The authors of the Wikipedia article makes no effort to research the claims of either side by themselves.
So even if we assume a very generous margin of error for Rummel, it doesn't change the conclusion: If you would reject a Batista T-shirt because Batista was a butcher, you have no reason to wear a Che Guevara T-shirt either.
When I think of Cuba during the 1950s, I think of very real corruption in the old style . . . a sort of movie set corruption of guys and molls.
edgarblythe wrote:Violence was being used, by superior forces, before and after Che made his try. Anybody who thinks the US forces were going to dialog for a better world does not know the situation, as it existed on the ground, then. Torture and killing by dictators was allowed by the Americans. They had CIA active in all trouble spots.
Right, but isnt this just a "they did it too" argument?
I know the CIA was undermining any leftwing government in the world it could hit, democratic ones included. I know that the US, through the CIA, supported coup d'etats and dictatorships and terror against civilian movements across Latin-America and beyond. I know all that.
But - and? Does Che's and Castro's wanton terror against any Cubans opposed to their new regime, their disastrous economic and agricultural mismanagement that caused new waves of hunger in the countryside, their oppression of all dissent, become any more palatable by pointing out that the CIA and Batista were really, really bad as well?
No, the US wasnt "going to dialog for a better world", but thats a bit of a straw man since nobody here so far has said it was -- but yeah, and? Did that justify, or even necessitate the communist terror of the likes of Che?
Hell, I think that Cuba's communists had actually stood a better chance of effectively opposing the US and its machinations if it had refrained from the kind of terror Che's men unleashed and the kind of dictatorship Castro imposed, and instead had pursued a more plural and less crazed leftist course. By actually acting like the brutes that US propaganda made them out to be from the start, they were, if anything, playing into the hands of the CIA.
You go on with your posts and I shall go on with mine, and that's all I have by way of reply.
Hey, I'm sorry if I've offended you edgarblythe. Wasn't at all my intention.
Frankly, if Che had been less good looking and if the photos of his dead body hadn't been published, would anyone have known of him?
American leftists tended to be American, not Russian, not Cuban.
Che is one of those ubiquitous 20th century icons...at least of a certain kind of fashion.
plainoldme wrote:Frankly, if Che had been less good looking and if the photos of his dead body hadn't been published,
would anyone have known of him?
Yes. The Cuban revolution was a pretty big deal at the time.
I know my father was reading about him already before he died.
when I think of Cuba during the 1950's I think of the 56 Packard Clipper;