Yeah but Luke skywalker did not sentence people to execution (at least not in the movies) I think Che, was just a man, who did both great things and horrible things, in general he had egalitarian and altruistic goals, but his means were ruthless and violent.
ha ha ha :bravo: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Although obviously the Star Wars world, being complete fantasy; means it's more idealistic than the real world allows. All rebellions in history follow the same patterns however, it's inevitable. Che would be the lesser of two evils.
There have been many revolutionaries that never laid a finger on anyone, Gandhi being the most famous.
Yea, and I don't think creating a country of govt. controlled Soviet peasants was a part of Ghandi's plan either. There's good revolutionaries, and bad ones, like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro, and Che.
If you want to spectrum it: Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Che, Malcolm X, M.L.K, Ghandi and of course more names can be jammed in there but Hitler and Ghandi probably represent the ends of the spectrum, and Che ends up somewhere in the middle.
The simplest way to interpret the events that transpired surrounding Che is that they (the people who actually have to live there) did not want communism or Marxist fanatical chains around their necks. So they killed him.
Except "they" didn't. The military forces of the US client state government did. Che failed in a couple of different places, such as the Congo. It is worth comparing the fates of those places in which he failed with those in which he was more successful.
That "they" was a goverment, not the people, by the way the goverment Bolivia become much more liberlized since then, likewise "they" was also CIA.
he was killed by a south American military brigade. They cooperated with U.S just as they did with Pablo Escobar.
I see nothing wrong with Capitalism, simply because it is more in line with the true nature of humans. Communism is a lie and has proven to be at the very least unobtainable and at worst usually a ruse for a ruling class.
His ideals might be revolutionary, but change via revolution requires force, if it doesn't then to be honest your oppressors really aren't that oppressive.:shrug:
A lot of similarities there, yes. A love of capitalistic freedom and hatred of Marxist chains not really visible among them. So the comparative fates of the citizenries of Cuba and the Congo, Haiti, Bolivia, etc, are due to the true alignment of horrific capitalistic tyrannies with human nature, and Cuban collectivist opposition to human nature ?
It's funny, I get the feeling if you were at the bottom of the capitalist pyramid scheme you'd feel differently. Communism needs work, but everyone on this planet should be considered an equal.
