Che Guevara,
from Communist Firebrand to Capitalist Brand
By Alvaro Vargas Llosa
Che Guevara, who did so much (or was
it so little?) to destroy capitalism, is now a quintessential capitalist brand.
His likeness adorns mugs, hoodies, lighters, key chains, wallets, baseball caps,
toques, bandannas, tank tops, club shirts, couture bags, denim jeans, herbal
tea, and of course those omnipresent T-shirts with the photograph, taken by
Alberto Korda, of the socialist heartthrob in his beret during the early years
of the revolution, as Che happened to walk into the photographer’s
viewfinder—and into the image that, thirty-eight years after his death, is
still the logo of revolutionary (or is it capitalist?) chic. Sean O’Hagan
claimed in The Observer that there is even a soap powder with the slogan “Che
washes whiter.”
Che products are marketed by big
corporations and small businesses, such as the Burlington Coat Factory, which
put out a television commercial depicting a youth in fatigue pants wearing a
Che T-shirt, or Flamingo’s Boutique in Union City, New Jersey, whose owner
responded to the fury of local Cuban exiles with this devastating argument: “I
sell whatever people want to buy.” Revolutionaries join the merchandising
frenzy, too—from “The Che Store,” catering to “all your revolutionary needs” on
the Internet, to the Italian writer Gianni Minà, who sold Robert Redford the
movie rights to Che’s diary of his juvenile trip around South America in 1952
in exchange for access to the shooting of the film The Motorcycle Diaries so that
Minà could produce his own documentary. Not to mention Alberto Granado, who
accompanied Che on his youthful trip and advises documentarists, and now
complains in Madrid, according to El País, over Rioja wine and duck magret,
that the American embargo against Cuba makes it hard for him to collect
royalties. To take the irony further: the building where Guevara was born in
Rosario, Argentina, a splendid early twentieth-century edifice at the corner of
Urquiza and Entre Ríos Streets, was until recently occupied by the private
pension fund AFJP Máxima, a child of Argentina’s privatization of social
security in the 1990s.
The metamorphosis of Che Guevara
into a capitalist brand is not new, but the brand has been enjoying a revival
of late—an especially remarkable revival, since it comes years after the
political and ideological collapse of all that Guevara represented. This
windfall is owed substantially to The Motorcycle Diaries, the film produced by
Robert Redford and directed by Walter Salles. (It is one of three major motion
pictures on Che either made or in the process of being made in the last two
years; the other two have been directed by Josh Evans and Steven Soderbergh.)
Beautifully shot against landscapes that have clearly eluded the eroding
effects of polluting capitalism, the film shows the young man on a voyage of
self-discovery as his budding social conscience encounters social and economic
exploitation—laying the ground for a New Wave re-invention of the man whom
Sartre once called the most complete human being of our era.
But to be more precise, the current
Che revival started in 1997, on the thirtieth anniversary of his death, when
five biographies hit the bookstores, and his remains were discovered near an
airstrip at Bolivia’s Vallegrande airport, after a retired Bolivian general, in
a spectacularly timed revelation, disclosed the exact location. The anniversary
refocused attention on Freddy Alborta’s famous photograph of Che’s corpse laid
out on a table, foreshortened and dead and romantic, looking like Christ in a
Mantegna painting.
It is customary for followers of a cult not to know the real life story of their hero, the historical truth. (Many Rastafarians would renounce Haile Selassie if they had any notion of who he really was.) It is not surprising that Guevara’s contemporary followers, his new post-communist admirers, also delude themselves by clinging to a myth—except the young Argentines who have come up with an expression that rhymes perfectly in Spanish: “Tengo una remera del Che y no sé por qué,” or “I have a Che T-shirt and I don’t know why.”
Consider some of the people who have
recently brandished or invoked Guevara’s likeness as a beacon of justice and
rebellion against the abuse of power. In Lebanon, demonstrators protesting
against Syria at the grave of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri carried Che’s
image. Thierry Henry, a French soccer player who plays for Arsenal, in England,
showed up at a major gala organized by FIFA, the world’s soccer body, wearing a
red and black Che T-shirt. In a recent review in The New York Times of George
A. Romero’s Land of the Dead, Manohla Dargis noted that “the greatest shock
here may be the transformation of a black zombie into a righteous revolutionary
leader,” and added, “I guess Che really does live, after all.” The soccer hero
Maradona showed off the emblematic Che tattoo on his right arm during a trip where
he met Hugo Chávez in Venezuela. In Stavropol, in southern Russia, protesters
denouncing cash payments of welfare concessions took to the central square with
Che flags. In San Francisco, City Lights Books, the legendary home of beat
literature, treats visitors to a section devoted to Latin America in which half
the shelves are taken up by Che books. José Luis Montoya, a Mexican police
officer who battles drug crime in Mexicali, wears a Che sweatband because it
makes him feel stronger. At the Dheisheh refugee camp on the West Bank, Che
posters adorn a wall that pays tribute to the Intifada. A Sunday magazine
devoted to social life in Sydney, Australia, lists the three dream guests at a
dinner party: Alvar Aalto, Richard Branson, and Che Guevara. Leung Kwok-hung,
the rebel elected to Hong Kong’s Legislative Council, defies Beijing by wearing
a Che T-shirt. In Brazil, Frei Betto, President Lula da Silva’s adviser in
charge of the high-profile “Zero Hunger” program, says that “we should have
paid less attention to Trotsky and much more to Che Guevara.” And most
famously, at this year’s Academy Awards ceremony Carlos Santana and Antonio
Banderas performed the theme song from The Motorcycle Diaries, and Santana
showed up wearing a Che T-shirt and a crucifix. The manifestations of the new
cult of Che are everywhere. Once again the myth is firing up people whose
causes for the most part represent the exact opposite of what Guevara was.
No man is without some redeeming
qualities. In the case of Che Guevara, those qualities may help us to measure
the gulf that separates reality from myth. His honesty (well, partial honesty)
meant that he left written testimony of his cruelties, including the really
ugly, though not the ugliest, stuff. His courage—what Castro described as “his
way, in every difficult and dangerous moment, of doing the most difficult and
dangerous thing”—meant that he did not live to take full responsibility for
Cuba’s hell. Myth can tell you as much about an era as truth. And so it is that
thanks to Che’s own testimonials to his thoughts and his deeds, and thanks also
to his premature departure, we may know exactly how deluded so many of our
contemporaries are about so much.
Guevara might have been enamored of
his own death, but he was much more enamored of other people’s deaths. In April
1967, speaking from experience, he summed up his homicidal idea of justice in
his “Message to the Tricontinental”: “hatred as an element of struggle;
unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural
limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded
killing machine.” His earlier writings are also peppered with this rhetorical
and ideological violence. Although his former girlfriend Chichina Ferreyra
doubts that the original version of the diaries of his motorcycle trip contains
the observation that “I feel my nostrils dilate savoring the acrid smell of
gunpowder and blood of the enemy,” Guevara did share with Granado at that very
young age this exclamation: “Revolution without firing a shot? You’re crazy.”
At other times the young bohemian seemed unable to distinguish between the
levity of death as a spectacle and the tragedy of a revolution’s victims. In a
letter to his mother in 1954, written in Guatemala, where he witnessed the
overthrow of the revolutionary government of Jacobo Arbenz, he wrote: “It was
all a lot of fun, what with the bombs, speeches, and other distractions to
break the monotony I was living in.”
Guevara’s disposition when he
traveled with Castro from Mexico to Cuba aboard the Granma is captured in a
phrase in a letter to his wife that he penned on January 28, 1957, not long
after disembarking, which was published in her book Ernesto: A Memoir of Che
Guevara in Sierra Maestra: “Here in the Cuban jungle, alive and bloodthirsty.”
This mentality had been reinforced by his conviction that Arbenz had lost power
because he had failed to execute his potential enemies. An earlier letter to
his former girlfriend Tita Infante had observed that “if there had been some
executions, the government would have maintained the capacity to return the
blows.” It is hardly a surprise that during the armed struggle against Batista,
and then after the triumphant entry into Havana, Guevara murdered or oversaw
the executions in summary trials of scores of people—proven enemies, suspected
enemies, and those who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
In January 1957, as his diary from
the Sierra Maestra indicates, Guevara shot Eutimio Guerra because he suspected
him of passing on information: “I ended the problem with a .32 caliber pistol,
in the right side of his brain.... His belongings were now mine.” Later he shot
Aristidio, a peasant who expressed the desire to leave whenever the rebels
moved on. While he wondered whether this particular victim “was really guilty
enough to deserve death,” he had no qualms about ordering the death of
Echevarría, a brother of one of his comrades, because of unspecified crimes:
“He had to pay the price.” At other times he would simulate executions without
carrying them out, as a method of psychological torture.
Luis Guardia and Pedro Corzo, two
researchers in Florida who are working on a documentary about Guevara, have
obtained the testimony of Jaime Costa Vázquez, a former commander in the
revolutionary army known as “El Catalán,” who maintains that many of the
executions attributed to Ramiro Valdés, a future interior minister of Cuba,
were Guevara’s direct responsibility, because Valdés was under his orders in
the mountains. “If in doubt, kill him” were Che’s instructions. On the eve of
victory, according to Costa, Che ordered the execution of a couple dozen people
in Santa Clara, in central Cuba, where his column had gone as part of a final
assault on the island. Some of them were shot in a hotel, as Marcelo
Fernándes-Zayas, another former revolutionary who later became a journalist,
has written—adding that among those executed, known as casquitos, were peasants
who had joined the army simply to escape unemployment.
But the “cold-blooded killing
machine” did not show the full extent of his rigor until, immediately after the
collapse of the Batista regime, Castro put him in charge of La Cabaña prison.
(Castro had a clinically good eye for picking the right person to guard the
revolution against infection.) San Carlos de La Cabaña was a stone fortress
used to defend Havana against English pirates in the eighteenth century; later
it became a military barracks. In a manner chillingly reminiscent of Lavrenti
Beria, Guevara presided during the first half of 1959 over one of the darkest
periods of the revolution. José Vilasuso, a lawyer and a professor at
Universidad Interamericana de Bayamón in Puerto Rico, who belonged to the body
in charge of the summary judicial process at La Cabaña, told me recently that
Che was in charge of the Comisión
Depuradora. The process followed the law of the Sierra: there was a military
court and Che’s guidelines to us were that we should act with conviction,
meaning that they were all murderers and the revolutionary way to proceed was
to be implacable. My direct superior was Miguel Duque Estrada. My duty was to
legalize the files before they were sent on to the Ministry. Executions took
place from Monday to Friday, in the middle of the night, just after the
sentence was given and automatically confirmed by the appellate body. On the
most gruesome night I remember, seven men were executed.
Javier Arzuaga, the Basque chaplain
who gave comfort to those sentenced to die and personally witnessed dozens of executions,
spoke to me recently from his home in Puerto Rico. A former Catholic priest,
now seventy-five, who describes himself as “closer to Leonardo Boff and
Liberation Theology than to the former Cardinal Ratzinger,” he recalls that
there were about eight hundred
prisoners in a space fit for no more than three hundred: former Batista
military and police personnel, some journalists, a few businessmen and
merchants. The revolutionary tribunal was made of militiamen. Che Guevara
presided over the appellate court. He never overturned a sentence. I would
visit those on death row at the galera de la muerte. A rumor went around that I
hypnotized prisoners because many remained calm, so Che ordered that I be
present at the executions. After I left in May, they executed many more, but I
personally witnessed fifty-five executions. There was an American, Herman
Marks, apparently a former convict. We called him “the butcher” because he
enjoyed giving the order to shoot. I pleaded many times with Che on behalf of prisoners.
I remember especially the case of Ariel Lima, a young boy. Che did not budge.
Nor did Fidel, whom I visited. I became so traumatized that at the end of May
1959 I was ordered to leave the parish of Casa Blanca, where La Cabaña was
located and where I had held Mass for three years. I went to Mexico for
treatment. The day I left, Che told me we had both tried to bring one another
to each other’s side and had failed. His last words were: “When we take our
masks off, we will be enemies.”
How many people were killed at La
Cabaña? Pedro Corzo offers a figure of some two hundred, similar to that given
by Armando Lago, a retired economics professor who has compiled a list of 179
names as part of an eight-year study on executions in Cuba. Vilasuso told me
that four hundred people were executed between January and the end of June in
1959 (at which point Che ceased to be in charge of La Cabaña). Secret cables
sent by the American Embassy in Havana to the State Department in Washington
spoke of “over 500.” According to Jorge Castañeda, one of Guevara’s
biographers, a Basque Catholic sympathetic to the revolution, the late Father
Iñaki de Aspiazú, spoke of seven hundred victims. Félix Rodríguez, a CIA agent
who was part of the team in charge of the hunt for Guevara in Bolivia, told me
that he confronted Che after his capture about “the two thousand or so”
executions for which he was responsible during his lifetime. “He said they were
all CIA agents and did not address the figure,” Rodríguez recalls. The higher
figures may include executions that took place in the months after Che ceased
to be in charge of the prison.
Which brings us back to Carlos
Santana and his chic Che gear. In an open letter published in El Nuevo Herald
on March 31 of this year, the great jazz musician Paquito D’Rivera castigated
Santana for his costume at the Oscars, and added: “One of those Cubans [at La
Cabaña] was my cousin Bebo, who was imprisoned there precisely for being a
Christian. He recounts to me with infinite bitterness how he could hear from
his cell in the early hours of dawn the executions, without trial or process of
law, of the many who died shouting, ‘Long live Christ the King!’”
Che’s lust for power had other ways
of expressing itself besides murder. The contradiction between his passion for
travel—a protest of sorts against the constraints of the nation-State—and his
impulse to become himself an enslaving state over others is poignant. In
writing about Pedro Valdivia, the conquistador of Chile, Guevara reflected: “He
belonged to that special class of men the species produces every so often, in
whom a craving for limitless power is so extreme that any suffering to achieve
it seems natural.” He might have been describing himself. At every stage of his
adult life, his megalomania manifested itself in the predatory urge to take
over other people’s lives and property, and to abolish their free will.
In 1958, after taking the city of
Sancti Spiritus, Guevara unsuccessfully tried to impose a kind of sharia,
regulating relations between men and women, the use of alcohol, and informal
gambling—a puritanism that did not exactly characterize his own way of life. He
also ordered his men to rob banks, a decision that he justified in a letter to
Enrique Oltuski, a subordinate, in November of that year: “The struggling
masses agree to robbing banks because none of them has a penny in them.” This
idea of revolution as a license to re-allocate property as he saw fit led the
Marxist Puritan to take over the mansion of an emigrant after the triumph of
the revolution.
The urge to dispossess others of
their property and to claim ownership of others’ territory was central to
Guevara’s politics of raw power. In his memoirs, the Egyptian leader Gamal
Abdel Nasser records that Guevara asked him how many people had left his
country because of land reform. When Nasser replied that no one had left, Che
countered in anger that the way to measure the depth of change is by the number
of people “who feel there is no place for them in the new society.” This
predatory instinct reached a pinnacle in 1965, when he started talking,
God-like, about the “New Man” that he and his revolution would create.
Che’s obsession with collectivist
control led him to collaborate on the formation of the security apparatus that
was set up to subjugate six and a half million Cubans. In early 1959, a series
of secret meetings took place in Tarará, near Havana, at the mansion to which
Che temporarily withdrew to recover from an illness. That is where the top
leaders, including Castro, designed the Cuban police state. Ramiro Valdés,
Che’s subordinate during the guerrilla war, was put in charge of G-2, a body
modeled on the Cheka. Angel Ciutah, a veteran of the Spanish Civil War sent by
the Soviets who had been very close to Ramón Mercader, Trotsky’s assassin, and
later befriended Che, played a key role in organizing the system, together with
Luis Alberto Lavandeira, who had served the boss at La Cabaña. Guevara himself
took charge of G-6, the body tasked with the ideological indoctrination of the
armed forces. The U.S.-backed Bay of Pigs invasion in April 1961 became the
perfect occasion to consolidate the new police state, with the rounding up of
tens of thousands of Cubans and a new series of executions. As Guevara himself
told the Soviet ambassador Sergei Kudriavtsev, counterrevolutionaries were
never “to raise their head again.”
“Counterrevolutionary” is the term
that was applied to anyone who departed from dogma. It was the communist
synonym for “heretic.” Concentration camps were one form in which dogmatic
power was employed to suppress dissent. History attributes to the Spanish
general Valeriano Weyler, the captain-general of Cuba at the end of the
nineteenth century, the first use of the word “concentration” to describe the
policy of surrounding masses of potential opponents—in his case, supporters of
the Cuban independence movement—with barbed wire and fences. How fitting that
Cuba’s revolutionaries more than half a century later were to take up this
indigenous tradition. In the beginning, the revolution mobilized volunteers to
build schools and to work in ports, plantations, and factories—all exquisite
photo-ops for Che the stevedore, Che the cane-cutter, Che the clothmaker. It
was not long before volunteer work became a little less voluntary: the first
forced labor camp, Guanahacabibes, was set up in western Cuba at the end of
1960. This is how Che explained the function performed by this method of
confinement: “[We] only send to Guanahacabibes those doubtful cases where we
are not sure people should go to jail ... people who have committed crimes
against revolutionary morals, to a lesser or greater degree.... It is hard
labor, not brute labor, rather the working conditions there are hard.”
This camp was the precursor to the
eventual systematic confinement, starting in 1965 in the province of Camagüey,
of dissidents, homosexuals, AIDS victims, Catholics, Jehovah’s Witnesses,
Afro-Cuban priests, and other such scum, under the banner of Unidades Militares
de Ayuda a la Producción, or Military Units to Help Production. Herded into
buses and trucks, the “unfit” would be transported at gunpoint into
concentration camps organized on the Guanahacabibes mold. Some would never
return; others would be raped, beaten, or mutilated; and most would be
traumatized for life, as Néstor Almendros’s wrenching documentary Improper
Conduct showed the world a couple of decades ago.
So Time magazine may have been less
than accurate in August 1960 when it described the revolution’s division of
labor with a cover story featuring Che Guevara as the “brain” and Fidel Castro
as the “heart” and Raúl Castro as the “fist.” But the perception reflected
Guevara’s crucial role in turning Cuba into a bastion of totalitarianism. Che
was a somewhat unlikely candidate for ideological purity, given his bohemian
spirit, but during the years of training in Mexico and in the ensuing period of
armed struggle in Cuba he emerged as the communist ideologue infatuated with
the Soviet Union, much to the discomfort of Castro and others who were
essentially opportunists using whatever means were necessary to gain power.
When the would-be revolutionaries were arrested in Mexico in 1956, Guevara was
the only one who admitted that he was a communist and was studying Russian. (He
spoke openly about his relationship with Nikolai Leonov from the Soviet
Embassy.) During the armed struggle in Cuba, he forged a strong alliance with
the Popular Socialist Party (the island’s Communist Party) and with Carlos
Rafael Rodríguez, a key player in the conversion of Castro’s regime to
communism.
This fanatical disposition made Che
into a linchpin of the “Sovietization” of the revolution that had repeatedly
boasted about its independent character. Very soon after the barbudos came to
power, Guevara took part in negotiations with Anastas Mikoyan, the Soviet
deputy prime minister, who visited Cuba. He was entrusted with the mission of
furthering Soviet-Cuban negotiations during a visit to Moscow in late 1960. (It
was part of a long trip in which Kim Il Sung’s North Korea was the country that
impressed him “the most.”) Guevara’s second trip to Russia, in August 1962, was
even more significant, because it sealed the deal to turn Cuba into a Soviet
nuclear beachhead. He met Khrushchev in Yalta to finalize details on an
operation that had already begun and involved the introduction of forty-two
Soviet missiles, half of which were armed with nuclear warheads, as well as
launchers and some forty-two thousand soldiers. After pressing his Soviet allies
on the danger that the United States might find out what was happening, Guevara
obtained assurances that the Soviet navy would intervene—in other words, that
Moscow was ready to go to war.
According to Philippe Gavi’s
biography of Guevara, the revolutionary had bragged that “this country is
willing to risk everything in an atomic war of unimaginable destructiveness to
defend a principle.” Just after the Cuban missile crisis ended—with Khrushchev
reneging on the promise made in Yalta and negotiating a deal with the United
States behind Castro’s back that included the removal of American missiles from
Turkey—Guevara told a British communist daily: “If the rockets had remained, we
would have used them all and directed them against the very heart of the United
States, including New York, in our defense against aggression.” And a couple of
years later, at the United Nations, he was true to form: “As Marxists we have
maintained that peaceful coexistence among nations does not include coexistence
between exploiters and the exploited.”
Guevara distanced himself from the
Soviet Union in the last years of his life. He did so for the wrong reasons,
blaming Moscow for being too soft ideologically and diplomatically, for making
too many concessions—unlike Maoist China, which he came to see as a haven of
orthodoxy. In October 1964, a memo written by Oleg Daroussenkov, a Soviet
official close to him, quotes Guevara as saying: “We asked the Czechoslovaks
for arms; they turned us down. Then we asked the Chinese; they said yes in a
few days, and did not even charge us, stating that one does not sell arms to a
friend.” In fact, Guevara resented the fact that Moscow was asking other
members of the communist bloc, including Cuba, for something in return for its
colossal aid and political support. His final attack on Moscow came in Algiers,
in February 1965, at an international conference, where he accused the Soviets
of adopting the “law of value,” that is, capitalism. His break with the
Soviets, in sum, was not a cry for independence. It was an Enver Hoxha–like
howl for the total subordination of reality to blind ideological orthodoxy.
The great revolutionary had a chance
to put into practice his economic vision—his idea of social justice—as head of
the National Bank of Cuba and of the Department of Industry of the National
Institute of Agrarian Reform at the end of 1959, and, starting in early 1961,
as minister of industry. The period in which Guevara was in charge of most of
the Cuban economy saw the near-collapse of sugar production, the failure of
industrialization, and the introduction of rationing—all this in what had been
one of Latin America’s four most economically successful countries since before
the Batista dictatorship.
His stint as head of the National
Bank, during which he printed bills signed “Che,” has been summarized by his
deputy, Ernesto Betancourt: “[He] was ignorant of the most elementary economic
principles.” Guevara’s powers of perception regarding the world economy were
famously expressed in 1961, at a hemispheric conference in Uruguay, where he
predicted a 10 percent rate of growth for Cuba “without the slightest fear,”
and, by 1980, a per capita income greater than that of “the U.S. today.” In
fact, by 1997, the thirtieth anniversary of his death, Cubans were dieting on a
ration of five pounds of rice and one pound of beans per month; four ounces of
meat twice a year; four ounces of soybean paste per week; and four eggs per
month.
Land reform took land away from the
rich, but gave it to the bureaucrats, not to the peasants. (The decree was
written in Che’s house.) In the name of diversification, the cultivated area
was reduced and manpower distracted toward other activities. The result was
that between 1961 and 1963, the harvest was down by half, to a mere 3.8 million
metric tons. Was this sacrifice justified by progress in Cuban
industrialization? Unfortunately, Cuba had no raw materials for heavy industry,
and, as a consequence of the revolutionary redistribution, it had no hard
currency with which to buy them—or even basic goods. By 1961, Guevara was
having to give embarrassing explanations to the workers at the office: “Our
technical comrades at the companies have made a toothpaste ... which is as good
as the previous one; it cleans just the same, though after a while it turns to
stone.” By 1963, all hopes of industrializing Cuba were abandoned, and the
revolution accepted its role as a colonial provider of sugar to the Soviet bloc
in exchange for oil to cover its needs and to re-sell to other countries. For
the next three decades, Cuba would survive on a Soviet subsidy of somewhere
between $65 billion and $100 billion.
Having failed as a hero of social
justice, does Guevara deserve a place in the history books as a genius of
guerrilla warfare? His greatest military achievement in the fight against
Batista—taking the city of Santa Clara after ambushing a train with heavy
reinforcements—is seriously disputed. Numerous testimonies indicate that the
commander of the train surrendered in advance, perhaps after taking bribes.
(Gutiérrez Menoyo, who led a different guerrilla group in that area, is among
those who have decried Cuba’s official account of Guevara’s victory.)
Immediately after the triumph of the revolution, Guevara organized guerrilla
armies in Nicaragua, the Dominican Republic, Panama, and Haiti—all of which
were crushed. In 1964, he sent the Argentine revolutionary Jorge Ricardo
Masetti to his death by persuading him to mount an attack on his native country
from Bolivia, just after representative democracy had been restored to
Argentina.
Particularly disastrous was the
Congo expedition in 1965. Guevara sided with two rebels—Pierre Mulele in the
west and Laurent Kabila in the east—against the ugly Congolese government,
which was sustained by the United States as well as by South African and exiled
Cuban mercenaries. Mulele had taken over Stanleyville earlier before being
driven back. During his reign of terror, as V.S. Naipaul has written, he
murdered all the people who could read and all those who wore a tie. As for
Guevara’s other ally, Laurent Kabila, he was merely lazy and corrupt at the
time; but the world would find out in the 1990s that he, too, was a killing
machine. In any event, Guevara spent most of 1965 helping the rebels in the
east before fleeing the country ignominiously. Soon afterward, Mobutu came to
power and installed a decades-long tyranny. (In Latin American countries too,
from Argentina to Peru, Che-inspired revolutions had the practical result of
reinforcing brutal militarism for many years.)
In Bolivia, Che was defeated again,
and for the last time. He misread the local situation. There had been an
agrarian reform years before; the government had respected many of the peasant
communities’ institutions; and the army was close to the United States despite
its nationalism. “The peasant masses don’t help us at all” was Guevara’s
melancholy conclusion in his Bolivian diary. Even worse, Mario Monje, the local
communist leader, who had no stomach for guerrilla warfare after having been
humiliated at the elections, led Guevara to a vulnerable location in the
southeast of the country. The circumstances of Che’s capture at Yuro ravine,
soon after meeting the French intellectual Régis Debray and the Argentine
painter Ciro Bustos, both of whom were arrested as they left the camp, was,
like most of the Bolivian expedition, an amateur’s affair.
Guevara was certainly bold and
courageous, and quick at organizing life on a military basis in the territories
under his control, but he was no General Giap. His book Guerrilla Warfare
teaches that popular forces can beat an army, that it is not necessary to wait
for the right conditions because an insurrectional foco (or small group of
revolutionaries) can bring them about, and that the fight must primarily take
place in the countryside. (In his prescription for guerrilla warfare, he also
reserves for women the roles of cooks and nurses.) However, Batista’s army was
not an army, but a corrupt bunch of thugs with no motivation and not much
organization; and guerrilla focos, with the exception of Nicaragua, all ended
up in ashes for the foquistas; and Latin America has turned 70 percent urban in
these last four decades. In this regard, too, Che Guevara was a callous fool.
In the last few decades of the
nineteenth century, Argentina had the second-highest growth rate in the world.
By the 1890s, the real income of Argentine workers was greater than that of
Swiss, German, and French workers. By 1928, that country had the
twelfth-highest per capita GDP in the world. That achievement, which later
generations would ruin, was in large measure due to Juan Bautista Alberdi.
Like Guevara, Alberdi liked to
travel: he walked through the pampas and deserts from north to south at the age
of fourteen, all the way to Buenos Aires. Like Guevara, Alberdi opposed a
tyrant, Juan Manuel Rosas. Like Guevara, Alberdi got a chance to influence a
revolutionary leader in power—Justo José de Urquiza, who toppled Rosas in 1852.
And like Guevara, Alberdi represented the new government on world tours, and
died abroad. But unlike the old and new darling of the left, Alberdi never
killed a fly. His book, Bases y puntos de partida para la organización de la
República Argentina, was the foundation of the Constitution of 1853 that
limited government, opened trade, encouraged immigration, and secured property
rights, thereby inaugurating a seventy-year period of astonishing prosperity.
He did not meddle in the affairs of other nations, opposing his country’s war
against Paraguay. His likeness does not adorn Mike Tyson’s abdomen.
No comments:
Post a Comment