Is Che Guevara or Soviet-style Communism trendy for the left?

[ahhell]

Last week I looked up the CPUSA, the Communist party of the USA - which currently has a massive 5,000 members......in 1947 it was 75, 0000

I love reading up on the history of the CPUSA. Everytime there was some split in the Russia or China, there was a split in the American commie parties. That's a big part fo the reason the CPUSA is so small.

That being said, Che is trendy on the left, he has been since he died but only among the rebellious college kids of the left. He was a murderous ******* that latched on to leftism as an excuse to murder people. Once folks figure that out, they tend to stop wearing the shirts.

Almost nobody buys into soviet style marxist leninism anymore. Sure, there are still a few tankies out there but not many. In my exprience most lefties argue that soviet style communism was more like fascism than real communism.

IMHO, I don't know how often communism has to fail in horrifying ways before we give up on it but, there always seems to be a reason why it wasn't true communism/soicalism or whatever.

 

[ahhell]

I seem to recall seeing a fair number of images of Che Guevara on T-shirts in the past, but I suspect that most of those people have very little idea of who he actually was, and they just like that particular image. It was almost like wearing a Bob Marley T-shirt or a Black Sabbath T-shirt. It really doesn't mean much beyond a sort of fashion choice.

I do hear a lot of pro-Marxist rhetoric though. Which is not the same as pro-Soviet.
Every time someone says something like "late capitalism" it makes me think there must be at least a little bit of Marxist influence there.

Probably but I think more of a distant ancestor, folks have heard the temr but not from reading marx. Years ago I heard a funny line from Rebecca Watson, "you know its going to be a tedious conversation when someone corrects you're pronounciation of Ayn Rand's name." Same is true of anyone that mentions late stage capitalism unironically.

 

[gnome]

Then you shouldn't do a general search if that's the problem.
I am pretty sure that an ISF thread also won't give you any 'sense of proportion' - as if you'd ever had any serious interest in the question.

I have a serious interest in what other people's view on the matter is, yes.

 

[gnome]

Che is trendy on the left, he has been since he died but only among the rebellious college kids of the left.

What gives you this impression that "rebellious college kids of the left" are like this?

 

[crescent]

Almost nobody buys into soviet style marxist leninism anymore. Sure, there are still a few tankies out there but not many. In my exprience most lefties argue that soviet style communism was more like fascism than real communism.

Lots of holdouts here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/

But you know, I'm pretty liberal, all in favor of LGBTQ rights, gun control, social control of common infrastructure, strong regulation of business, strongly graduated income taxes, all that. But I don't like communism, or super high levels of socialism. I'm all about mixed economies. And I get the impression that most left leaning people also dislike communism or high level socialism.

Those subReddits are annoying in that they are clearly and explicitly equating socialism with Soviet style communism and defending the USSR, post war China (Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution era). I guess these people probably think Sweden is some sort of fascist libertarian hellhole. But they are outliers, even if loud and proud. Like the Marjorie Tyler-Green's of the left (and just as dumb and embarrassing). Naïve idiots.

So yes - at the far-far left, the activist left, there are still some communists, marxists, all that. But they are not even remotely typical of left leaning Americans.

 

[dudalb]

I love reading up on the history of the CPUSA. Everytime there was some split in the Russia or China, there was a split in the American commie parties. That's a big part fo the reason the CPUSA is so small.

That being said, Che is trendy on the left, he has been since he died but only among the rebellious college kids of the left. He was a murderous ******* that latched on to leftism as an excuse to murder people. Once folks figure that out, they tend to stop wearing the shirts.

Almost nobody buys into soviet style marxist leninism anymore. Sure, there are still a few tankies out there but not many. In my exprience most lefties argue that soviet style communism was more like fascism than real communism.

IMHO, I don't know how often communism has to fail in horrifying ways before we give up on it but, there always seems to be a reason why it wasn't true communism/soicalism or whatever.

That is what is amusing; the endless reasons the more extreme left gives as to why Communism/Matxism has failed whenever tried.
Anything but that the basic theory behind it is flawed.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

That is what is amusing; the endless reasons the more extreme left gives as to why Communism/Matxism has failed whenever tried.
Anything but that the basic theory behind it is flawed.

same is true of Capitalism.

 

[dudalb]

Lots of holdouts here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/

But you know, I'm pretty liberal, all in favor of LGBTQ rights, gun control, social control of common infrastructure, strong regulation of business, strongly graduated income taxes, all that. But I don't like communism, or super high levels of socialism. I'm all about mixed economies. And I get the impression that most left leaning people also dislike communism or high level socialism.

Those subReddits are annoying in that they are clearly and explicitly equating socialism with Soviet style communism and defending the USSR, post war China (Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution era). I guess these people probably think Sweden is some sort of fascist libertarian hellhole. But they are outliers, even if loud and proud. Like the Marjorie Tyler-Green's of the left (and just as dumb and embarrassing). Naïve idiots.

So yes - at the far-far left, the activist left, there are still some communists, marxists, all that. But they are not even remotely typical of left leaning Americans.

Problem is there seems to be no one definitation of Socialism.
That some of the most brutal and repressive regimes in history have proclaimed themselves Socailist ..The USSR comes to mind...muddies the water.

 

[dudalb]

same is true of Capitalism.

My attitude towar Captialism is like Churchill's toward democracy; it is the worst economic system every devised...except for all the others.

 

[TragicMonkey]

At this point in time if you see someone wearing a Che Guevara shirt are they referencing Che Guevara or the people who wore that shirt back in the 60's/70's? I think we may be past the time where things are only references to the things they reference, and not to themselves. Now that's a t-shirt worthy slogan!

I'd expect someone wearing that shirt to be as dedicated to communist revolution as a biker wearing a spiked helmet is dedicated to Kaiser Wilhelm.

 

[RolandRat]

Problem is there seems to be no one definitation of Socialism.
That some of the most brutal and repressive regimes in history have proclaimed themselves Socailist ..The USSR comes to mind...muddies the water.

Some brutal, repressive regimes call themselves democracies too.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

That is what is amusing; the endless reasons the more extreme left gives as to why Communism/Matxism has failed whenever tried.
Anything but that the basic theory behind it is flawed.

The REAL argument on why Communism/Marxism has failed is because it has been applied on the wrong scale, just like Capitalism.

Capitalism can only be applied where a Total Market Failure doesn't cause economic collapse. It can never be the basis of organizing the entire economic system, as capitalism is intrinsically anti-market driven.

Communism/Marxism should be applied on the scale on the individual economic unit, i.e. a Company - better even just a factory. Only then will there be on gap between where the necessary information is gathered and where economic decisions are made - in essence the flaw of Communism/Marxism as a political system is bad communication, something that probably can't be overcome when we use humans.

I foresee a comeback of Techno-Communism, with A.I. machines like the ones in Asimov's "the Evitable Conflict" run the world ...
as a lefty trend that is, not in reality.

 

[dudalb]

Some brutal, repressive regimes call themselves democracies too.

There us an old joke that if a country has the terms "People's" or "Democratic" in it's offical title, it's a sure bet that the People have nothing to say about how the coutnry is ran, and it is not a Democracy.

 

[dudalb]

The REAL argument on why Communism/Marxism has failed is because it has been applied on the wrong scale, just like Capitalism.

Capitalism can only be applied where a Total Market Failure doesn't cause economic collapse. It can never be the basis of organizing the entire economic system, as capitalism is intrinsically anti-market driven.

Communism/Marxism should be applied on the scale on the individual economic unit, i.e. a Company - better even just a factory. Only then will there be on gap between where the necessary information is gathered and where economic decisions are made - in essence the flaw of Communism/Marxism as a political system is bad communication, something that probably can't be overcome when we use humans.

I foresee a comeback of Techno-Communism, with A.I. machines like the ones in Asimov's "the Evitable Conflict" run the world ...
as a lefty trend that is, not in reality.[/QUOTE_

Ignores the basic problem...people like money, and it's impossibel to get them to act in a selfless matter for any lenght of time.
"From Each According to His Abilties, To Each According To His Needs" will never, ever, work where Human beings are invovled.
You seem to think that profit is an evil idea. I don't.
I also think the idea implied that everything should be small scale is simply impractical.

 

[dudalb]

I think that private enterprise should be the basic core of an economic system with the government regulating it to prevent it form self destruction (the whole Market will regulate itself nonsense is where I break with the Libertarians) and provide a safety net.
Let;s put it this way, I am much more open to government regulation to protect the public safety.(enviromental laws, etc) then I am to regulation to try to make everything "Fair".

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Ignores the basic problem...people like money, and it's impossibel to get them to act in a selfless matter for any lenght of time.
"From Each According to His Abilties, To Each According To His Needs" will never, ever, work where Human beings are invovled.
You seem to think that profit is an evil idea. I don't.
I also think the idea implied that everything should be small scale is simply impractical.

That is only a problem if MONEY is the only "currency" in use.

In a honor society, or one where social standing is very important, Capitalism is not the Capital of Money, but of connections, favors, friends, honors.

If Billionaires would compete with each other who could fund the biggest public works projects (as they used to), Capitalism would be much more sustainable.

In a society where Public Shaming is a central part, a rich person would get shunned if there are any houseless, hungry people around who he could help without any real impact on his wealth.

 

[ahhell]

What gives you this impression that "rebellious college kids of the left" are like this?

Maybe that was just my social circle in college. Still pretty much the only time I've seen a che shirt was on DJs at the college radio station.

Lots of holdouts here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/

But you know, I'm pretty liberal, all in favor of LGBTQ rights, gun control, social control of common infrastructure, strong regulation of business, strongly graduated income taxes, all that. But I don't like communism, or super high levels of socialism. I'm all about mixed economies. And I get the impression that most left leaning people also dislike communism or high level socialism.

Those subReddits are annoying in that they are clearly and explicitly equating socialism with Soviet style communism and defending the USSR, post war China (Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution era). I guess these people probably think Sweden is some sort of fascist libertarian hellhole. But they are outliers, even if loud and proud. Like the Marjorie Tyler-Green's of the left (and just as dumb and embarrassing). Naïve idiots.

So yes - at the far-far left, the activist left, there are still some communists, marxists, all that. But they are not even remotely typical of left leaning Americans.

That's why I said almost nobody. There's always somebody and they tend to be on the internet.

 

[Brainster]

No, Che is not at all trendy, except around here where two members have the shirt (one even bought in Cuber!) and two members' wives had the shirt at one point.

 

[Suddenly]

Made my own thread to discuss it. I can't say I have my finger on the pulse of the entire left. I do have a vantage of participating in political discussions among many friends that are liberal or left to a varying degree, even including those that are actively hostile to capitalism on general principle. Among them I can't find a single example of praise or apologism for the crimes against humanity or totalitarian rule of the Soviet Union, nor any use of the image of Che Guevara to represent "wokeness" or some kind of trendy hipster badge.

I suspect that to what extent this may have existed in the past is all but extinct among the modern left. If I'm mistaken I would certainly like to hear more. If it still exists at all, I question whether it's sizable enough to describe a typical left reaction to the issue.

If looking for any semblance of significant numbers you will find people who think that had Trotsky rather than Stalin grabbed power post-Lenin that the USSR would have been significantly improved. Which requires an extreme ahistorical idealized idea of Trotsky as some sort of moderate idealist rather than a fundamentalist lunatic that would be launching invasion after invasion.

Most Marxism among the left is observation. Noticing how the results of current US economic policy are pointing towards the same collapse faced pre-New Deal. Even then these leftists are almost all advocating for New Deal type reforms of varying degree as they aren't so silly as to think a general collapse will end well for them.

 

[8enotto]

Trotsky was killed in Mexico, not sure the year but it's claimed Stalin wasn't happy with him. His home was preserved as a museum in his honor.

The movement was strong into the 1940"s in Mexico, in fact there is s book on coffee chats among famous artists, well to do names ay the time, a minor political figures and thinkers of the time. A copy ended up in the family library.
It seems one nationally famous author chronicled the group and printed it all later on.
My SIL got a copy in her college days.

It's a trainwreck of a read. A bunch of well off folks brain farting, commenting on issues of the day and proposed ideas to make it different at times.
And keeping the local liquor store busy.

In the reality of it the Communist party was loud and visible, but never really broke Mexico of being far from her regular routine of depose bad leader, then depose that one later for being corrupt. Rinse and repeat.

No visible movement remains. Occasionally a political party pops up using a red star as it's symbol and then fades away as it never gains much hold.
Just like all the others in a mountain of new parties every six years or do. The biggest three remain.