this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2026
85 points (100.0% liked)

Chapotraphouse

14394 readers
674 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

(Rosario, Argentina, 1928 - Higueras, Bolivia, 1967) Latin-American Revolutionary. Along with Fidel Castro, whose movement he joined in 1956, he was one of the main architects of the triumph of the Cuban revolution (1959). He later held positions of great relevance in the new regime, but, dissatisfied with the inoperation of the offices and faithful to his purpose of extending the revolution to other Latin American countries, in 1966 he resumed his guerrilla activity in Bolivia, where he would be captured and executed a year later.

Given his life thus in the fight against imperialism and dictatorship, Che Guevara became the greatest revolutionary myth of the 20th century. He was immediately an icon of the youth of May 68, and his figure has remained as a timeless symbol of ideals of freedom and justice that, like the heroes of yesteryear, he judged more valuable than life itself.

Ernesto Che Guevara was born into a wealthy family in Argentina, where he studied medicine. His leftist militancy led him to participate in the opposition against Juan Domingo PerΓ³n; Since 1953 he traveled through Peru, Ecuador, Venezuela and Guatemala, discovering the prevailing misery among the masses of Latin America and the omnipresence of North American imperialism in the region, and participating in multiple opposition movements, experiences that definitely inclined him towards Marxism.

In 1955 Ernesto Che Guevara met Fidel Castro and his brother RaΓΊl Castro in Mexico, who were preparing a revolutionary expedition to Cuba. Guevara befriended the Castros, joined the group as a doctor, and landed with them in Cuba in 1956. Once the guerrillas settled in the Sierra Maestra, Guevara became Fidel's lieutenant and commanded one of the two columns that came out of the eastern mountains toward the west to liberate the island. He participated in the decisive battle for the capture of Santa Clara (1958) and finally entered Havana in 1959, ending the dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista.

The new revolutionary Cuba granted Guevara Cuban nationality and appointed him head of the Militia and director of the Agrarian Reform Institute (1959), then president of the National Bank and Minister of Economy (1960), and, finally, Minister of Industry (1961). ). In those years, Guevara represented Cuba in various international forums, in which he frontally denounced US imperialism. On a trip around the world he met Nasser, Nehru, Sukarno and Tito (1959); On another trip he met various Soviet leaders and the Chinese Zhou Enlai and Mao Zedong.:based-department:

In the task of building a new society in Cuba, and especially in the field of economics, Che Guevara was one of Fidel Castro's most tireless collaborators. In the economic controversy that took place at the beginning of the new cuba, he opted for an original, creative and not bureaucratic or institutionalized interpretation of Marxist principles. Looking for a path to the real independence of Cuba, he strove for the industrialization of the country, linking it to the aid of the Soviet Union, once the attempt to invade the island by the United States had failed and the socialist character of the Cuban revolution had been clarified ( 1961).

Now relieved of his positions in the Cuban state, Che Guevara returned to Latin America in 1966 to launch a revolution that he hoped would be continental in scope: Bolivia thanks to its position in the middle of the continent and its strong natural defences would make ot the ideal starting socialist state.

However, his action did not catch on with the Bolivian masses. From the beginning, his group, baptized as the National Liberation Army and made up of Cuban veterans from the Sierra Maestra and some Bolivian communists, found themselves lacking in support from the peasants, completely alien to the movement. Without any popular support in the rural world, and without support in the big cities for the rejection of communist political organizations, the chances of success drastically diminished.

Isolated in a jungle region where he suffered the exacerbation of his asthmatic disease, Ernesto Guevara was betrayed by local peasants and fell into an ambush by the Bolivian army in the Valle Grande region, where he was wounded and arrested on October 8, 1967. Given Since Che had already become a symbol for young people around the world, the Bolivian military, advised by the CIA, wanted to destroy the revolutionary myth, assassinating him and then exposing his corpse, photographing himself with him, and bury him in secret. In 1997 the remains of Che Guevara were located, exhumed and transferred to Cuba, where they were buried with all honors by the Castro's Cuba

Megathreads and spaces to hang out:

reminders:

  • πŸ’š You nerds can join specific comms to see posts about all sorts of topics
  • πŸ’™ Hexbear’s algorithm prioritizes comments over upbears
  • πŸ’œ Sorting by new you nerd
  • 🐢 Join the unofficial Hexbear-adjacent Mastodon instance toots.matapacos.dog

Links To Resources (Aid and Theory):

Aid:

Theory:

Financial Support to the Bearsite

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] roux@hexbear.net 4 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Can someone tell me how I should feel about Platner?

The dude gets a Nazi tattoo while serving in the military, he has a history of sexual predation, then there is his now scrubbed reddit account that was allegedly full of racist comments, and there are allegations that he was a guard at Abu Ghraib. I get that somethings might be made up to attack his character, but to me, the multiple military deployments is where I'm stuck on.

And something about him being such a "radical socialist" rubs me wrong regardless. I can't put my finger on it.

I have an anarchist friend that is arguing with me on FB but is stuck on Platner's military history and I can understand his point being that people change and radicalize in that system. I've seen it before. But the last time I've seen it, I ended up in a discussion with another anarchist about a PSL member that served in the military. So, like military service... I know a lot of people sign up because they are after financial security, and I get that. And I also get that people radicalize in the military. One of my favorite rappers, Bambu, did just that.

But I'm getting mixed signals from similar scenarios from 2 different anarchists and maybe my dialectics of this whole situation is skewed in the wrong way?

I think right now my head is at this: Joining the military in hopes for financial security in the way of education and early retirement can be a noble way to go, but joining to "save the world from the savage terrorists that want to destroy the US" really isn't the way. So I guess maybe it boils down to Platner's intentions when he enlisted?

[–] Le_Wokisme@hexbear.net 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

his actions in the service are damning. being a victim of propaganda doesn't absolve you of shooting grenades at civilians when you're ordered to stop using artillery.

he re-upped on a different branch, then was a mercenary because he hadn't gotten enough murder.

if you want to believe people can change, fine, i don't think there's evidence of that for platner, but you're clown shoes covered in dog poop if you think he should be entrusted with any institutional power.

they made Puyi a street sweeper, not a politician.

[–] Blakey@hexbear.net 12 points 2 days ago

they made Puyi a street sweeper, not a politician.

Holy fuck, THANK YOU.

[–] Chana@hexbear.net 11 points 2 days ago

Platner is unapologetic about his history. We could have more reasonable discussions about former imperialist murderers that present themselves as reformed (I think there are limited strategic uses and this isn't one of them) but he doesn't state regret. He was very recently saying how much he liked it and he trades on being a vet. He didn't cover his Nazi tattoo into it became publicly recognized. Also he had a Nazi tattoo. Also he covered it with neo-Norse symbolism commonly associated with Nazis nowadays. This is a big W white supremacist playing games and getting away with it because liberals love to reward that and will indulge their partisanship to do so with gusto.

His presented politics are socdem at best.

For PSL, you may have discussed Michael Prysner (married to Abby Martin). Prysner has been a self-critical anti-war organizer for like 18 years. Some of his main work has been in getting members of the military to resist deployment and leave the military.

[–] DornerStan@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 2 days ago

Everything I know about Platner is passively absorbed, so I don't have much of an opinion on him specifically. If I believed in hell and moral essence and redemption I'd say any and every US soldier is damned unless maybe they spend the rest of their life atoning. Killing innocents for financial gain seems worse than doing so out of ideological belief, if anything.

But I don't think whatever moralist feelings we have personally are very relevant to Marxist analysis or revolutionary action. Can a person currently be used to advance the interests of the global working class? If so, use them.

If I have tactical reservations about Platner (again, uninvestigated so not worth much) they are:

  • past behavior is a good predictor for future behavior so there'd have to be strong indications or circumstances suggesting his actions will actually further the interests of the global working class, whether deliberately or incidentally

  • He's a single individual vying for election, so even in the best case it's unlikely he'd be able to wield electoral power in a way that benefits us except maybe, again, incidentally (incompetence or incongruence with establishment politicians can be to our advantage sometimes, even if not from allies)

  • What are the propaganda/messaging implications if he wins/loses and if he succeeds/fails in pushing for progressive legislation, or predictably betrays working people? Should leftists be vocally against him so that when he wins and betrays our position in the masses advances? Should we sit back and let things play their course because electoralism isn't worth our finite energy? Should we support him so that when he loses or wins and fails the masses turn away from electoralism towards leftist orgs?

  • Why is he the one pushed to the front of public awareness, was it deliberate, and what mechanism does it have on public discourse? If we can determine that, what should our role and position be in public discourse (not to be "right", but to be effective in accomplishing our goals). The degree to which we participate in spectacle should be strategic and surgical, otherwise we're just part of the flow.