There are individuals out there, moralist radicals, which would act in disgust to see anyone dare celebrate the death of another. To an extent there is some truth, for instance, it would be quite rude to celebrate the death of a friend’s recently deceased relative; this issue, however, is not that simple. I’m certain even the moralist radicals wouldn’t find much problem when I celebrate the death of Hitler, Mao, or Stalin.
The question then becomes ‘why’? Why is it okay to celebrate the deaths of these horrible people when and why does this differ from a celebration of the death of a grandma? The answer is quite ironic, like the moralist radicals, it’s due to the sanctity of life and how these individuals trampled over such significance. To take another’s life deliberately and without the just cause of self defense is to lose one’s personal moral high ground. If any moralist radicals would then critique me for celebrating the death of a man who has killed others, then their moral code is akin to a broken vending machine, out of order.
To critique me celebrating a death is to imply that the individual in question should still be alive, and yet, what if continued existence of such a person led to more death? Thus the moralist radical who tries to obtain a moral high ground by criticizing those who celebrate the deaths of certain individuals must come to accept that in celebration of a specific individual’s death we are, in essence, celebrating life in that more people would’ve lived if not for such a person.
Thus let us continue onto a discussion of Che Guevara, a communist messiah that has been worshipped ironically by the atheist radical leftists. Che’s face has found its home on t-shirts created as a result of capitalism and the concept of supply and demand. Unfortunately many people demand such a good and therefore, Che has found his prominence through these t-shirts. It’s quite an irony that so many Che shirts exist as a result of capitalism and the Austrian idea of subjective value, yet the communist community is too naive to realize this.
Why should Che’s death be celebrated? Simply due to the fact that he killed people who were not aggressing against him in any way. Che and the Cuban government executed those who stood in the way of their impossible socialist dream. Michael J. Totten from the World Affairs Journal reports: “La Cabaña is the old Spanish military fortress above the east side of Havana’s harbor that Che turned into a prison. Fontova calls it the Caribbean Lubyanka. Thousands of men and boys were executed against its walls with firing squads. “To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary,” Che famously said that “These procedures are an archaic bourgeois detail.””
Even marxists and other radical leftists must admit that Che was a vampire who openly expressed his lust for blood. Consider this speech from Che that could be accessed through a Marxist website: “Hatred as an element of the struggle; a relentless hatred of the enemy, impelling us over and beyond the natural limitations that man is heir to and transforming him into an effective, violent, selective and cold killing machine. Our soldiers must be thus; a people without hatred cannot vanquish a brutal enemy.”
Now, many radical leftists might actual defend such a position due to their desire to see an impossible communist dream come to fruition. Thus, while there is enough evidence for normal people that Che’s death should be celebrated, more evidence is needed for even the radical leftist to give up their admiration for this man. One of these methods could be done through race. Cultural marxists are racial collectivists who view collectives based on race as different in aspects beyond qualifications. Thus the cultural marxist will apply labels like ‘oppressed’ or ‘privileged’ to certain collectives based on race.
Usually this is done in a way that is objectively racist towards not only white people but pretty much all of these races. It’s a form of racial collectivism, in which individual differences and complexities are ignored and disparities between such individuals are attempted (poorly) to be explained through insufficient evidence regarding race. Where would Che, the marxist that he is, stand? While not an outright white supremacist, Che dipped into some quite racist assumptions against black people in his posthumously published Motorcycle Diaries: “The black is indolent and a dreamer; spending his meager wage on frivolity or drink; the European has a tradition of work and saving, which has pursued him as far as this corner of America and drives him to advance himself, even independently of his own individual aspirations.”
The evidence is out there that Che Guevara is not someone to be celebrated, even among radical leftists. Regardless of this evidence, the possibility that those who bear such t-shirts will discard of them is quite miniscule. Why? Che Guevara holds a cultural significance to him that probably fills non-intellectual desires within the radical leftist. This is not to say it’s specific to the left, many of us on the right wear our own politicized t-shirts. This being said, none of our heroes directly killed someone and in fact advocate against such matters unless aggression is at hand.
While people bicker over Columbus day, I propose we instead celebrate the death of this racist murderer and be thankful that he died as soon as possible so that his bloodlust would not kill more innocents. The celebration of the death of a murderer those becomes a celebration of life and a mourning for those who have died at the hand of such a murderer. Let us reflect and give a moment of respect to those innocents who have died at the hand of this man and hope that the world never sees another Che Guevara.