Un/healthy Role Models

[removeduser_426582376423734]

or



Both are fine, when you look at them. But what of their actions, their lives, their influence...?

Che Guevara's disputable legacy

It's difficult to wander throug towns in Britain ad not notice T-shirts, lighters, keyrings, all adorned with his countenance. The commervialisation of Ernesto 'Che' Guevara is rife in the West.

Naturally, you can be that half the people proudly sporting garments emblazoned with his face wouldn't have the faintest idea of any of his political beliefs, or his suffering. Moreover, they would have no idea of the crimes he committed in order to impose his socialism on Cuba, and here is the problem.

Current stats claim that between 1957-59 there wer 180 deaths for which he was responsible for. In the first three years of Fidel Castro's reign of 'terror', Che killed seven thousand prisoners, or something around that number, giving few of them fair trials.

Compare this to Mohandas Karamchnd Ghandi, who fought for and obtained India's freedom from an opressive rule through entirely non-violent means. Gandhi is revered by many as on of the great Indian leaders of all time. His beliefs in non-violence and truth influence many of the iconic campaigners for peace and equality, such as Martin Luther King.

Gandhi was not a man of stature or handsome features. Not was he an academically distinguished fellow. However, he led 300 million people to rebel, always in the front, and dismantled the jewel of the British empire. Gandhi's method of protest did not require men to take up arms or to imprison thousands. Instead, it gave voice and strength to the downtrodden society.

Why then, is it that Gandhi is almost overlooked by our generation while a murderer is held in almost a god-like esteem. The answer seems simple enough: Gandhi was thin, bald, and wore glasses, which is somewhat pallid in the shadow of Che Guevara's strong profile. star emblazoned beret and facial hair.

Compare these quotes :-

Crazy with fury I will stain my rifle red while slaughtering any enemy that falls in my hands! My nostrils dilate while savoring the acrid odor of gunpowder and blood. With the deaths of my enemies I prepare my being for the sacred fight and join the triumphant proletariat with a bestial howl!

It is easy enough to be friendly to one's friends. But to befriend the one who regards himself as your enemy is the quintessence of true religion

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.

I have learned through bitter experience the one supreme lesson to conserve my anger, and as heat conserved is transmitted into energy, even so our anger controlled can be transmitted into a power that can move the world.

To me, it could not be clerer whose adages would be more profitable when folled as universal law. The anger and hatred evident in Che's statements is the same as that which resulted in the 9/11 or 7/7 bombings, whereas Gandhi's pacifism is something that could be observed by everyone. However, the comparison that ultimately decides which of these two figureheads deserves the worship of today's youth seems to be, sadly, whicher one's face looks best on the front of a T-shirt.

[imb39]

Ganhi is THE man of the 20th Century. This is from an Englishman who admires Churchill. Both were great but Gandhi wins imo.

Che Guevara is a bit too blood thirsty for me. The message is so passé...

Sorry this is such a poor response to a well written starter...

[removeduser_426582376423734]

Don't worry, that's exactly what I was looking for. An Englishman who is impartial to Indians, and even admires Gandhi for the explusion of the Brits in the Second World War. No doubt there are some who thinks you are un-British.

[Honeohvovohaestse]

What about Ghandi's view of other things? That it'd be best if Jews went willingly to their deaths at the Nazis hands? Surely this isn't so great. I personally find his actions in India to be respectable, but his views aboard were lacking.

"I want you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions. Let them take possession of your beautiful island with your many beautiful buildings..."

He was nominated for the peace prize several times, and never once got it.

"There are many causes that I am prepared to die for but no causes that I am prepared to kill for".

His own life is his to forfite, but asking another to do so for his cause seems a bit out there in my opinion.

[bdh]

What about Ghandi's view of other things? That it'd be best if Jews went willingly to their deaths at the Nazis hands? Surely this isn't so great. I personally find his actions in India to be respectable, but his views aboard were lacking.

"I want you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions. Let them take possession of your beautiful island with your many beautiful buildings..."

He was nominated for the peace prize several times, and never once got it.

"There are many causes that I am prepared to die for but no causes that I am prepared to kill for".

His own life is his to forfite, but asking another to do so for his cause seems a bit out there in my opinion.

Perhaps you judge too quickly. What would have happened if the peoples of Europe peacefully and unbendingly resisted Nazism? It may very well have defused the will of the German army. The Nazis were evil, but do you think that the thousands of common Nazi soldiers would systematically exterminate entire populations of peaceful but uncompliant resistors? Would they gun down a hundred thousand man march on Berlin?
Dictators rule through fear, and, if the people are not afraid, they cannot be ruled. The nazi army wouldn't exterminate determined and peaceful protesters.
Look at the Holocaust. Could Hitler have killed 6 million people if A) They weren't a minority and B) They weren't shipped away from the general populace. C) if they weren't Afraid ?
What if the Jews had organized and refused to be taken to the Ghettos? Could Hiter's popularity survive public massacres of peaceful protesters.

Gandhi didnt' say "roll over and die" he said don't be afraid, don't let yourself be ruled. Perhaps it could have worked. Hitler would have fallen out of the power the same way he came in: popular opinion. And, given the scope of the war, it could feasibly have occured with less casualties, though it is impossible to know. It really all depends on how deep human kindness runs.
Even so, I think I am content with the passage of historical events as is.

[imb39]

Clearly Gandhi's ideas cannot be used all of the time but he was the first to secure independence using the idea of nonviolence. Che Guevara did nothing new. He was the latest in a long list of revolutionaries. If someone want to worship one, why not Simon Bolivar? - he secured a continent!

[Hodor]

Heh, I wonder how many people worship Jesus for his teachings of "turning the other cheek", while calling Ghandi and others who follow those principles a "bleeding heart".

Seriously though, Ghandi's pacifism may go a bit far, but you've go to hand it to him that he was pretty successful at it, and he is, IMO, clearly a better rolemodel than the other guy who looks like the bad guy from "Escape from L.A.".

[Fenris]

It always depend on how you look at them. If you look at Ché and take weapons to get a communist party in Canada, for example, it's not really a good thing. But if you consider what he has done, he was a highly educated man, a physician, and decided to go fight for the people, well he WAS a good man, there's no doubt about this. Wether you agree or not with his views, you cannot argue. However, he is probably the most overrated hero :laughing: it's really only because he fits the picture we have of the romantic hero.

As for Gandhi, I have a LOT of respect for this man, he deserves everyone's respect, without a doubt. Anyone who doesn't know Gandhi miss something, really.

[RZZZA]

Che was a terrorist, I've always thought so...and the people who wear his image on their T-shirts are brainwashed idiots...theyre not making a political statement, most of them are just morons who dont even know who Che was. I don't know why Maddox took Che's image as his own, maybe he did it ironically or something, but I was always confused by that as Maddox doesnt fit under the average "clueless about politics :wub:" category.

I got nothing against Ghandi though...maybe you could have put Mother Theresa there instead of Ghandi, she had a checkered past, even more so than Ghandi did.

[Fenris]

Che was a terrorist, I've always thought so...and the people who wear his image on their T-shirts are brainwashed idiots...theyre not making a political statement, most of them are just morons who dont even know who Che was. I don't know why Maddox took Che's image as his own, maybe he did it ironically or something, but I was always confused by that as Maddox doesnt fit under the average "clueless about politics :wub:" category.

I got nothing against Ghandi though...maybe you could have put Mother Theresa there instead of Ghandi, she had a checkered past, even more so than Ghandi did.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a terrorist.

It depends why you do it, and how you do it.

But yeah, many people who wear Ché t-shirt have no clue about who he was.

[the_mango55]

I think Maddox did that as a parody, since Che's image is one of the best known images in the world, it was simply a bt of humor and arrogance on Maddox's part.

[Mathias]

I agree that people shouldnt use Che as a rolemodel instead of Ghandi.
I have much respect for ghandi, but hes pacifism was a bit too much.
Remember the old paradox "let him who desires peace prepare for war" which Vegetius said, while this is not always true, it certainly is true when dealing with people like Hitler and many others

[Honeohvovohaestse]

"The Nazis were evil, but do you think that the thousands of common Nazi soldiers would systematically exterminate entire populations of peaceful but uncompliant resistors? "

I absolutely do, see Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Colonial America, The Modoc wars, and the Spainish Reconquista, The Navajo long walk, The Ukrianian/polish cleansing.

[mongoose]

Also, I don't think they would exterminate Europe; I think they would enlsave it, which I doubt any of them would have had a moral qualm about...

[bdh]

"The Nazis were evil, but do you think that the thousands of common Nazi soldiers would systematically exterminate entire populations of peaceful but uncompliant resistors? "

I absolutely do, see Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Colonial America, The Modoc wars, and the Spainish Reconquista, The Navajo long walk, The Ukrianian/polish cleansing.

One key overall difference: ethnic cleansing. The Nazis didn't consider the bulk of those they conquered (except in Russia) human. In the situations you proposed, the participants denied the very humanity of those they are killing. In which case, I doubt Gandhi would even support peaceful resistance. He did support Britain in WWI you know, though he was younger at the time.
For the nazis though, they were wrapped up in their own crazy ideals of unifying the "Germanic peoples."

Also, I don't think they would exterminate Europe; I think they would enlsave it, which I doubt any of them would have had a moral qualm about...

Slavery always involves some level of compliance from the enslaved, I.E. you do what I say and you live. If they did what Gandhi wanted, they couldn't enslave Europe without killing everyone, which seems very unlikely.

[Osceola]

Che was a warrior though, and so I prefer Che.

If you want bad role models try comparing a more well known one. Tupac Shakur vs. Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson.

Both are equally popular but ones actually deserving of the recgonition and respect they've been given.

Personally though, I'd really like to see shirts and commercialism of Genghis Khan.

[the_mango55]

Che was a warrior though, and so I prefer Che.

If you want bad role models try comparing a more well known one. Tupac Shakur vs. Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson.

Both are equally popular but ones actually deserving of the recgonition and respect they've been given.

One is dead, the other shot 100x yet still lives (unluckliy for us). Both with connections to crime, who glorify the crime that they had every reason to leave behind. They were millionaires already, what reason do they have to carry guns around and have people assassinated?

Neither is a good role model, talent does not make someone a better person

Personally though, I'd really like to see shirts and commercialism of Genghis Khan.

Ghengis Khan was one of the worst people in history. We might as well make Hitler shirts.

[Osceola]

One is dead, the other shot 100x yet still lives (unluckliy for us). Both with connections to crime, who glorify the crime that they had every reason to leave behind. They were millionaires already, what reason do they have to carry guns around and have people assassinated?

Neither is a good role model, talent does not make someone a better person



Ghengis Khan was one of the worst people in history. We might as well make Hitler shirts.

First of all your obviously ignorant. Pac did pretty much leave the crime, he didnt carry around a gun, he just had bodygaurds. His label and manager were the thugs. Thats what got him into trouble and thats probably who got him killed.

Pac was a revolutionary, a philosopher, a poet and moreover he actually cared about his people. Hell he was the one guy who got the Bloods and Crips to ceasefire. He wasnt a gangsta himself either.

Learn your facts before shooting your mouth off.

And for Genghis Khan.. how the hell can you not look up to the man? He came from a third world country, the Rwanda of the medieval world, he conquered the greatest Empires in the world my friend. All in 60 years. He introduced religous tolerance, he introudced cultural tolerance, he cared and governed about his Empire. The ends cancel out the means in my opinion. And with the people he did slaughter.. hey, he gave you the chance to surrender.. You need to know when your beat.

[removeduser_426582376423734]

Funny, people see the civilised, great Julius Caesar and are inspired. People see Genghis Khan, and are disgusted. Exactly the point I made at the start of the thread - the beautiful flourish, the less so less so.

[.Socrates]

Genghis Khan was really a very smart man.