• History vs. Che Guevara
    5 replies, posted
[video=youtube;tjrvKA4w9-Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjrvKA4w9-Y[/video]
I really liked that it showed both sides. If you're going to know anything about history, you can't look at it in a black and white way. Have your opinion, definitely, but always realize history is really, really complicated with a lot of mitigating factors. That's my number one complaint about how history's taught in American schools (at least my American k-12 experience, my college history courses were amazing). As for my personal opinion, he was a piece of shit. You can't justify genocide on this level by saying, "but look how many people I taught to read, man!"
Nobody sets out to be a butcher or terrorist, and he may have had (in his mind) great ideals, but it's the process and results of what you do that matter more than what you believe. And the end result was violence, death, and chaos - which can be said for every revolution, but in his case it continued long after the war. Him being a trendy symbol is sickening.
[QUOTE=Penultimate;52927185]I really liked that it showed both sides. If you're going to know anything about history, you can't look at it in a black and white way. Have your opinion, definitely, but always realize history is really, really complicated with a lot of mitigating factors. That's my number one complaint about how history's taught in American schools (at least my American k-12 experience, my college history courses were amazing).[/QUOTE] I absolutely [b]love[/b] how this video was presented. Was a very seamless and natural way to continually point-counterpoint throughout the entire video, presenting not only both perceptions, but the objective information those perceptions come from. And then you have blatantly biased think-tank shit like PragerU in the Up Next. [img]https://files.catbox.moe/geez4d.png[/img] :v:
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52928273]I absolutely [b]love[/b] how this video was presented. Was a very seamless and natural way to continually point-counterpoint throughout the entire video, presenting not only both perceptions, but the objective information those perceptions come from. And then you have blatantly biased think-tank shit like PragerU in the Up Next. [img]https://files.catbox.moe/geez4d.png[/img] :v:[/QUOTE] whoever rated you dumb is also dumb enough to watch praeger u
This video claims to be objective while in fact is lacks many important details. The reason Guevara went to Africa and Bolivia to lead a revolution was mostly because of disagreements between him and Castro on how they see Cuba's future. It is very likely that if he was still in power Cuba would be a different place. Regardless to whether you support Communism or not, the man was a true communist, in contrast to Castro who was a regular person blinded by power
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.