It seems that ignorance and general carelessness about American history and U.S. politics have become commonplace in the majority of the youth of my generation.
In the (altered) words of Roger Waters, we are “comfortably dumb.”
I recently came to this scary conclusion when I stumbled upon a great response to the new movie Che, a film which essentially celebrates Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara’s life and glorifies his revolutionary ways. I proceeded to post the article as my Facebook status.
The response was shocking. It was quite eye-opening to see the support for this man by his commie-red t-shirt toting followers. Never before had I truly come to terms with the severity of the situation until I read the comments defending Che.
When looking at this case of admiration gone wrong, there are two aspects which need to be examined in order to tackle the situation fully. First and foremost, we must find out exactly what inspires the support and where it comes from. The second is to look at the Che clan’s reasoning and justification for his actions, and see how well that stands up under scrutiny.
So why the Che support and vast lack of knowledge amongst our youngsters? In the case of Che, I believe it is applicable to a few things: the ‘snowball-effect’ of beliefs via the leftist media, political correctness in education, and the general rebellious behavior and appeal of a revolutionary figure to teenage kids.
Of course, the fact that the age at which kids become interested in politics coincides with typically rebellious high school and college years, is obvious. But why, even in the face of irrefutable facts detailing Che’s unwavering killing, do multitudes of of people support him and pay for his t-shirts and movies? I think that much of it is due to the preaching of political correctness in our schools and its influence on students beginning at a very young age. We, as students, are taught to be tolerant to all beliefs (which I do not object to), but sometimes this tolerance is exchanged for sympathy when in regard to our enemies and foreign threats. This is especially the case when dealing with Latin America and U.S. involvement during the time of Che. Students are presented with a situation which attempts to subtly give justification for Che’s actions. History classes today often make it seem as if America’s insensitivity and hunger for power breeds terrorists and tyrants such as Che.
Once these kinds of ideas are ingrained into our student’s brains, they are further upheld by the constant influx of overwhelmingly liberal TV media, the main source of politics for people of this age. However, I also blame the kids themselves in my generation for being lazy and not finding the time or interest to research political arguments on their own, but rather taking what is given to them as the absolute truth.
So, the next step is find these Che apologists and find out how much they really know and what their defense is for him. Truth is, most of the time I have received the same sorts of responses I did when I asked many people why they support Obama – no response. However, when a response is given it typically takes the form of a blame-America-because-we-created-Che argument.
Instead of launching into the very long and complex analysis of Latin American regimes and social ideologies of the mid 20th century, we can take a much simpler approach on Che’s life that eliminates any need for finding a ‘motive.’
Che was a murderer; a cold man who imprisoned people without trial and took joy in executing those who stood in his way. His concept of life is no gentler or sophisticated than that of Stalin or Hitler. Che did not want peace or agreements with the U.S., but rather convinced himself, Castro, and his followers that “we must walk the path of liberation even if it costs millions of atomic victims.” Che made it publicly known that if he had the means he would do everything possible to bring death, chaos, and humiliation to America.
No matter what these followers say Che’s ‘motive’ or ‘justification’ was, I will not side with Che or Castro, nor will I ever condone such staunch hate and cold brutality. I find it disturbing that so many people flaunt the Che icon on their chests and defend a man, who, given the opportunity, would not have thought twice to wave a destructive hand over the same country which gives them such unparalleled freedom and opportunity to express their beliefs.
The massive Che promotion movement is a scary testament to the spreading ignorance and lazy mindedness of a large portion of generation X.
It is a plague and it must be stopped.
Thanks to Mark Goldblatt’s article for the inspiration and Facebook as a platform for political debate and communication. Below is a transcript of my conversation between a Che follower and a moderate that took place on Facebook before I wrote this article.
You will not condone such acts of staunch hate and cold brutality yet you support the American government. The atrocities of the United States government reach far beyond the actions of any one man. Greed is what has powered America to fight in foreign wars and interfere in the affairs of foreign countries. Greed not a want to spread democracy is the motivator.
Liberalism is not a plague it a force of political repercussion.
Che’ is a product of American interference in Latin America. Without American interference in Guatemala he would not have become who he is remembered as today a ruthless killer, an innovator in guerrilla tactics, and a leftist. I do not say he is a good man but i point to simple cause and effect that American actions created this man and eventually ended him. Even in death he upon the chests of thousands of mindless teenagers reminds the knowledgeable observer that we are not the good guys. We are just the guys with all the guns and money.
Great article. Che was not somebody to be admired or glorified. Any culture which glorifies someone who is a cold executioner has either lost its sense of morality, or even more, lost its sense of reality. I think that is Anonymous 1’s problem. He clearly does not believe in moral absolutes, which is why he can defend Che as being a product of his environment. “Without America’s interference in Guatemala he wold not have become who he is remembered as today a ruthless killer….” Osama bin Laden says the same thing about himself, “We declared jihad against the US government, because the US government is unjust, criminal and tyrannical….” – Osama bin Laden to CNN in March 1997. Hitler thought he was justified and so do pathological criminals. See the pattern? One is not justified if he thinks he is justified, but only justified if he is right. And determination of right and wrong is chiefly a question of morality. And morality is not personal or cultural but absolute. If morality is not absolute then we can easily say that all of the “bad men” of history were not “bad,” they just were products of their environment and had their own view of things. Saying such a thing is not only dangerous, but wrong.
Fabulous article. Che deserves no glorification whatsoever. He was a murderer of innocent people, whose guise of “liberation” was simply thinly-veiled oppression. And as for the so-called “atrocities” committed by the American government, I would not call the comparatively humane killing of guilty people atrocities, especially compared to the glaring human rights violations of the Latin American Communists to completely innocent people. Let us be glad we live in a nation that kills the guilty with regret as opposed to the innocent with no qualms.
nice article about facebook dude.don