Mike wrote:
We've had a few Che fans here, past and present.

I wasnt aware of the pig thing, but you learn something new everyday here hey, i guess thats one of the things that keeps people coming back.

He wasn't a huge fan of anarchists

I always considered Ernie to be a bit of a self absorbed twat.

The only book I have ever thrown away was a suck-up biography written by one of Castro's minions. I was only about 17 and thankfully it turned my attention away from the whole communist bollocks.

oioioi wrote:
I always considered Ernie to be a bit of a self absorbed twat.

The only book I have ever thrown away was a suck-up biography written by one of Castro's minions. I was only about 17 and thankfully it turned my attention away from the whole communist bollocks.

Patrimonialism is a form of governance in which all power flows directly from the leader. This constitutes essentially the blending of the public and private sector. These regimes are autocratic or oligarchic and exclude the upper and middle classes from power. The leaders of these countries typically enjoy absolute personal power. Usually, the armies of these countries are loyal to the leader, not the nation

Convinced that the ''Yankee imperialism'' he detested had to be confronted not only at home but in its bases of support, the developing nations emerging from colonialism, Guevara had slipped into Congo in 1965, in the midst of rebel uprisings against the American-supported government that followed the assassination of Patrice Lumumba in 1961.

On November 4, 1964, the MNR government was overthrown in a military coup led by vice-president René Barrientos and Alfredo Ovando, commander of the army, with the aid of CIA. ..
on October 9, Bolivian President René Barrientos ordered that Guevara be killed. The order was relayed by Félix Rodríguez despite the U.S. government’s desire that Guevara be taken to Panama for further interrogation.

A strikingly large proportion[who?] of 20th century praetorian regimes emerged in countries that had been occupied by the USA.[citation needed] Examples include Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi's regime after the American intervention in 1953, the regimes of the Somozas, Duvaliers and Trujillo (their countries were occupied by US marines 1912-33, 1915–34 and 1916–24), and Batista's regime in Cuba.

Che the executioner

In the Sierra Maestra Che was always quick to demand execution for guerrillas and local peasants who were not up to his standards. “Informers, insubordinates, malingerers and deserters” got a bullet in the head. Fidel was far more tolerant of human frailty and reversed several of Che’s execution orders. Executions were quite frequent during the guerrilla campaign. (p. 231) He was “notoriously severe” with his punishments. One time he threatened to shoot a number of guerrillas who had gone on a hunger strike over the bad provisions. Only Fidel’s intervention stopped him. (p. 346)

Shortly after the fall of Batista, Che helped to form the C-2 or the new secret police. He was also in charge of purging the army and government bureaucracy of “traitors, spies, and Batista henchmen.” However, it was mostly minor individuals that were arrested, since the officers and top bureaucrats fled with the dictator. Che was the “supreme prosecutor” who made the final decision to execute or not. (p. 385) And execute he did. Che was “merciless,” (p. 390) and between January and April 1959 more than 550 people were shot by firing squad. (p. 419) By January 1960 alleged Batista supporters were not the only ones getting the bullet. Some young Catholics were executed for distributing anti-communist leaflets. (p. 458)

Che is implicated in the destruction of Cuban anarcho-syndicalism, (and Trotskyism as well). Cuba in the 1950’s was the scene of the last of the great Latin American syndicalist movements. (See Appendix.) Libertarians controlled many trade unions and were an important anti-Batista force. The anarchists had survived the Machado and Batista dictatorships but did not survive two years of Castroism. By 1962 the movement was down to 20 or 30 members, hundreds of others having fled into exile, imprisoned or executed. For anyone still harboring any illusions about Che’s alleged libertarianism, the following quote should put this to rest: “Individualism...must disappear in Cuba...[it] should be the proper utilization of the whole individual for the absolute benefit of the community.” (p. 478) Such an opinion on the individual was about as far removed from libertarianism as you could possibly get.

”Following the Cuban Revolution, Guevara performed a number of key roles in the new government.The historian argued Che Guevara was not responsible for the execution of any “innocent” prisoners.“I have yet to find a single credible source pointing to a case where Che executed ‘an innocent’. Those persons executed by Guevara or on his orders were condemned for the usual crimes punishable by death at times of war or in its aftermath: desertion, treason or crimes such as rape, torture or murder. I should add that my research spanned five years, and included anti-Castro Cubans among the Cuban-American exile community in Miami and elsewhere.”

What was left for Cuba's anarchists was to choose either the hard path of exile or that of clandestine struggle. As Casto Moscú would explain, "We were convinced that all of our efforts and those of our people had gone for nothing, and that we had arrived at a worse, more menacing situation than all of the ills we had already combatted." Facing this totalitarian situation, the great majority of Cuba's anarchists decided to rebel. They initiated an armed struggle that was condemned from the start to failure.

Among nonviolent anarchist opposition activities at this time was the clandestine bulletin, MAS (Movimiento de Acción Sindical), which circulated throughout the island and overseas. MAS featured in its few monthly editions (August-December 1960) attack without quarter against the PCC and its followers in general and against Castro in particular. As for the situation in Cuba at this time, Casto Moscú states: "An infinity of manifestos were written denouncing the false postulates of the Castro revolution and calling the populace to oppose it. Many meetings were held to debate matters and to raise awareness," and "plans were put into effect to sabotage the basic things sustaining the state."

The methods included armed struggle. Moscú relates: "I participated in efforts to support guerrilla insurgencies in different parts of the country." In particular, two important operations took place in the same zone, the Sierra Occidental, in which operations were difficult because the mountains aren't very high, they're narrow, and they're near Havana: "There was direct contact with the guerrilla band commanded by Captain Pedro Sánchez in San Cristobal; since some of our compa-eros participated actively in this band . . . they were supplied with arms . . . We also did everything we could to support the guerrilla band commanded by Francisco Robaina (known as 'Machete') that operated in the same range." At least one anarchist fighter in these bands, Augusto Sánchez, was executed by the government without trial after being taken prisoner. The government considered the guerrillas "bandits" and had very little respect for the lives of those who surrendered.

According to Moscú, in addition to Augusto Sánchez, the following "compa-eros combatientes" were murdered by the Castro government: Rolando Tamargo, Sebastián Aguilar, Jr. and Ventura Suárez were shot; Eusebio Otero was found dead in his cell; Raúl Negrin, harassed beyond endurance, set himself on fire. Many others were arrested and sent to prison, among them Modesto Pi-eiro, Floreal Barrera, Suria Linsuaín, Manuel González, José Ace-a, Isidro Moscú, Norberto Torres, Sicinio Torres, José Mandado Marcos, Plácido Méndez, and Luis Linsuaín, these last two being officials in the Rebel Army. Francisco Aguirre died in prison; Victoriano Hernández, sick and blind because of prison tortures, killed himself; and José Álvarez Micheltorena died a few weeks after getting out of prison.

The situation of Cuba's libertarians grew more tense with each passing day. The failed Bay of Pigs invasion, in Playa Giron, south of Matanzas Province, on the 17th of April 1961"”an adventure as well financed as it was badly planned by the CIA"”gave the government the excuse it needed to totally liquidate the internal opposition, which of course included the anarchists, and to consolidate its power.

On May Day, 1961, Castro declared his government "socialist" "”in practice, stalinist. This presented the libertarians both inside and outside of Cuba with an ethical dilemma: the regime demanded the most decided allegiance of its sympathizers and militants, and didn't recognize abstention or a neutral position. This meant that one either slept with criminals or died of insomnia, that is, one either supported the regime, went into exile, or went into the cemetery.

hugorune wrote: What specifically do you find "self absorbed" about turning his back on a private education, comfortable middle class lifestyle and career as a Dr, to ride a bike around South America experiencing abject poverty, living like a peasant and treating, medicating, cleaning etc Lepers in Leper colonies where very few people without the disease ever went?

Or was it his risking his life as an Argentinian to help lead a Nationalist peasant revolution in Cuba, to overthrow the pro US Imperialism, "Patrimonialist" Batista regime?en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrimonialism

Maybe it was leaving a political career in Cuba and lifetime position within the Bureaucracy to fight a losing battle iin the Congo?
www.nytimes.com/2001/11/11/books/che-in-africa.html

Or maybe it was dying in a foreign land leading a counter revolution against the CIA and US again, as they were trying to overthrow the democratically won rights of workers, to freely associate and bare arms to defend their rights in Bolivia?en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che_Guevara#Capture_and_execution

A brief look into Rene Barrientos will show you what Che was fighting against in Bolivia. Make no mistake about how far the US was going throughout the sixties to overthrow democratic socialist popular movements and governments.
From the wiki on Patrimonialism.
But his enemy won, and it's a good job too, things have never been better

To be honest, Guevarista, I just did it to get a reaction.

Meanwhile in Moscow, the Underground Anarchists were formed by Kazimir Kovalevich and Piotr Sobalev to be the shock troops of the Revolution, infiltrating Bolshevik ranks and striking when least expected. On 25 September 1919, the Underground Anarchists struck the Bolsheviks with the heaviest blow of the Revolution. The headquarters of the Moscow Committee of the Communist Party was blown up, killing 12 and injuring 55 Party members, including Nikolai Bukharin and Emilian Iaroslavskii. Spurred on by their apparent success, the Underground Anarchists proclaimed a new "era of dynamite" that would finally wipe away capitalism and the State.

To be honest, Guevarista, I just did it to get a reaction.

To be honest, Guevarista, I just did it to get a reaction.

Come now hugo, call me Mike, after all it is my name


I find it utterly futile to perpetuate divisions between Anarchists and Socialists in the way the US and British ruling classes encourage, I personally wouldn't run around the countryside burning Churches and killing priests, but I can see why during the Spanish Civil War, Anarchists found such a course of action necessary or at least enjoyable/worth pursuing.

I'm interested in finding the points where Socialists find Anarchism incompatible, where anarchists find socialism incompatible and then trying to understand, hopefully undermine these contradictions.

Libertarian Anarchism, Petit Bourgeois Anarchism and individualism require a bourgeois economy to prosper, collectivization in a socialist economy is fairly incompatible with the Ideal of Individual liberty, individual property rights, rights of appropriation and so on, my point here is ultimately there would have been a reason for Che's treatment of Factions, conspirators, deserters etc, like there was a reason for Anarchists leading the anti clerical terror in Spain.

Ultimately imo this moralistic, emotion based "condemnation" is ideologically motivated, rather than factually based on the material conditions or actual events inevitably more complex than, "Poor Anarchists killed by Marauding Revolutionary Marxists" or "Anarcho Libertarians oppressed under Soviet style dictatorship" etc on what do you base your assumption the leaders of Cuba were wrong to put down counter revolution in this way?

Will you openly condemn the actions of Anarchists throughout history aswell? And from what position as an Anarchist would you condemn the killings of Priests, Nun's etc by Anarchists during the Spanish Civil War?

anarchism Spanish civil War

Come now hugo, call me Mike, after all it is my name