“When asked whether or not we are Marxists, our position is the same as that of a physicist or a biologist when asked if he is a ‘Newtonian,’ or if he is a ‘Pasteurian.’”

So said Che Guevara in 1960.

“There are truths so evident, so much a part of people’s knowledge, that it is now useless to discuss them. One ought to be ‘Marxist’ with the same naturalness with which one is ‘Newtonian’ in physics, or ‘Pasteurian’ in biology, considering that if facts determine new concepts, these new concepts will never divest themselves of that portion of truth possessed by the older concepts they have outdated,” he continued.

Now that’s a devout Marxist there.

Today, Che Guevara is a pop icon who adorns many a T-shirt and is the subject of numerous glowing Facebook pages. Celebrities love him.

Historically, he was an Argentine Marxist revolutionary who played a prominent role in mid-20th century Cuba.

In any case, I don’t like him. And saying so probably would have gotten me shot if I happened to be living in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Plenty of others have written about him being a murderous ba—um, bad man. Even on a site that sells Che merchandise, his biographical summary provides clues that he wasn’t the best leader. (“…he pushed the Cuban economy so fast into total Communism, and into crop and production diversification, that he temporarily ruined it.”)

I’m just going to focus on Che the ideologue — particularly, one piece of writing from 1965, his “Socialism and man in Cuba” manifesto. I had to venture onto a Marxist Web site to get this, so I hope you appreciate it. (Don’t worry…They didn’t get their brainwashing utopian tentacles on me. I remain firmly anti-collectivist.)

“Socialism and man in Cuba,” I suspect, is one of those pieces that turn folks into Che Guevara fans. It’s on Marxists.org, after all. So let’s pull out excerpts of Mr. Revolutionary at his “best” and apply some critical thinking to it.

“In capitalist society individuals are controlled by a pitiless law usually beyond their comprehension. The alienated human specimen is tied to society as a whole by an invisible umbilical cord: the law of value. This law acts upon all aspects of one’s life, shaping its course and destiny.”

If there’s a Che Guevara drinking game, it probably involves taking a shot every time he refers to alienation. More on alienation later. For now, please note the negative connotation associated with value–as in, if a person has skill X, then that makes him/her valuable within a free, capitalistic society.

He continues, “The laws of capitalism, which are blind and are invisible to ordinary people, act upon the individual without he or she being aware of it. One sees only the vastness of a seemingly infinite horizon ahead. That is how it is painted by capitalist propagandists who purport to draw a lesson from the example of Rockefeller — whether or not it is true — about the possibilities of individual success. The amount of poverty and suffering required for a Rockefeller to emerge, and the amount of depravity entailed in the accumulation of a fortune of such magnitude, are left out of the picture, and it is not always possible for the popular forces to expose this clearly.” (I’ve added the bold for emphasis in all instances.)

Capitalism is more or less a zero-sum game, as Guevara describes it. You can only become successful on the backs of others.

Except…How many jobs did Rockefeller create? How many people have enjoyed prosperous and/or comfortable lives because of the Rockefellers of the world? Sure, no one man can make everyone else in the world wealthy. But if everyone became wealthy, then no one would be, because the value of that wealth would deflate. Everyone would be merely mediocre, at best.

A spiritual thriller by Dan Calabrese. Click the image learn more and to order a copy.

“In any case, the road to success is portrayed as beset with perils — perils that, it would seem, an individual with the proper qualities can overcome to attain the goal. The reward is seen in the distance; the way is lonely. Furthermore, it is a contest among wolves. One can win only at the cost of the failure of others.”

More of the same already, but with a clearer connection between success and loneliness. Because you don’t want to be lonely, do you?

“To build communism it is necessary, simultaneous with the new material foundations, to build the new man and woman.”

Ooooohhh…The new man and woman! How exotic! How evolved! How sophisticated! How new!

No wonder the image-conscious Hollywood folks are drawn to this guy. Or, for that matter, many discontent, narcissistic youths.

“…capitalism differed from the earlier caste systems, which offered no way out. For some people, the principle of the caste system will remain in effect: The reward for the obedient is to be transported after death to some fabulous other world where, according to the old beliefs, good people are rewarded. For other people there is this innovation: class divisions are determined by fate, but individuals can rise out of their class through work, initiative, etc. This process, and the myth of the self-made man, has to be profoundly hypocritical: it is the self-serving demonstration that a lie is the truth.”

Here, he tries to kill two birds with one paragraph: 1) Religion is an “old,” primitive concept, so let’s get that out of the way. 2) And let’s keep referring to a person’s capacity for individual success as a lie, and eventually, people might believe it.

We interrupt our journey into Marxism with this special message from Abraham Lincoln: “That some should be rich, shows that others may become rich, and, hence, is just encouragement to industry and enterprise.”

And now, back to Che Guevara…

“They [Marxist people] no longer travel completely alone over lost roads toward distant aspirations. They follow their vanguard, consisting of the party, the advanced workers, the advanced individuals who walk in unity with the masses and in close communion with them. The vanguard has its eyes fixed on the future and its reward, but this is not a vision of reward for the individual. The prize is the new society in which individuals will have different characteristics: the society of communist human beings.”

Who doesn’t want to belong to an advanced society?

“Some experiments aimed at the gradual institutionalization of the revolution have been made, but without undue haste. The greatest brake has been our fear lest any appearance of formality might separate us from the masses and from the individual, which might make us lose sight of the ultimate and most important revolutionary aspiration: to see human beings liberated from their alienation.”

Guevara seems to think feeling alienated is a bad thing that we all want to avoid. I posit that alienation can be a wonderful thing, in moderation. If you never felt alienated, you wouldn’t be a unique individual. You’d be just like everyone else. No unique opinions, no unique skills, incapable of producing unique art. You’re like a blade of grass — just one among many, no different from the rest.

Plus, feeling a little alienated can help motivate you to be your best. But if we’re all trying to be the same, we have little to which to aspire. If we’re all different from each other, we have to prove our worth to other individuals — whether we’re talking professionally, romantically, or just in casual friendships. In the process of proving, we build ourselves into better people. Most people don’t want total isolation, but some alienation allows them the opportunity to stand out from among the crowd and be more valuable to it.

“Despite the lack of institutions, which must be overcome gradually, the masses are now making history as a conscious collective of individuals fighting for the same cause. The individual under socialism, despite apparent standardization, is more complete. Despite the lack of a perfect mechanism for it, the opportunities for self expression and making oneself felt in the social organism are infinitely greater.”

Just in case you were starting to worry you’d be losing your individuality by subscribing to his worldview, he tells you no, of course not, not at all. It’s only “apparent standardization,” but you’re “more complete.” By removing much of what makes you unique?

But yes, it’s easy to express yourself and be “felt in the social organism” if you’re surrounded by like-minded people. Just look at how an actor has no problem expressing his political views in his Academy Awards acceptance speech, and the audience has no problem cheering him on.

“…the individual will reach total consciousness as a social being, which is equivalent to the full realization as a human creature, once the chains of alienation are broken. This will be translated concretely into the reconquering of one’s true nature through liberated labor, and the expression of one’s own human condition through culture and art.”

Take a shot.

Culture and art are great, but again, a healthy sense of alienation can result in great art.

“In order to develop a new culture, work must acquire a new status. Human beings-as-commodities cease to exist, and a system is installed that establishes a quota for the fulfillment of one’s social duty. The means of production belong to society, and the machine is merely the trench where duty is performed.”

A commodity is generally defined as “a useful thing.” Isn’t it good to be useful?

“A person begins to become free from thinking of the annoying fact that one needs to work to satisfy one’s animal needs. Individuals start to see themselves reflected in their work and to understand their full stature as human beings through the object created, through the work accomplished. Work no longer entails surrendering a part of one’s being in the form of labor power sold, which no longer belongs to the individual, but becomes an expression of oneself, a contribution to the common life in which one is reflected, the fulfillment of one’s social duty.”

Hate your job? Become a Marxist!

Some people, in a free society, are capable of finding work they enjoy. Others, who find jobs that are merely bearable, still find creative and/or spiritual outlets that make it all worthwhile. We all endure periods of working jobs we don’t like, but we can become better and stronger people for having done so. I survived working the refund counter at a Target store — a humbling experience that will forever ensure that I’m very, very nice to service industry employees.

“The law of value is no longer simply a reflection of the relations of production; the monopoly capitalists — even while employing purely empirical methods — surround that law with a complicated scaffolding that turns it into a docile servant. The superstructure imposes a kind of art in which the artist must be educated. Rebels are subdued by the machine, and only exceptional talents may create their own work. The rest become shamefaced hirelings or are crushed.”

As someone with degrees in English and Theatre, I can assure all readers that a wide variety of art exists in a capitalistic society. There are markets for many different styles, including those of the “rebels.” The market sizes may vary, but every work of art has its audience — so long as it’s created with “exceptional talent.” But even if you don’t have “exceptional talent,” you can still create art as your own personal hobby.

Che Guevara’s writing may sound nice at first, but upon closer inspection, it’s a recipe for perpetual adolescence, for people who want to conform rather than stand out.

I’ll take the chaos of capitalism any day. Though not a perfect system, capitalism at least forces you to grow up and put some effort into your life.

11 Responses to “Meet Che Guevara, Marxist ideologue”