There, he worked on the new concepts and details of agrarian reform, which he considered the cornerstone of the revolution.
Che was criticized by a magazine, or rather the magazine pointed out that he was living in confiscated luxury. He was outraged, published a rebuttal, and as soon as he was better, moved into a more modest house.
Amazing. Here was a man who had risked everything. Put his life on the line a thousand times for the poor people of Cuba, and he didn't want the spoils of war. He didn't want anything for himself, and he didn't want to be seen as self-aggrandizing.
To me, he deserved as much luxury as he could get, at least for awhile. But not Che. He didn't want anything that ordinary people couldn't have. That is one of the things that made him such a hero to his people, I think.
His intelligence, his bravery, his commitment to the cause, all these things made him admirable. Of course, he was a complex man who had decided to devote his life and sacrifice himself for his ideals.
Obviously, there were good things and bad things about him. He was a committed communist, for one thing. And he believed that violence was necessary.
Was he wrong? It's hard for me to judge, at this distance in time and place.
But at the same time that Che was plotting agrarian reform, to help the poor peasants, the good old USA was plotting to either "handle" or overthrow Fidel Castro and the revolution.
Apparently, we didn't give a damn about the peasants. What we cared about was the big sugar business.
How arrogant were we, to think that we knew better than the Cubanos how they should live and how they should be governed, and that they didn't have the right to govern themselves.
I think the way the USA behaved was abominable. Capitalism may be better, and democracy may be better, but I think we had no right to interfere.
-- Roger
© Copyright 2011, Roger R. Angle
No comments:
Post a Comment