully formed minds are vulnerable to the teachings of the middle and old-aged adolescents that have gotten tenure in major universities. They poison the minds of these young people with stories of collectivist glories, while dismissing well known and documented communist atrocities as inventions of anti-intellectuals and McCarthy-ites.
In time, these young men and women graduate and go out into the world with a sub-standard education, but with a reverential attitude towards supposedly heroic figures such as Che. These are the radicalized folks you see at anti-war rallies waving the flag of Maoist China and the hammer and sickle. Or maybe they write books like "Motorcycle Diaries." Perhaps they go to Hollywood, travel to Cuba, get the royal treatment from Fidel and come back to proclaim the glory of socialism.
So, yes Andrew, I and many others encounter these types of people on a daily basis. They wear Che shirts, they dominate academia, they attend anti-war rallies, they write well known books and they infest Hollywood. Hell, they even have more than a passing familiarity with our president-elect.
Agnes D| 1.6.09 @ 2:49PM
Che was very much in vogue when I was in college (as was Fidel Castro). We wore his T shirts and hung posters of him on our dorm room walls. How wrong we were.
tony| 1.6.09 @ 5:48PM
Agnes D:
Glad to see you've overcome your education.
Quartermaster| 1.6.09 @ 6:58PM
Che tried to cut a deal to save his life. The main died a coward. But, he sure was tough when he had people taken to the wall.
sidnee| 12.11.09 @ 1:00PM
jack wills
ugg mayfaire boots on sale