That Murdering Bastard Che

Posted on December 1st, 2008 by Dan Wilk in Bureaucrash HQ

It seems like I can’t turn around today without seeing a Che/Communist-adorned shirt, poster, or sign. For example, a few weeks ago I was at the liquor store and spied a bottle of vodka with a sickle and hammer, earlier this week I was in New Orleans and saw a sign with Che’s image to sell cigars.

What the hell is that? It’s now fashionable to use symbols that represent ideas (Communism/collectivism/socialism) that have killed tens of millions in the past century to sell products?
I don’t believe that people would knowingly support such thugs and the ideas they espouse if they took a moment to really think about their implications. If they did, we’d see them rocking shirts with the images of Kim Jong-il or Robert Mugabe. Instead, I believe it’s just that folks haven’t been exposed to the harms that stem from such terrible ideas — thanks to government schools and tactful politicians that promote much of the same agenda without using the poisonous “Communism” label.
Think that’s a stretch? Then take a moment to compare where we’re at today with the 10 planks laid out by Marx and Engels in the Communist Manifesto:
  1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
  2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
  3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
  4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
  5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
  6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
  7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
  8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
  9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
  10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factor labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c., &c.
Like you, I was able to go down the list and check off virtually all of the ten planks. This is why we’re pushing back — to restore the freedoms and rights of each individual rather than allowing bureaucrats to control their lives and the economy and to get people to think for themselves.
So when you see someone wearing a Che t-shirt, don’t let it go unopposed. Ask them if they have the whole set, when they respond perplexed, explain that you meant the Che-Hitler-Mao-Stalin etc. set. That may get them, and those who heard the exchange, to rethink their blind support for such symbols and bad ideas.
For more, check out our ”Communism Kills” overview over at Bureaucrash SocialThe Che Guevara Myth by our friend Alvaro Vargas Llosa at the Independent Institute, and these related Contraband offerings:

  • Thrashmetal
    Hey, easy there. Che-Hitler-Mao-Stalin? What's Hitler got to do anything with them? If you're just including him in there to make the point that communism is evil, well, then, that's pretty bad.

    And surely, capitalism has killed as many people as communism has. If not of hunger, well, just check the numbers of communists persecuted for their beliefs, and the dictatorships installed by the United States all around South America.

    And calling Che a mass murderer is simplifying the whole thing. You have to understand his life, the situation in south america, the injustice we were living, etc. I'm not saying all the killings were justified. I'm just saying that he represented more to south americans than a simple mass murderer.
  • ncopple
    Be sure to include Ayn rand. That brings the set to a nice round five and covers bad ideas from all sides of the political spectrum.
  • David Hill
    I came to this site out of curiosity and an interest in political ideas, but it seems that Bureaucrash is simply against any individual or movement who's wielded any actual political power; so who exactly will be able to enforce your beloved "property rights" without at the same time incurring your fundamentalist extreme-libertarian wrath? If freedom is God, then whatever anyone chooses to do is just fine, whether that be implementing communism or taxing the middle class - so you ought to stop complaining. Or do you just enjoy your misplaced feelings of intellectual superiority?
  • Also, I should add that being a 501(c)3, Bureaucrash as an organization cannot come up for/against a specific candidate/bill.
  • David, thanks for your comment. I'm not going to speak for others but I hope my posts aren't communicating that we believe we're "intellectual[ly] superior." I strive to be non-dogmatic. I advocate certain a certain perspective here as I believe it is the most rights-respecting and prosperity-generating. If you have compelling reasons against something I've written I'll definitely look at it with an open mind. And if it's more rationale and consistent than a belief I now hold, I'll change my argument and adopt it.

    Regarding your questions -- do you believe that property rights were nonexistent before the rise of government? For more on where I'm coming from, please check out de Soto's "Listening to the Barking Dogs" (http://www.fnst-freiheit.org/uploads/974/Text_4...). And Bureaucrash is made of individuals that come from all political persuasions. We don't all agree, and that's good, as it challenges each of us and hopefully causes the best ideas to come to light. Some folks actively support candidates for political office (or run for office themselves) and some don't.

    I'm not sure I completely understand your line about "If freedom is God..." so please clarify if I don't fully address it, but in a truly voluntary society communism and other non-"extreme-libertarian" societies could exist. If people voluntarily choose to be a part of a communist collective or any other structured society that's there choice so long as they don't attempt to use force to place that system on others. And that's the big difference. Under a totalitarian system there is no choice to opt out. People who value freedom recognize that everyone is different and therefore have different preferences.

    I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Thanks.
  • I like the idea of asking people if they own the whole set. I've also used, "Sure is handsome for a murderer..."
  • Good one Jose. I may have to use that as well:)
  • Bob Johnson
    you are one ignorant sob. is it ok to wear a bush or cheney shirt? two of the most murderous pricks of the 21st century.
  • Bob, thanks for the comment. I think people should be free to wear what they choose. Me personally, I would not rock a Bush/Cheney shirt. Nor would I wear an Obama or McCain shirt. I don't think it's admirable to control the lives of other people, and that's what those folks in that position do -- reduce our choices. When government grows the freedom to live our lives as we see fit, shrinks. That's why we here at Bureaucrash advocate individual rights and responsibility as well as voluntary interactions and truly free markets.

    Thoughts?
  • Mises
    Bob johnson, you are a moron.
    1) Is anyone here endorsing Bush/Cheney? Of course not. George Bush oversaw HUGE increases in federal power and the budget: hardly Libertarian. You're a moron.
    2) Bashing Bush/Cheney doesn't change the fact that Che, of his own volition, admitted to executing thousands of people for their political beliefs. And you're trying to defend him. Your an evil moron.
    3) What are you even trying to do here? You're trolling. Grow up, you evil trolling moron.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Sign-up for the Bureaucrash Bulletin

Email
First Name
Last Name

Subscribe to the Podcrash


Any Podcatcher

View in iTunes

Crash Accomplished

Code Red Healthcare Rally