Talk:Che Guevara

Views in Argentina

I travelled extensively in Argentina and the views on Guevara were unanimous; he is rarely mentioned there and is certainly not a source of pride. Many I met described him as a "psychopath" who enjoyed killing people. He apparently told his father that he "enjoyed the smell of cordite and blood" after he had shot someone through the head. Not sure if this is worth extra exploration. 86.153.86.158 (talk) 17:03, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

It definitely isn't, I for one know plenty of Argentinians that are in awe of Guevara. Hearsay is not worth being mentioned on Wikipedia. 2A02:1811:C1F:8200:3564:4278:E78B:F860 (talk) 12:45, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Che was a psychopath who enjoyed killing people. He was also a homophobic and racist who hated black people. This is not hearsay. He publicly executed innocent Cubans by gunshot in front of many witnesses as a warning to anyone who tried to oppose their new government. Hectorgavilla (talk) 11:55, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Striking out material from block evader. Grandpallama (talk) 00:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Grandpallama: Although I agree that the heresay is irrelevant to our article, I looked at the IP and saw no evidence of block evasion. Is there a link that shows it? If so, it would be helpful if that is mentioned on the IP's talk page in case that editor continues making edits. --David Tornheim (talk) 00:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

David Tornheim, the editor is unlikely to show up with this particular IP again, as it's not static. That said, it's been pointed out to me that the age of the edit is such that I'm probably causing confusion more than helping (which makes sense); I only noticed today that he'd become active again for a while last year and was clearly overzealous in wanting to scrub his unproductive contributions. I've reverted my strikethrough. Grandpallama (talk) 06:25, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay. --David Tornheim (talk) 06:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Che was a mass murderer

Please add that Che Guevara was a mass murderer in the first sentence of this article. He should be put in the same category as Hitler. the sentence should read as follows:

was an Argentine Marxist Mass Murderer, physician, author, guerrilla leader, diplomat, and military theorist. Hectorgavilla (talk) 04:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

When was he convicted of being a mass murderer? HiLo48 (talk) 05:39, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

in Cuba he lined up innocent people against a wall “pared” and executed them without a trial for the public to witness. My Cuban family witnessed these executions and knew people who disappeared. He forced at gunpoint the removal of families from their homes. The only way to enforce socialism is to take away everything the people own by execution and physical violence. No one will willingly give the government their possessions. What I stated are facts. Hectorgavilla (talk) 11:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Then it shouldn't be hard for you to provide some reliable sources here. Facts aren't hard to find in reliable sources. StephenMacky1 (talk) 12:48, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Lots of sources exist, but they're very easy for you to ignore. 73.100.184.209 (talk) 01:23, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

If you have sources, WP:PROVEIT. Flounder fillet (talk) 00:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Alvaro Vargas LLosa, The Killing Machine; Che Guevara, from Communist Firebrand to Capitalist Brand" (Independent Insitiute:July 11, 2005, https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=1535)

Guillermina Stutter Schneider. "Che Was a Racist, Homophobe, and Mass Murderer" (Human Progress: December 15, 2017, https://humanprogress.org/the-truth-about-che-guevara-racist-homophobe-and-mass-murderer/)

Troy J. Sacquety, "Che Guevara: A False Idol for Revolutionaries" (U.S Army Special Forces Command History Office: 2008, https://arsof-history.org/articles/v4n4_false_idol_page_1.html#fn:2)

These three sources support the idea that Che was ruthless, brutal, and guilty of more than enough human rights violations to earn multiple in-depth paragraphs for this article.

Aldrich.Faithful (talk) 23:39, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Your first source is an opinion piece with no citations filled with misleading information. For example, it paints it as if Che was a supporter of the Soviets up until later in his life when in reality, he opposed Castro relying on the Soviets and actively spoke out against him on the matter viewing it as hardly any better than relying on America. The "innocent" people listed that Che killed were people who committed blatant offenses and were very clearly guilty of crimes punishable by death in any army such as Eutimio Guerra who it frames as Che only suspecting his guilt when in reality there was a trial where asked Che to shoot him quickly because he knew he was guilty of betraying them and causing the death of their fellow soldiers and they found an army safe conduct pass with his name on it on his person. It also frames it as if he is responsible for the UMAPs that went in place after he left the country just because he was in charge of a camp that had the primary purpose of being an alternative for soldiers instead of being discharged from the military for misconduct. Not to mention the article is written by a man who is heavily biased by being a staunch libertarian opposed to leftism and is a member of the Independant Institute a conservative think tank making him as biased against Che as possible explaining the lean toward misleading claims.

Your second source is the most infamous terrible source on the subject that gets frequently cited itself because it makes so many unique claims with no basis that others use it as the basis on top of being only a couple paragraphs long and having no real substance. The author is a member of the Fraser Institute yet another conservative think tank on an opinion piece with no sources making it also absurdly biased and the furthest thing from a reliable source though I'll still play ball and explain the misleading claims to show you just why this is infamous for being the most misinformation filled source out there. For starters I find it especially laughable how you see nothing suspicious about the fact one of the quotes in this second source is attributed to Alvaro Vargas Llosa the author of your first source so you can barely even come up with three sources that don't cite each other on top of the heavy bias present in him already. In regard to him being homophobic he wrote practically nothing on the topic and the only thing he did write in regard to calling a gay man a sexual pervert was in saying that a guy he knew was getting beat up which upset him because despite him being a sexual pervert he liked him. You definitely could say that is homophobic but with that being the extent of what he wrote about the subject it is pretty below average for the attitude at the time. In regard to him sending homosexuals to concentration camps this is outright misinformation because the UMAPs that did this did so when he was literally not in the country any more and held zero power there with the only camp he was in charge of as said earlier being for soldiers as an alternative to being discharged and not a prison civilians were sent to. On top of that the quote "work will make you men" is entirely fabricated and was never used by Che or in Cuba at all. As for him being racist he had a single racist remark he made when he was young after living a sheltered life in Argentina which he then did a complete 180 on after meeting black people and traveling the world to the point he actively spoke out against oppression toward black people in all places and literally went with a band of Afro-Cubans to fight a revolution in the Congo. I don't know about you but most people who are racist don't risk their lives to fight alongside that group of people so it doesn't make much sense to condemn him for beliefs he held when he was young that he then changed entirely and acted to fight oppression against said group. For the claim he was a mass murderer it also falls apart once you realize the people he killed during the revolution were traitors in his own army and enemy combatants while the people after the revolution were members of the Batista regime who killed and tortured his soldiers as well as civilians. The tribunal he was in charge of after the revolution he also never chose the sentence for or committed the executions himself and there were trials still so it wasn't much different than other similar post war trials punishing war criminals such as the Nuremberg trials.

Your third source yet again is laughably biased to an absurd degree this time with the author formerly working for the literal CIA though I truly must commend you for bothering to give a source with citations this time. It is pretty laughable how the Cubans are framed as savage for defending themselves against the US backed Bay of Pigs invasion and how Che is framed as arrogant for mocking the US over it as well as the US for general imperialism and oppression. Though as a whole I must admit this third source isn't half bad as while it shows its bias very clearly it at the very least doesn't make wildly misleading/misinformative claims. It also doesn't really do much to show how supposedly evil Che is either though beyond the general implication that the practices used to fight a revolution should be condemned inherently as if George Washinton isn't held up as a hero despite being a similar figure while Che is condemned. I do concede though while pretty biased and not doing much to confirm your points it is pretty solid as far as providing information that is backed up with sources.

So as a whole you have largely just showcased a general lack of ability to do real research with your first two sources being the epitome of unreliable sources and your third not really showcasing what you claim that much to begin with. While you didn't make any claims as absurd as the original person who made this topic claiming Che is in the same category as Hitler your assertion that there is a need for multiple paragraphs about him supposedly being a mass murderer don't have much grounding any more than it would make sense to include in any general's page. To reiterate from before the vast majority of people he killed were those who were demonstrably either deserters/traitors within his own army or enemy combatants who had killed and torture his own men and civilians hardly making any of his killings constitute as murder by any definition. You can believe his use of force was excessive but at the end of the day it is not the place of a Wikipedia page to offer our opinions on the matter it is a place to state what occurred and consensus about it without bias which is done on this page. Personally I find him to be a great revolutionary and admire his anti-imperialism while disagreeing with him that socialism is the way forward and can see the clear proof he was terrible at running the economy in an administrative position. There have been a great many pushes by the far right to spread misinformation about him and at the end of the day I oppose misinformation more than anything and believe we should strive to avoid it especially when making changes to Wikipedia pages which are often one of the first places people go for information. There is already a good chunk of the article giving the opinions of conservative think tanks from individuals such as Alvaro Vargas Llosa so there is no real need to give these beliefs any special attention when they are already mentioned. If anything it would make more sense to include a section about how misinformation has been widely spread about him though even I admit that is a stretch as that would fit better on the legacy of Che Guevara page than here which is more focused on what he did than his legacy which gets its own page. Wikipedia is a place to display the truth in a way as close to unbiased as possible not a place to give our opinions on the nuance of revolutions so I really do urge you to learn to be more skeptical of sources rather than looking explicitly for ones that affirm your already held beliefs. Plugshirt (talk) 09:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Semantic Error

Please change "Cause of death Execution by shooting" to "Cause of death Elimination by shooting"

Che Guevara's capture and immediate execution without a legal trial would be more accurately described as an extrajudicial killing which is considered a form of murder. This differs from a lawful execution which typically involves a formal trial. Thirdfemalelead (talk) 05:31, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done I replaced it with extrajudicial killing (per what's covered in the article's body). M.Bitton (talk) 15:17, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Can you also take care of the "Battles/wars" section, where he was labeled to be executed after a conviction. LackOfInspiration1 (talk) 10:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Interview with Tucker Carlson - Ex-CIA Agent Felix Rodriguez on Che Guevara death

Ex-CIA Agent on Capturing Che Guevara, Who Truly Killed JFK, and Election Predictions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwohQJrJeo8&ab_channel=TuckerCarlson

Che Guevara was executed in 1967 in a remote Bolivian village. One of the last people to speak to him alive was CIA officer Felix Rodriguez (former CIA agent). Here’s his story.

Felix Rodriguez worked for the CIA until 1976.

Ironcurtain2 (talk) 16:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

That's not a reliable source. Simonm223 (talk) 16:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

It is his own testimony!!! Ironcurtain2 (talk) 16:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

That's not how WP:ABOUTSELF works. Simonm223 (talk) 16:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Edit conflict, "please provide the acronym that supports your logic". LOL. Ironcurtain2 (talk) 17:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Specifically see points 1 and 2:

1. The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim 2. It does not involve claims about third parties; Simonm223 (talk) 17:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Wow, you know how to make pretty colored text. I am impressed. LOL. Thanks for making my day, User:Simonm223 LOL. Ironcurtain2 (talk) 17:02, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

South Park

Officer Barbrady - There's nothing to see here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LW6RWSiR88s&ab_channel=MiamiBadBoyBOSS

Ironcurtain2 (talk) 18:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Lies & propaganda surrounding Che.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/che-guevara-executing-women/

Example number 1: The link listed above where the accusation of him “Killing 2 woman” came out including him being accused of being a mass murderer (which is false, the people executed weren't innocent and were those working with Batista, war criminals etc.

Example number 2: The accusation that he was responsible for the UMAP camps/Imprisonment of homosexuals. in 1965 Che resigned his position as minister of industries and went to the Congo. He wasn't in Cuba during the operations of the camps and nor was he involved, Castro later took accountability for these camps stating how he failed the LGBT community in Cuba. Sproogli (talk) 16:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

There is an extra special need to be wary of propaganda surrounding Che as the scope of it by far right think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, Independant Institute, and the Fraser Institute in particular. The most commonly spread misinformative article is "Che Was a Racist, Homophobe and Mass Murderer" by someone from the aforementioned Fraser Institute which is responsible for the claim Che sent homosexuals to UMAPs which wasn't physically possible as well as accusing him of being homophobic in general when his only writing about homosexuality was saying someone he called a gay man a sexual pervert and said he still liked him anyway which is hardly enough to be any more of a homophobe than anyone else at the time and there is no instances of him punishing anyone for it. It also spreads the claim he is racist for one remark he made when he was young ignoring the fact that occurred when he grew up in a rich sheltered home and he flipped his views entirely once he explored the world and became a staunch defender of the rights of black people to the point he left Cuba with a band of Afro-Cubans to fight a revolution in the Congo. This article's misinformation is so widespread it gets cited by other articles to claim he was racist and sent homosexuals to concentration camps ignoring the fact these claims are made on an opinion piece by a biased source with not much to actually support them.

Another prominent figure spreading misinformation is Alvaro Vargas Llosa who while not as egregious as the Fraser Institue works with the Independant Institute to spread misleading claims like framing people Che killed such as Eutimio Guerra as if his guilt was questionable. In reality Eutimio Guerra had betrayed Che's group and sold them out to the Batista regime causing one of Che's men to die and then they found an army safe conduct pass on him and he admitted to doing it alongside having a trial, so it was hardly the unjust killing of a man whose guilt was questionable. His writings about Che are chock full of claims such as this that conveniently ignore context to paint Che as someone just indiscriminately killing people at the drop of a hat.

Both of these things were cited in this talk page as someone trying to give reliable sources as evidence of just how prevalent this is. He is a very morally gray man to begin with but there is a vast quantity of articles out there that look to ignore any and all nuance or actual context surrounding events to paint Che as unequivocally evil through misleading info and outright misinformation. It really needs to be a major concern for anyone looking to edit anything on this page as there is such an abundance of misinformation and bias that you have to be especially careful of any sources about him. It isn't our job to paint him as a hero or a monster it is our job to give the facts with any opinions one way or another being stated openly as beliefs held about him and not facts such as how it is done in this article where the opinion of Alvaro Vargas Llosa is mentioned with the clear statement that it is his opinion and nothing more. Plugshirt (talk) 09:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Category:Stalinism

Obviously Che was supportive of Stalin at one point, and maybe throughout his life? I'm not an expert. However I don't think this was a "defining characteristic," as laid out in Wikipedia:CATDEF. The article mentions Stalin once but doesn't really make clear Che's connection to Stalinism or why the category is there. I'm removing it. Prezbo (talk) 13:03, 31 December 2024 (UTC)