Do any of you know if Che Guevara had a lover called Vania? If so, could you please suggest where I can find out more about her?
Thank you

Sorry, last post wasn’t supposed to be all one paragraph. Maybe tags are called for. Let’s see if this works better:

Here’s an interesting article on Guevara that came out soon after the Motorcycle Diaries movie:

The author quotes some from Guevara’s diaries of the trip:

“The main task at hand was getting to Iquitos… The first person we hit on was the mayor, someone called Cohen; we had heard a lot about him, that he was Jewish as far as money was concerned but a good sort. There was no doubt he was tightfisted; the problem was whether he was a good sort. He palmed us off to the shipping agents, who in turn sent us to speak with the captain, who was kindly enough, promising the huge concession of charging us third-class fares and letting us travel in first. We weren’t happy with this. … [T]hen the second-in-command … promised to help… [Later] we came across him, [and] he said he’s secured a great deal for us: as a special favor to him, the captain had agreed to charge us third-class fares and let us travel in first. Big deal.”

And later says “The film clearly intends to suggest that Guevara was a youthful idealist, and that his idealism—so generous, so disarming—was the source of his later opinions and activities, such as his liberal and open-handed signing of death sentences after perfunctory trials, his support of regimes that had killed millions and scores of millions, and his wish that much of the population of the world should be immolated in a nuclear war for the sake of an alleged point of principle. The film is thus the cinematic equivalent of the Che Guevara T-shirt; it is morally monstrous and emotionally trivial.”

Supposedly Ho Chi Minh lived a very disciplined life. Might be bullshit though…

Can anyone point to a Communist leader who had the discipline and moral character exemplified by say, George Washington? Or are they all psychos and girlie-men?

While reading this book, I became interested in Fidel Castro. Jon Lee Anderson mentions a biography written by Tad Szulc named “Fidel: A Critical Portrait”. This book is excellent but is not in the same style of Che by Anderson. Anderson’s account sometimes has a storytelling feel to it. Szulc’s book, not much so.

Che was in Guatemala in 1954 when Jacobo Arbenz was overthrown by the CIA organized invasion forces. The motivation behind this was tied to the threat to the United Fruit company’s investments in Guatemala. This coup is covered in another book called “Bitter Fruit” by Stephen Schlesinger and Stephen Kinzer.

Those two books are excellent paths to follow after reading the Che biography. After you tackle Bitter Fruit, “All the Shah’s Men” about the 1953 CIA coup in Iran is another good account.

Eduardo Cavazos
(of Brownsville Texas)

“Che was so far ahead of his time, which is possibly why he remains a hero for so many millions of people today.”

I gotta tell you Phil that I have no understanding of what this means- even as sarcasm it baffles me. Ahead of his time? Like he was an angry slacker before they were so prevalent??- Here we have a person trying to prove his machismo by doing everything but acting like a grown-up – Poor follow- through (the unfinished degree, the unfinished “revolution”), low autonomy (parasitic relations with women) and an adolescent approach to problem solving (quick, dramatic action -like a violent “revolution” is actually going to restructure complex economic situations driven by multiple variables…) I remain confused understanding his prominence among “so many millions of people today”.

“Let’s stop pretending that the europeans are blameless in all this, okay?”

Absolutely! European countries are largely responsible for the bloody mess in the first place. The only reason to pick on the US is that it’s bigger and more succesful at screwing up other people and so it’s an obvious shorthand. But I have no doubt even the Bolivians would be shafting other people if they had the chance.

But that’s an important point. A lot of people in the US take criticism very personally, in a kind of “them and us” kind of way. It’s not about “them and us”. It’s just about calling out and opposing cynical and exploitative behaviour wherever it occurs. We absolutely need to be aware when it’s our country too.

More pertinantly, in October 2003 thousands of those Bolivians you somewhat dismissively describe as “bewildered peasants” were on the streets of La Paz protesting (some of them having taken up arms) that their government was selling off gas reserves too cheaply to US corporations

Not only US corporations. Repsol, the spanish oil company, also had its share of the pie in Bolivia (not to mention the recent scandal of french telecom Alcatel bribing officials of the OEA). Let’s stop pretending that the europeans are blameless in all this, okay?

What I want to know is why it was alright for North Americans to have a revolution in order to get out from under control of the british monarchy, but it’s somehow risible (or worse) if South Americans have similar aspirations want to get out from the overbearing influence that the US government has on their lives?

Why the double standard?

Is it only because the US won their revolution but the South Americans keep losing theirs?

More pertinantly, in October 2003 thousands of those Bolivians you somewhat dismissively describe as “bewildered peasants” were on the streets of La Paz protesting (some of them having taken up arms) that their government was selling off gas reserves too cheaply to US corporations. Many of these people were killed by the Bolivian army, but in the end they managed to chuck out the president who had to flee the country.

Not sure they’re much better off, because the influence of US corporations runs pretty deep in corrupt latin governments. On the other hand, they’re not as badly off as the poor bastards in Saudi Arabia, who’ve had their natural resources plundered and sold cheap by a Western imposed fundamentalist dictatorship for decades.

I read a Che’ biography 5 years ago that emphasized his loyalty to Castro, and I came away with the impression that he was at war with his own pretty boy tendencies– I recall that he continually volunteered to shoot ‘traitors’, including those guilty of trivial lapses. Each time that someone had to shoot a traitor, Che’ was willing to do it as a proof of his own machismo.