Byron Clark ([info]lossenelin) wrote,
@ 2008-07-16 00:11:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:anti-flag, byron, che guevara, iraq, libertarianz, moral relativity, university

Stupid Fuck
Had clubs day at university today, I of course helped out on the Workers Party on Campus table. That morning the first T-shirt I grabbed off my drying rack was my MetalSoc (heavy metal society) one, I decided against it least people get the tables mixed up. The next one I picked up was my "Mummy, what were the arts?" t-shirt, that was part of a students association campaign against the university's cuts to the College of Arts. Again, this could be confusing, so I grabbed a third T-shirt, it happened to be one baring the image of Che Guevara. I grinned at the student-radical cliche it would be, but thought what the hell, and wore that one. Which is where my story begins...



While having a wander around the other clubs, I was chatting to some friends at the UniQ (queer society) table, and someone (who I later discovered was a member of the ultra-right Libertarianz party) approached me and pointing at my Workers Party badge screamed "who's this stupid fuck!" followed by "and you've got a murderer on your shirt! he killed more people in his first six years in office than Hitler did!!!" I told him (admittedly in equally colourful language) that I wasn't interested in having this debate with him, as I didn't expect to be able to change his views, and frankly, I'm sick of arguing with far right partisans (the Internet is crawling wih them). He wouldn't leave me alone, so I walked away.

If he'd been more polite maybe there could have been some debate. During the rebellion in Cuba against Batista's dictatorship, the general command of the rebel army, led by Fidel "introduced into the liberated territories the 19th-century penal law commonly known as the Ley de la Sierra".[source] "This law included the death penalty for extremely serious crimes, whether perpetrated by the dictatorship or by supporters of the revolution. In 1959, the revolutionary government extended its application to the whole of the republic and to war criminals captured and tried after the revolution. This latter extension, supported by the majority of the population, followed the same procedure as that seen in" the Nuremberg Trials held by the Allies after World War II. Che was charged with purging the Batista army and consolidating victory by exacting "revolutionary justice" against traitors and Batista's war criminals.[source] Serving in the post as "supreme prosecutor" Of course, many executions took place.

Do I think this was the right course of action? well, I think its not my business to tell other countries how they should have conducted their revolutions. I am however against capital punishment, as was Karl Marx, who stated that "it would be very difficult, if not altogether impossible to establish any principle upon which the justice or expediency of capital punishment could be founded in a society glorifying in its civilization" Is it fair though to call Che a murderer? well, the issue needs to be looked at relativistically, a substantial proportion of New Zealand society supports capital punishment, and George W Bush was infamous for executions as governor of Texas, and then there are the 1.2 million people who have died as a result of the Iraq war. Sure, you could cop out and adopt a simple "a pox on both your houses" view, but look it from this angle; those deaths overseen by Che were done with the goal of bringing about a better society, by expunging the dregs of the old oppressive dictatorship. The deaths in Iraq have been for oil profits...

Thats just the beginning of a potentially long and thought provoking debate, but the way to start that debate is not by calling someone a "stupid fuck."




Being called a stupid fuck would make anyone angry, doubly so when its done as an insult to deeply held principles and beliefs, but thankfully there is an outlet for anger which also reinforces progressive politics... PUNK ROCK!
Heres Anti-Flag with "One People, One Struggle":






(Post a new comment)


[info]battered_broken
2008-07-15 11:02 pm UTC (link)
Byron! You are not a stupid fuck!

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]lossenelin
2008-07-16 02:21 am UTC (link)
You're too kind Cat ;-)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]mellowdramatix
2008-07-16 09:41 pm UTC (link)
Of course, non-stupid fucks can be identified by their penchant for relying on knee-jerk arguments based around cliches like "Che was a murderer!" to get their point across.

What a dick. I would've just exhaled loudly and walked away without giving him the satisfaction of knowing he pissed me off, but your method's good too.

(Reply to this)


[info]restiva
2008-07-19 01:42 pm UTC (link)
Those deaths overseen by Che were done with the goal of bringing about a better society.

Wtf Byron - you can't go around justifing peoples deaths like that, made by a political figure you admire or otherwise. Yes the war on Iraq was started and conducted for considerably murkier motives than a genuine revolution but that's no reason to be an apolgist for murder.

GRrrrrrrrrrrrrr. (Although I feel your pain re abusive losers "talking" politics!)

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]lossenelin
2008-07-19 09:18 pm UTC (link)
I didn't say it justifies them, I just said that that was the motive. Remember just a few sentences before I wrote "Do I think this was the right course of action? well, I think its not my business to tell other countries how they should have conducted their revolutions. I am however against capital punishment"

The whole thing is really a moral argument rather than a political one, and there is no universal morality so I don't like to make moral judgments on these matters. Politically though, I think had the movement in Cuba been non-violent it would have been crushed by the violence of the Batista state and/or other imperialist states (eg the USA) This may give activists in the West the moral high high ground doesn't really help people in Cuba.

The Cuban revolution is history that can't be changed of course, I think the revolutions happening today are admirable for their lack of violence, for example Nepal telling the king to leave his palace and live as an ordinary citizen, rather than an off-with-his-head style execution.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]restiva
2008-07-20 09:08 am UTC (link)
Okay... I did notice that you said you were against capital punishment. But you then went on to use the reasoning behind the murders to justify them, at least a little bit. That was what I was commenting on (and disagreeing with!).

I would also counter your point that there is no universal morality. Rape, genocide, murder, animal abuse etc ARE NEVER ACCEPTABLE. I don't care where or how it happens - and what's more I think that hiding behind the argument that those who disagree are merely taking the "Western moral high ground" is offensive in the extreme to other cultures.

(What do you think? Yay for friendly debate! :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]lossenelin
2008-07-20 09:33 am UTC (link)
I don't know how much further I want to argue the point as I was making it just to be provocative :-p its an argument that could be made (killing in revolution morally better than killing in imperialism) but I don't think I'm the one to make it.

On the other points though; "universal morality" maybe I've just taken one to many sociology classes but I think its still true, take your point about animal abuse, its a perfectly valid moral to hold, but you can't argue that its universal because in New Zealand society animals are systematically slaughtered for food. I'm not saying thats right or wrong, I'm just saying that wider society has a different moral view on it.

And regarding "Western moral high ground" you shouldn't have put in quotation marks because I didn't say it, you should have used inverted commas :-p what I said was "This may give activists in the West the moral high ground" I didn't mean that there was some sort of superior 'Western' morality, I just mean its a lot easier for activists in the West to pass judgment on revolutions in the third world when they have never been in that situation, when people are non violently resisting imperialism we can point out how wonderful it is and then condemn the imperialists when they crush the resistance, but will this method ever defeat imperialism?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]restiva
2008-07-20 10:35 am UTC (link)
So are you seriously maintaining that killing in revolution is morally better/acceptable even if you don't want to argue the point anymore? Because that's just weird (but okay yes I will let the matter drop!).

Re universal morality - I will admend my previous statement to just rape, genocide and murder as things that should be/are considered unacceptable worldwide and which wider society therefore shuns, at least in theory. Animal abuse unfortunately goes only on my personal list. But agggggg don't be brainwashed by sociology academics; there IS such a thing as right and wrong.

Re your final point - I'm not passing judgement on the third world revolutions as an "activist" but as an individual. Yes resisting imperialism is important BUT this doesn't mean we should passively support methods that go against our own values. Is defeating imperialism by any means really the most important thing here? And personally I would criticise Che Guevera on how sexist he was, just like I criticise PETA. That doesn't negate the good they did/do but they weren't/are not perfect.

And PS Vicky is looking over my shoulder and she would like to add that universities are a hotbed of idiocy and she sympathises with you! Oh, and hi :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]lossenelin
2008-07-21 01:57 am UTC (link)
"So are you seriously maintaining that killing in revolution is morally better/acceptable even if you don't want to argue the point anymore? Because that's just weird"

If I strongly believed that I would argue it, so I guess I'm not maintaining it. I do however think that you can't say that all killing is equal no matter the situation, circiumstances or society. Killing happens in every society, and if you judge all killings as equal then moralty just becomes mathmatical- society A kills x people and society B kills y people. x>y therefore society A is morally superior. And I don't think that forumula really works for whats an incredibly complex issue.

I'm repeating myself with the universal morality issue, but as I said in the original post there isn't a common morality even in New Zealand society, many people here support capital punishment. I fully agree that rape, genocide and murder should be considered universally unaceptable, but the point is they're not. I agree there is such thing as right and wrong, but I don't think anyone can really claim to be an authority on what falls into what category.

I didn't mean that you were an activist taking the moral high ground, that point was more genralised, I just mean that I see that as being the only advantage of an oppressed people not fighting back; for example those us in the West could defend Palestinian self-determination a lot easier if there was no armed resistance to Israeli occupation, but would that make the Palestinians better off?

"Is defeating imperialism by any means really the most important thing here?" Thats a thought provoking question, If the alternative is the status quo, then maybe the answer is yes, it goes back to the moral relativism thing (and even to some extent the formula that I don't think works) but the most violent instution is the world today is the imperialist state, which has a monopoly on violence through the armed forces, police and judicial system. Is violence to end violence OK? I don't think I can give an answer really, its a very difficult ethical question. Of course, defeating imperialism by non-violent means is certainly the ideal, though I'm skeptical as to whether thats possible or not.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]restiva
2008-07-21 02:08 am UTC (link)
I just don't think that murder can be excused. Obviously it isn't just a numbers game and motives also play a part in determining what and whose actions are worse - but they're still all bad. Murder for politics, whatever the aim, is repugnant. Cuba isn't excused just because the USA is worse (although we should be directing most of our anger at the States...). I actually don't think the issue *is* that complex. With issues such as theft, sure, but not murder.

And interesting points re imperialism. But blah, I will stop there! How is uni going?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]lossenelin
2008-07-21 02:46 am UTC (link)
Fair enough.

Uni is going well, was terrorfied about having to read Plato this semester but its actually not that daunting, 'The Republic' is novel-length and its basically just Socrates asking people questions :-p

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]restiva
2008-07-21 05:52 am UTC (link)
Hummmmmmm. Yes. Should be fun reading the classics too, just to see what they truely said...

I am thrilled as half my courses are in French this semester, yay.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…