"The CIA might claim Che's body, but it will never be able to shackle his spirit."

Not one, not two, not three, but four films about Che Guevara will soon hit theaters, all from major studios. And that barely scratches the surface of Che chic. Writing in the Miami New Times, Brett Sokol takes stock of the guerrilla's media moment:

While it's certainly true that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, with Che Guevara that maxim has become downright surreal. Today the revolutionary icon's writings are simultaneously admired by teenage Howard Dean volunteers in Burlington and Taliban leaders in the Afghan countryside; they are parsed for strategies by narco-guerrillas in Colombia as well as counterinsurgency experts at the U.S. Southern Command.

Meanwhile the same Che T-shirt spotted on several masked anarchists cavorting through downtown Miami during November's FTAA protests was also sported by actress Elizabeth Hurley as she club-hopped across London. Hurley, though, chose to accessorize her sartorial ode to class struggle with a $4500 Louis Vuitton handbag. And just to add a further dash of the ridiculous, consider the recent sight of supermodel Gisele B?ndchen strutting down the catwalk in a Che bikini, Madonna's Che-inspired CD cover, or Smirnoff vodka's Che ad campaign.

For many local Cuban exiles, however, Guevara's current cultural moment is hardly a laughing matter. To them the very mention of Guevara -- let alone the thought that his visage adorns countless dorm rooms -- is deeply disturbing. The Argentine-born rebel, after all, was Fidel Castro's right-hand man during Cuba's 1959 revolution, personally presiding over several key events that forced so many to flee to South Florida: commanding scores of firing-squad executions of political opponents inside Havana's La Caba?a waterfront fortress; managing the wholesale nationalization of private businesses and homes; hunting down anti-Castro groups in the Escambray mountains; even demanding that the Soviets launch their island-based nukes at Washington, D.C., during the 1961 Cuban Missile Crisis.

Sokol draws the obvious conclusion that Che's iconic stature owes less to who he was or what he did than to what he seems to symbolize. Which may beg the question So just how did a guy like this come to be such an appealing symbol?, but at least it spares us the suspicion that Hurley and B?ndchen fantasize about commanding firing squads of their own.

Footnote: Libertarians have not been immune to Dr. Guevara's charms. Consider Murray Rothbard's obituary for the man. Here's the opening:

Che is dead, and so we all mourn him. Why? How is it that so many libertarians mourn this man; how is it that we just received a letter from a brilliant young libertarian, a former objectivist and Birchite, which said, in part: "if they finally did get Che…I am sure that his memory will live to haunt both Latin America and the U.S. for decades to come. Long live Che!"

Comments

[Xavier]

We might not celebrate Che, but I think libertarians should celebrate the commercialization of Che's legacy. So long as Che's image is used as a marketing gimmick, he isn't representing anything more than rebelliousness or fashionable leftism, neither of which are very threatening.

[Jesse Walker]

Joe has a point. It's similar to the way Trotsky gets points in some quarters for not being Stalin, even though Trotsky, like Che, was pretty brutal when he held power in the real world. It's the romance of the road not taken.

As for whether this is "why libertarians get such a bad name" -- I don't think so. Not many people associate libertarianism with Che-adulation. I linked to Rothbard's article not because such sentiments seem typical, but because -- especially today -- they seem so weird.

(I wish Stephen Halbrook's 30-year-old articles arguing that Lenin and Mao were great libertarians were online somewhere -- now those will blow your mind. Stranger still, because it was written by a grownup: the piece in which Leonard Liggio essentially endorsed Halbrook's position.)

[JD]

Che Guevara is just the James Dean of politics, that's all. I doubt 90% of the adolescents with James Dean posters could tell you his filmography or why he was important, beyond "being cool and rebellious", and I doubt the ones with Che posters could tell you much about Che, beyond the C&R bit. (Some starry-eyed young Marxists excepted - they could probably chew your ear off about it.) Mo: You know his real name was Ernesto? Somehow that doesn't sound so cool...

The really sad part is that people all over the political spectrum go in more for hero-worship than they do for ideology or principle. (Bill Clinton being a recent example from our own time.) In the case of Che, being forever young and good-looking seals the deal. All the hero-worship is just a form of jacking off over his corpse. So much more convenient than having a real, imperfect person to deal with.

[Moroni]

A bad habit that both libertarians and Mormans share: Baptising the dead into their membership.

[notJoe]

What a lot of you are missing is that most American leftists consider the Cuban revolution to be mostly a failure...

Joe,
Thanks for the summary, that 'splains things well.

Gotta love the leftists who think that the Russian revolution was mostly a failure (power politics and all), the Chinese revolution was mostly a failure (power politics and all), the Cambodian revolution was mostly a failure (power...you know the rest). Why don't these people have at least a suspicion that the Gulag, the killing fields, La Caba?a, etc. are the direct result of Communism? I know you (rightly) denigrate anarcho-liberterians for seeing through rose-colored glasses, but it seems to me that the left suffers from congenital, total blindness.

[Mo]

I had forgotten his real name, but a cool nickname does help in the old marketing department. Wearing a shirt of Che is cool, one of Ernesto is less so.

Good call by Jesse on the Trotsky parallels.

With Bert hanging out w/ OBL and Ernie hanging w/ Castro, what's next? Grover and Kim Jong Il? Elmo and Musharaf?

The Che fashion is more like USSR and other assorted commie chic, completely meaningless and a demonstration of the ignorance or youth of the wearer. I say give the teenagers a pass when they wear it, the older ones who try to high fashionize it are merely idiots (unless they irony of a $600 Che t-shirt is intentional).

[Garth]

"Che" is a nickname given to Ernesto because of his Argentine roots - Che is a common Argentine short word / filler - some likening it to "hey!" It could have Italian roots, as so much lingo in Buenos Aires is so derived. No one in Argentina would have called him "Che".

It would be like an American in Britain gaining the nickname "Yank" - it would only work there and not here.

[alma hadayn]

I will readily admit to not being an expert in history, but it seems to me that people put too much weight in the philosophical underpinnings of ideologies of power.

Was Stalin's brutality really related to his deep seated convictions about collectivist economics? The violence of the communist dictatorships may have more to do with the nature of violent insurgencies than with leftist political theory. It is overly simplistic to blame power politics, which has always existed and is part of human nature, on specific political philosophies, especially when there has never been a shortage of violent dictatorships across the political spectrum.

And yes, I realize that this will get me in trouble with the croud that is still fighting the Cold War.

[Kraorh]

This reminds me - does anyone have the JPG of the famous Che picture that substitutes a white Nike swoosh for the red star in his cap? It was in Reason a few issues back, but I can't find it, and my pseudo-Photoshop software isn't worth messing with to recreate it.

[Heather]

Being a young'n in associated with youth and all. I can give the projection that 98% of everyone who has a Che shirt doesn't know who he is, or what he did. Zach de la Rocha from Rage Against the Machine made Che t-shirts pretty popular to the MTV crowd. Sort of snowballed from there.

Also, he never denied Erenesto, Che is just an endearing nickname meaning "guy."

[Neither Boomer nor Xer]

I'm tired of the oft seen icons of Boomers' childhoods such as Che, James Dean, Lenny Bruce, and Marilyn.

Since the Boomers are all abiout to have heart attacks and strokes, I want to see some icons from my childhood. Perhaps Billy Carter, Linda Rondstadt, John Anderson, and Ed Koch?

uh, never mind....

[Garth]

Go to Bureaucrash if you want some parodies of the Iconic Che Guevara picture - They have had him in Mickey Mouse Ears as well as a Propeller Beanie....

http://bureaucrash.com

[Mark S.]

"The Che fashion is more like USSR and other assorted commie chic, completely meaningless and a demonstration of the ignorance or youth of the wearer."

I guess this means hip teens can go marching around in SS uniforms and hang posters of Ol' Adolph in their dorm rooms, huh? Or was Hitler not as cute as Che?

[Fred]

"And how do you weed out nutty libertarians?"

Buy them a subscription to Reason.

[Les]

Is it valid to compare Che to Hitler? Just wondering.

[MK]

I liked Heather?s point about Rage Against the Machine. They definitely delivered ?Che chic? to a whole generation of head-bangers and rap/rock thrashers.

Also, a great t-shirt biz idea (if it?s hasn?t already been done) would be to do a whole line of Che-stare icon shirts featuring today?s popular ?revolutionaries?. You could do Clinton, Gore, Nader, etc. for the lefty crew, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, etc for the righties, and a whole line of star-fucker icons like Affleck and J-Lo, Brittany, Ed Asner, Sarandon and Robbins, Pam Anderson, etc.

[Andrew]

Joe

The American Left lionizes Castro and his "embattled revolutionary state" in the same way they admire Che, about as much, and for broadly the same reasons.

Irving Howe, in his history of American communism, hypothesised that American Trotskyist sects (never anything but TRULY tiny) did serve as a "decompression chamber", permitting conscience-stricken party intellectuals to BEGIN criticising the Soviet tyranny without having to re-think all of their positions and habitual loyalties at once.

The difference is, that Trotskists openly denounced Stalin's Russia, and at least partly for reasons any humanist would give. Although we all know Che and Fidel were not getting along, they never repudiated one another.

Che idolatry began in the 60's (of course) and had a parallel in Maoism: no one contended China was a more open society than Russia-- or would have cared...the issue was big-dick revolutionary potency.

[Andrew L.W.]

Don't forget--Che was also a great singer:

"Oh what a circus, oh what a show..."

[hey]

south park t-shirts...

i have an "I killed Che" t-shirt where's he's bleeding from a hole in the forehead..

also bureaucrash...

be subversive of the "subversives"

[dlc]

Alma:

Yes. Without getting too deep into it (I don't have the time), a radical redistribution of private wealth and land will always require a great deal of force. It is instructive (as pointed out before), that no communist country has been free of repression and dictatorship. For example, building the trans-Siberian railroad was both an excersize in collectivist economics and brutal repression and forced labor. The invasion of Eastern European countries, an act of terrible brutality, was largely about economics and obtaining the natural resources Russia needed to keep their collectivized economy running.

And, yes, we are still fighting the Cold War because the ideas that led to Soviet atrocity still have not gone away.

-dlc-

[Andrew]

Jesse

You are right. They say the same thing about Cuba, too.

(AND they think Castro's version of Hillary-Care is the sine-qua-non of the Good Society...that and some literacy campaigns-- who needs cultural freedom or an industrial base, when you have a lot of primary schools and first-aid clinics?)

The irony is that if Castro dies tomorrow, and the Cuban people start lynching the DGI, according to Chomsky it will still somehow all be our fault...either because sugar companies didn't pay stoop-laborers the Global Minimim Wage in the 50's, OR because we eased trade restrictions sometimes (get it? WE "supported" Castro!)

Every revolutionary movement enjoys an orgiastic moment when the bonds of Family and Property seem irrelevant, when human difference and inequality cease to vex, when the very limits of physical nature appear surmountable...and mostly, really, it is merely the camaraderie of Brothers in Arms-- so what?

[fyodor]

My own experience amidst my friends the lefties is that most see Castro's Cuba as imperfect but not nearly so bad as we've been "brainwashed" to believe.

I'm not saying all leftists think that way, and I readily admit I haven't read up on what the left wing elite have to say. But I think this is a fair characterization of the leftist grass roots, as I've seen it.

[joe]

There are things to admire about Cuba. It is good that everyone can get medical care when they need it. It is good that all children receive decent educations. Now, that doesn't make the torture chambers, squelching of free speech, killings, etc etc etc excusable. But neither do the latter atrocities invalidate the former benefits.

I think it was a good idea for the Nazis to build a national roadway system. I'm glad we followed their lead. I think it was a good idea for the Nazis to invest in the development of the jet engine. Does that make me pro-genocide? Soft on Hitler?

[Andrew]

Joe

Perhaps we use words differently.

I actually think of Left as a quasi-insult, and would not carelessly apply it to mainstream Democrats (preferring Left-of-Center, Liberal...or obvious hyperboles like "statist" or "collectivist" which I assume would be taken as good-natured kidding).

Right is also a sort of insult...I would much druther go under the label "conservative" and often introduce myself as a Republican, which is both true and serves well enough.

Left and Right denotes a willingness to defend anti-human behavior...in the case of the Left, both historical examples (from Jacobinism to the police-state terror of Lenin and Trotsky) and contemporary tyrannies and terrorists (PLO, IRA...whatever).

There are high-profile examples (Nader, Chomsky, Helen Caldicott), if you want a media outlet you can always tune in Pacifica, who knows how many Hollywood dip-shits.

But the really dismaying thing, is how rooted this strain of thought is in the academy. David Horowitz has a legit point.

The Right has less to work with. The ancien regime is so remote from contemporary political discourse, that I fully expect some kind of Gilded Jeneusse thing to become the next fad for teen runaways. De Maistre, anyone?

(PS the Nation inhabits a borderland I call Leftish. A forum for some I consider odious. The Right labors under a more constant and unforgiving scrutiny...the National Review wouldn't dare take the chances the Nation does with comparably extreme POV's. Just as lucky for us, maybe...I despise Confederate apologists, eg.)

[thoreau]

I have yet to hear a single one of the Castro apologists explain why Cuba's chief export is people who know how to swim.

A couple years ago the mayor of Santa Barbara went to Cuba as part of a delegation of US politicians pushing for an end to the embargo. I was excited, because I whole-heartedly support ending that idiotic embargo. But I was disappointed when she wrote a column in the local paper saying that she was actually impressed by universal access to health care and education. She never did explain why people are swimming away form Utopia.

[joe]

OK, Andrew, I will agree that actual Communists along the lines of Lenin (the couple hundred that live in this country) actively support Castro*. But when someone asks, "Why does the left like Castro?" they're obviously using a definition that includes liberals and Naderites and social democrats. If they were only using your definition - people who support the types of policies enacted under Communists like Castro - then why would they bother asking the question?

*Actually, it's more likely that a third consider him a left deviationsist radical, and a third consider him a right deviationist sellout. 😉

[Chris Anderson]

Proof in my mind that The Picture of Che has become a fashion accessory without meaning is on the current season of Absolutely Fabulous, where Edina has redecorated her kitchen to include a huge Che picture. If Edina Monsoon is fetishizing Che Guevera, then you know it's all about fashion.

I think that series creator Jennifer Saunders is well aware of this, and Elizabeth Hurley plainly is not.

[Andrew]

Joe

I just told you...Nader IS a Castro apologist, and that goes for the whole Green Party milieu. These are people who obviously think it's so important to have a clinic where a village could share a bottle of aspirin, that it's worth it to have a dreaded secret police knocking on the door past midnight...and who assume a Castro-free Cuba would have to default to rural Haiti according to some Iron Law of History.

I spend nearly all my free time in coffee-shops where I play chess and read my poetry. I am not unfamiliar with the atmosphere-- you can drop the temperature 20 degrees, just by mentioning that Castro is a dictator in a passing way...it's not like the chicks dig it!

Try it tonight. See how long it takes to hear someone describe the 9/11 dead-enders as protesters all about Third World poverty...steer the conversation in the direction, and count the minutes.

And I am not talking about people who think of themselves as Wobblies or anarchists, or any of those Amish-like eccentricities.

I am talking about people who could simultaneously spend a summer "helping out" in the Occupied Territories, and campaigning for Dean in the fall. How many of them take a strident exception when Castro rounds up another batch of queers and people who think?

[alma hadayn]

"And, yes, we are still fighting the Cold War because the ideas that led to Soviet atrocity still have not gone away."

The Russian Revolution was not born solely of ideas- mass disillusionment with Czarist rule had something to do with it.

[dj of raleigh]

> He also has a pretty cool name.

[joe]

thank you, Dan. We were unaware thag Che Gueverra killed people before your post.

Just to make sure I'm taking it all in: he's BAD, right?

[joe]

Jesse, I suppose it would depend on the elements.

method, that idea is hardly unique to me. I wish I had come up something that insightful! I'm pretty sure it was central to Henry Morganthau's book. But that type of analysis got buried by the Holy Warriors in the 50s.

Andrew, the conversion thing explains why anything short of unadulterated scorn gets interpreted as being a Castro apologist. While we're on the subject, does ex-Trot libertoid = neocon? Anyway, I don't think "leaves the world below it unchanged" is accurate. All that banging of dolls heads takes its toll.

Cambodian culture is not dead.

[Dan]

thank you, Dan. We were unaware thag Che Gueverra killed people before your post.

I was shocked by your stunning revelation that leftists dismiss the crimes of communism as a misapplication of a valid theory -- I just had to respond with an equally surprising observation of my own. Yes, many left-wingers are delusional and many libertarians dislike tyranny; we're learning all sorts of new things today.

Just to make sure I'm taking it all in: he's BAD, right?

I think he was bad... or, as you might put it, I do not to a significant degree think that mass murder and totalitarianism are good. 🙂

[joe]

Dan, are you actually responding to something I wrote, or do you cut and paste from arguments you've had with other people?

[joe]

Slate explainer on Maosim today.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2095043/

[Chris]

Thats why libertarians get such a bad name. Some moron claiming to be a libertarian starts crying over a dead communist. We need to start weeding these people out and shipping them over to the Democratic Party where they can hang out with all of the other truely stupid and uninformed people.

[dhex]

crying over a communist is the least of their concerns.

there's a great many people who call themselves libertarian who admire the writings of ayn rand...as literature! AS LITERATURE?!?!?

sorry. where's my heart meds?

but yeah, che chic is stupid. and gross. and yucky. etc.

[Discuss]

1. Some libertarians see themselves as revolutionaries, hence they emulate Che.

2. Some libertarians are anti-state to the point of hatred, they identify the United States government as their enemy, so they find common cause with Che.

3. Some libertarains fetish anarchists, communists, etc., so pretending to like Che is their way of appealing to this crowd.

[Shannon Love]

How to be a Leftwing Icon

1) Be good looking

2) Learn the lingo: Blah blah Imperialism. Blah blah colonialism. Blah blah oppression. Blah blah The People!

3) Murder people who truly believed in your cause, comrades in arms that used to watch your back.

4) If you survive all the other wannabes doing the exact same things, live a lifestyle of opulence and decadence that would make the most hedonistic capitalist billionaire green with envy.

You'll be loved and adored by all.

[xray]

Chris: why go to the trouble of weeding 'em out and exiling them when we can simply round 'em up for firing-squad executions inside Havana's La Caba?a waterfront fortress?

[thoreau]

I'm amazed that this thread so quickly turned into a libertarian purity test thread.

Don't get me wrong, I disdain any idiot who would mourn Che Guevarra and yet call himself a libertarian. But, overall, that tiny contingent is not a significant concern.

On the more general point about non-purists calling themselves libertarians, I actually think it's a good thing if people who harbor some libertarian sympathies start using the word "libertarian" to describe themselves, even though they aren't purists. This isn't a "cool kids club" that should be exclusive. It's about getting more and more people to start pushing for the state to back off. Pounding our chests and screaming every time Bill Maher calls himself a libertarian won't make us any more popular. If we can accept blue-skinned druids, surely we can accept some people who aren't perfect.

[Douglas Fletcher]

I bet half of it is that he looks like a swashbuckling hero in that one photo of him they've made into so many posters & tee shirts. From the picture it's not hard to imagine him steering a Harley with his left hand and shooting a machine gun with his right.

Probably be different if he had looked like Brezhnev.

[Les]

Can anyone recommend a good, objective bio of Che? You know, one that can recognize his philosophical and intellectual talents without glossing over his gross brutality and simplistic world-view?

Is that true about him "demanding that the Soviets launch their island-based nukes at Washington, D.C., during the 1961 Cuban Missile Crisis"? Where can I get a source for that?

Thanks in advance!

[fyodor]

Thats why libertarians get such a bad name.

Nonsense, there's nuts in every political or social movement. If people see a nut as somehow typifying or representing libertarianism, then they were predisposed to make that assocation in the first place. And how do you weed out nutty libertarians? Heh-heh, y'know, that last sentence just made me laugh.... 🙂 Good or bad, maverick movements are always going to attract their share of nuts, it's the burden of independent thinking!

[Mo]

Douglas,
He also has a pretty cool name. Julio Guevara doesn't have the same ring to it as Che Guevara.

["Mao Now!"]

It's an adolescent thing. Most teenagers grow out of their mindless adoration of anarchists and Marxist revolutionaries. A few don't, and will never, ever get it.

[Dennis]

Mo:

His real name was Ernesto Guevara de la Serna, Che is a nickname.

[thoreau]

Joe-

You failed to express sufficient condemnation. You shall now be mercilessly lambasted on this forum. Failing that, a firing squad execution in Havana...

[Jake]

Ernesto?

Ernie!?!?!

Maybe we had Bert all wrong.

(which goes to show you just how seriously I take the whole thing)

[kevrob]

I'd say that the proper analogy is:

Fidel was to Che as
Hitler was to Otto Skorzeny.

Nasty bad men, all of them.

Kevin

[Colby Cosh]

If you think "Ernesto" would have been an uncool name for a leader in the struggle against Anglo-Saxon capitalist imperialism, how much less comfortably does "Lynch" fit? It's not widely realized that Che was a true son of Galway.

[joe]

To the list of things Andrew knows dick about, we can now add "Burma," which is run considerably worse than Cuba and indulges in much worse atrocities, and "North Vietnam," which has a miserable health care system, decades behind Cuba.

[Andrew]

Why is any of this important? Well fascism-- which once was a pernicious and destructive force in much of Latin America, too-- has been contained as much as it will ever be (skin-heads aside) by a lot of holocaust education.

The Burmese, I take it, aren't much into promoting their police state as a model for the third world...no "Two, three, many Myanmars!"

And even the Viet Workers Party seems more concerned about protecting their successor state from other communists.

But Che, Fidel, Raul and all those cuddly Cuban clinic-builders are inspirations for-- well, I know Joe isn't comfortable with "evil"...how 'bout "murderous folly", "atrocious vainglory"?

[crossbuck]

Remember when Homer, Mr. Burns and Smithers fled to Cuba with the trillion dollar bill and there was a giant Duff Beer billboard featuring Che and the slogan "El Duffo o Muerte"? That was funny...

[joe]

Scorn does indeed have its uses. I have no problem with heaping scorn on Fidel. But there are interesting and worthwhile things to say about failed systems and bad leaders other than "He was bad, n'kay?"

Just as not all criticims of American policies indicates a hatred of America and all it stands for, neither does the recognition of the positive achievements of bad governments indicate approval of those governments. Why does everything have to be simplistic with you?

[JD]

Regarding the "blame Russia" theory of why the Soviet Union, and by extension all of Soviet-supported Commie-dom was so unpleasant: you might want to read Richard Pipes' Property and Freedom. It includes a history of Russian private property and makes a case that Russian society has been unfriendly to private property for a long, long time. One of the most thought-provoking parts of the book for me was the story of how Moscow (private-property-unfriendly) conquered Kiev and Novgorod (rather more friendly), unifying Russia. Had Russia not been unified under Moscow,the history of Europe might have been very different.

[dhex]

joe: because thoughtfulness and dickwaving make poor partners.

[joe]

A thinking person draws more than one line, Andrew.

[Andrew]

Fair enough.

It isn't as if I thought you are a bad guy, and I don't always do the Outspoken Intolerance Of Evil thing myself.

I like to believe that when Castro gets his ultimate deserts in the not to distant future, the regime will devolve fairly effortlessly.

I lived in Miami for many years, and I know that "right-wing" exiles are comparatively rare, and most of the community is never going back anyway. Cubans at home and abroad actually have a fairly leftish taste in policy choices, and will doubtless retain all the services-- fueled by an economy that can actually pay for them.

I sorta expect a reaction to all the national trauma to produce a civil democracy, among the most secure in Latin America.

All fond hopes anyway.

[Andrew]

A few other things.

Cuba supplies one of the few examples of a tolerably healthy democracy being succeeded by various despotisms.

Most Cubans are at least partly descended from 19th century Italian immigrants...which may account for the Communitarian ethos.

Cuba and Mexico were nearly the only Latin societies to back the Spanish Republic. Cuba alone was welcoming to Jewish refugees, and Jews account for much of the leadership in Castro's movement AND his opponents. (Che was a typical Argentine anti-semite.)

30 t0 40% of Florida Cubans vote Democratic-- more in New Jersey I'm told. The GOP is pretty centrist.

The major exile groups were formed by disillusioned Castro compatriots. Nowadays they mostly sponser cultural freedom activities.

Still, exiles get a bad rap in the American mainstream...the UN pickets don't help, I'd guess.

[dj of raleigh]

I always figured when Castro died, and chaos ensued,
that Cuban exiles would be back in droves with money,
and do the 'this land is mine, Castro took this land from me,'
and take over and make fortunes from development,
and foreign assistance too, to ensure democracy.

[joe]

I'll support the repayment of assets taken from wealthy Cubans during the revolution when the US government starts tracking down the descendants of the Tories whose houses, farms, and businesses were expropriated by the Patriots.

[Slave mentality]

So Che was a "bad guy." Yeah he killed people, etc. But with Castro he gave people "free handouts" equally.

And you non-leftists don't get it. To get a hand-out from the "massa" in equal portions is the whole jist of our 300 years of philosophy. So gimme gimme gimme and I will be a good slave. And if you shoot homosexuals for being gay, it is still better than the imperialist, corporate right-wing USA because you are shooting them equally and at no-cost to the homosexual.

[Pulcifer Jeremy]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 210.18.158.254
URL: http://preteen-sex.info
DATE: 05/20/2004 06:45:20
Against boredom even the gods contend in vain.