I’ve been listening to Guerrilla Warfare this week and it’s just had me thinking about Che more generally, particularly how he was essentially killed trying to replicate the Cuban pattern in Bolivia.
Was his strategy adventurist? Did it become adventurist by applying it in the wrong conditions? Were the Cuban revolutionaries just adventurists that got lucky - (Fidel wasn’t even communist at the time so it’s hard to say they were following some kind of Leninist line)? Do we just call armed insurrections adventurism if they fail, heroism if they win?
I wouldn’t consider myself an expert on Che or the movements he fought in, I know a decent amount about Cuba, but very little about his time in Africa or elsewhere. Looking to start a discussion and hopefully be educated by comrades who are more well-read on this topic.
You must log in or register to comment.
Che and the Cuban revolutionaries were not adventurists in either case because their primary strategy was in building a base of support among workers. Adventurists only do violence, with no attempt at building a base or community outreach. The same was true of Che’s efforts in Bolivia, he was trying to build a local base of support first and foremost.
To add context, as based as it was, the recent assault on the Israeli embassy was adventurist in essence because it was disconnected from any greater project, and had no association with the people in general.
It wasn’t adventurism in the formal term, Che by that point would never do something so frivolous after the experience of the Cuban Revolution. It was just not a great plan and didn’t have enough support (though it certainly had some) and seemed to favor doing more warfare over the obvious task of nation-building that he absolutely could have continued with back in Cuba, and I think that last part is why it gets called adventurist, because there is a superficial similarity in terms of the vibe.
He was fairly adventurist before he became communist. But in Bolivia he just miscalculated on how he could build support. The same strategy that worked in Cuban countryside did not work in Bolivia, it did not balloon with basically universal support. His understanding of local conditions was insufficient.
I was just listening to that a couple days ago, it wasn’t adventurist because there was a collective effort and a network of revolutionaries working together and gradually expanding their operations.
It would be a touch more accurate to say his actions after Cuba were more commandist than adventurist
Am I remembering correctly that he wanted to get nukes from USSR to nuke the US thinking it would lead to a proletarian revolution, too?
I love Che and he’s handsome as fuck but he was still human like anyone else.
Mao condemned Kruschev for not starting a war with the US over the Cuban Missile Crisis. Like a hot war.
I think at that point in the Cold War, with the power of the global socialist movements, it would have been incorrect to basically kamikaze into (adequately strategic targets in) America, but it’s not as unreasonable as it sounds out of context, and certainly not as senseless as the ideas of post-being-tortured-out-of-his-mind Posadas. If it actually worked, that’s NATO being nearly caved in without a strong causus belli against the rest of the socialist world. The main issue is that it probably would not work.
I have no idea if he actually believed either version of what we said, I just think it would be more forgivable than it might sound, though still incorrect.
I’m not as read on Che as I am on Stalin so I couldn’t answer you on the veracity of your question
Hmm. I read Che so long ago I can’t remember anymore.
what does commandist mean ?
In vulgarized terms, its the inverse of tailism.
In more elaborated terms, its where a party or its leadership dictates revolutionary action from ahead of the proletariat without adequately considering the actual conditions or the will of the masses. The tendency of commandism usually manifests in the form of an impatience to jump directly to open revolution, bypassing critical stages of development of dual power structures and neglecting the importance of mass mobilization and education.
In some circles commandism is also called “Left-Adventurism”
Thanks for the answer. Have a good day/night wherever you are
You should watch the motorcycle diaries for a bit of insight into where he was coming from. I found it insightful.
