I don't think Che was the type that would be impressed by somebody who makes memes.

Famous politicians tend to be narcissistic sociopaths, and looking for validation from a narcissistic sociopath is a dead end.

Memes aren't agitprop?

This is the alternative timeline where, after meeting Emily, Che became a national socialist.

You call this agitprop?

Stop peddling horseshit.

That's what you are... a peddler of horseshit - you know, because that's what you are doing... peddling horseshit.

Kindly stop that.

edit: Somebody requested that I "rebutt" the obvious horseshit peddled by the obvious horseshit peddler

So... courtesy of [deleted] from r/AskHistorians 6 years ago:

Summary

While LGBT people were oppressed following the Cuban revolution, there is no good evidence that Che Guevara was personally involved in any significant way. The system of forced labor (which was used to persecute gay men) was established after Guevara had left Cuba. There is also relatively little evidence of homophobia in Che's personal life; the whole of his (very prolific) writing contains only one homophobic statement (a line in The Motorcycle Diaries, discussed below), which uses language that was unfortunately quite common for the time and place. Claims that Che "frequently used homophobic slurs" appear to be baseless as well.

Forced Labor and LGBT Persecution in Revolutionary Cuba

After the Cuban revolution, a system of labor camps (called Military Units to Aid Production) were established, as an alternative to conscription for those who were unwilling or unable to join the military. One group of people who were prohibited from military service, and thus made to work in these camps, were homosexual men (when people say that Castro and the communists "put gay people in camps," this is what they are referring to). This system lasted for several years, until its abolition in July 1968. The persecution of LGBT people in revolutionary Cuba (principally through the use of this system) is discussed in a 2010 paper in the journal Social History.

While this system of forced labor was undeniably a human rights violation of the highest order, to pin the blame for this on Che is simply ahistorical. The camps were first established in November 1965, by which time Che had already left Cuba to spread the revolution abroad (see Jon Lee Anderson's book). At that time when the camps were set up, Che Guevara was having a terrible time in the Congo, not oppressing LGBT people in Cuba.

The blame for the labor camp system should instead be placed upon Fidel Castro, who himself admitted the injustice of his government's homophobia in a 2010 interview with the Mexican newspaper La Jornada:

Yes, they were moments of great injustice, great injustice... If someone is responsible, it's me.

In short, while LGBT people were indeed persecuted after the revolution, the blame for this should not be laid at the feet of Che Guevara.

Homophobia in Che Guevara's Personal Life

The claims about Guevara's homophobia ultimately go back to one particular quote from The Motorcycle Diaries (which is pretty much the only authentic quote we have in which Che even mentions homosexuality):

He was an introvert and probably gay, too. The poor man was drunk and desperate because they hadn't invited him to the party. He began to yell and insult people until some of them beat him up and gave him a black eye. This episode bothered us, because apart from him being a pervert and a bore, we liked him. (Diarios de Motocicleta, page 223)

This quote is certainly homophobic, but unfortunately it was probably not unusual language for a Latin American man in the 1950's (or frankly, a man in most places in the 1950's), and it doesn't rise to the level of "extremely virulent and vocal homophobia," as Che is often accused of having harbored.

Most other allegations surrounding Che's homophobia are baseless. Take for instance the claim that Che had the American poet Allen Ginsberg deported from Cuba for calling him "cute" (a claim that often appears in "things you didn't know about Che" articles on right-leaning websites). This claim is quite easy to refute, seeing as Che and Ginsberg were never in Cuba at the same time. According to Ginsberg's diaries, he was in Cuba from January 18th to February 17th of 1965, during which time Guevara was on a diplomatic tour (having left for Moscow on November 4th of 1964), from which he would not return until March 15th (see page 592 of Anderson's book in the sources), about a month after Ginsberg had been deported. Most other "Che hated gay people" claims are of similar merit (that is to say, none).

Sources:

Gender policing, homosexuality and the new patriarchy of the Cuban Revolution, 1965–70 (Social History), by Lillian Guerra

La Jornada interview with Fidel Castro, 2010

The Motorcycle Diaries by Ernesto "Che" Guevara

Iron Curtain Journals: January-May 1965 by Allen Ginsberg

Che: A Revolutionary Life by Jon Lee Anderson

This is posted on Lemmy where you reach the masses, don't underestimate that.

where you reach the masses

That doesn't make this any better - in fact, it makes it worse.

I have no idea what this means, but I like the guy with the shirt of the same drink he's drinking

Do you want to like, maybe, rebutt what they posted?

Fine. Check my edit.

Do tell... will that be enough for the people who can't spot obvious horseshit peddled by obvious horseshit peddlers?

This is the good tempered me.

Now answer the fucking question.

Imagine using AI as a reference

I don’t understand the consternation with accepting Che was homophobic.

He was a product of his times.

Is it really that shocking that a man in the 1950s has homophobic views?

You linked a source saying this; he called a gay man a pervert.

Why die on this hill?

Is it really that shocking that a man in the 1950s has homophobic views?

Is that the problem you see here?

Really?

A shitlib waddles into a leftist space, does what every shitlib does whenever Che's name gets mentioned and craps out the standard shitlib disinformational propaganda about him they always do, and that's the problem you see here?

You linked a source saying this; he called a gay man a pervert.

I hate to be the one to break it to you... but LQBTQ people get to be perverts too - just like the rest of us.

Don't be upset because they were happy to "rebutt" the point instead of throwing a fit like you expected.

Dumbass.

Like honestly, how many dudes born in the 1920's had any sort of positive view on homosexuality? Crazy how hero worship whitewashes people who weren't heros.

Imagine worshipping a homophobe during pride month

Everyone forgets that Che was a collage educated upper middle class yuppie who got radicalized on a road trip while trying to “find him self”

So, like, this is basically his crowd when he was younger.

Oh buddy. There ain't no masses involved. Lemmy is where you reach the dozens.

worshipping

And who exactly is doing this?

That was his origin, but his history shows that it was kind of irrelevant in the sense that he spent his life supporting revolutions in Latin America

I don’t think it is irrelevant, I think it shows that background does not preclude people from dedicating them selves to causes they believe in. And that ideological purity tests based in social background are counter productive.

Yeah that's what I meant ^^'

fwiw that stuff is waaay more caffeinated than the stuff you make yourself

My bro Ho was a cook.

Oh yeah, he was probably being sex-positive when he called homosexuality perversion /s

oh absolutely. my statement was not an endorsement. half a can of that stuff will give you severe jitters

Your comment alone has more than a dozen upvotes. Think about that.

wait wait wait, i thought the whole point of this was the insinuation that he was homophonic and is blamed for creating gay work camps and committing human rights violations against gay people. this person lays out a detailed rebuttal on the major talking points that would back the accusers assertions… but now it’s “well everyone at the time was homophobic!, so i am still technically right!”

so you do know there is a difference between someone who uses the word gay to mean bad or gross, and someone who commands the creation of concentration camps to commit human rights violations against gay people right?

it’s a little dishonest. is this moving the goal post?

Should my thinking include the possibility that you don't know what plural words are?

Plural is when more than one

Very good.

Thanks

didnt this guy send gay people to concentration camps?

aaaaaand he defended labor camps

so you do know there is a difference between someone who uses the word gay to mean bad or gross, and someone who commands the creation of concentration camps to commit human rights violations against gay people right?

The latter relies on the former to attain power. We should tolerate neither.

so you don’t recognize the difference then. and your entire point is meaningless.

and i would think you would be happy to know that he hasn’t used such language in quite a few years.

so you don’t recognize the difference then.

Translation: "I want to normalize but not reclaim a slur. How do I spin this so it doesn't seem so bad?"

Is it really that shocking that a man in the 1950s has homophobic views?

Yeah, I mean, even FDR personally murdered dozens of gay people with a chainsaw.

Oh wait! I made that up! But I bet I can find some problematic statement he said at some point in his life, so I guess that's fine that I said that.

you are inventing an enemy of your own choosing instead of being honest with this “discussion”

i never said that, but i can see why you would rather argue someone who acutely believed that then admit you lack the bare basic nuance to separate hitler from an edgy 90’s tween, due to not wanting to actully defend the argument against Che after, from what i can see, is a very reasonable rebuttal.

you must have something against Che, but are unable to articulate why he is bad

you are inventing an enemy of your own choosing

Nice gaslighting attempt, but I'm not buying it. If someone uses "gay" as a synonym for anything bad, I don't respect them.

Toodle-oo!

ok, good to know for certain that you were a waste of time

The state department runs wikipedia. You know, the state dept that oversaw bombing all of Cuba's agricultural production with invasive pests? Decimated everything. The people who keep them under embargo & want to turn the island into a casino. You trust them? This screenshot presents Wikipedia as an authoritative source on politics. This isn't about chemistry or some shit, and honestly it is pretty lacking for organic chemistry & i hear material science, it didn't even know where ethylene gets used these days, so anyone checking that throughout the US war of aggression on Iran is clueless of how important these feedstocks really are

🫡🧉🤓