Un Pensamiento Revolucionario

1
¿Las Armas o el Amor?
Un Pensamiento Revolucionario:
A Comparative Study of
Ernesto “Che” Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez
By Dana Claire Discher
Advised by Dr. Greg Miller
Submitted in partial fulfillment
Of the requirements for graduation from
The Malone College Honors Program
April 21, 2008
2
Acknowledgements:
I would like to thank the many professors at Malone College for their continued
support in teaching and molding me into a Christian scholar. I would particularly like to
thank Dr. Greg Miller for his prayers, patience and discernment in guiding me through
this process. I would also like to thank Dr. Julia Villaseñor for teaching me so much
about Latin America and being an inexhaustible resource for this project. Thanks also to
my family, Alisha Hershberger, and Alexandra Robbins for their support, prayers, and
listening to me develop these ideas. Thanks above all to the Lord Jesus Christ, who
orchestrated my journey to Latin America, through the thoughts of Latin American
revolutionaries, and back to the faith, though He was traveling with me every step of the
way.
3
Table of Contents
Introduction………………………………………………………………….4
Chapter I
The Latin American Context………………………………8
Chapter II
Ernesto “Che” Guevara………………………………......21
Chapter III
Gustavo Gutiérrez………………………………………...58
Chapter IV
Comparison………………………………………….…...85
Conclusion………………………………………………………………...100
Appendix A
“La United Fruit Co.”….……………………………….110
Appendix B
Samples of Fontova’s Scholarship…………………......111
Appendix C
Comments Posted on Utube about Che Documentary…113
Appendix D
“Personal Theology of Translation”...……………….....116
Bibliography……………………………………………………………....117
4
Introduction
Riding through the night across the countryside, the bus carried me along the
Argentinean highway. Motorcycle Diaries was playing on the little screens, the only film
my group of study-abroad students had that could be understood by our fellow Spanishspeaking passengers. The young men on screen had said farewell to their families and
were riding a motorcycle along an Argentinean road. The subtitles read “Dear Mom,
Buenos Aires is behind us. Gone is ‘this wretched life’, the uninspiring lectures, the
papers and medical exams. All of Latin America is ahead of us. From now on we only
trust in ‘The Mighty One’.” As I bounced with the bus, I could not shake the feeling that I
was sharing the journey with the protagonists, Ernesto “Che” Guevara and Alberto
Granado.
They were traveling along new roads, leaving academia behind them, seeing
places that they had only read of before. As a study abroad student traveling from Buenos
Aires to Rosario, Argentina, how could I not feel the same way? Throughout the film,
Ernesto and Alberto meet many new people, share funny and tragic experiences, and
come to know Latin America in a very personal way. They meet people who have been
evicted from their family’s land, people oppressed because of their political views, people
traveling in search of work, people who do work and life isn’t bad, but it isn’t good
either. As a medical student, Ernesto offers what little help he can to those in need; his
greatest gift is treatment with dignity. By meeting these people and seeing Latin America
for himself, Ernesto comes to have a deeper understanding of the realities around him,
and he wishes to bring change. Journey and change are motifs of the film Motorcycle
Diaries, which repeats the message “let the world change you, and you can change the
5
world”. When the movie ended and I was left in darkness on the bus carrying me further
into the heart of Argentina, I couldn’t resist the call to critically examine the world
around me, treat others with love, and find a way to change, to right the injustices of the
world.
The bus stopped in Rosario, Argentina, the birthplace of Ernesto “Che” Guevara.
As I walked across the square dedicated to him, La Plaza de Cooperación, I saw things
reminiscent of the film. “By working together we can create a better place” was written
on one of the signs, and a piece of art depicted three ants working together to move a
huge boulder. A plaque read “A few meters from this plaza was born Ernesto “Che”
Guevara, a Rosarian who struggled for a more just and solidarified society.” But off to
one side, someone had written graffiti on the brick wall of the plaza. It read “The world
will never be happy until the last bureaucrat is hung by the intestines of the last
capitalist”. I was shocked. How could someone see the Ernesto of Motorcycle Diaries
and this plaza dedicated to love of humanity and cooperation for social justice and also
write such violent and chilling words? How could it be possible for such violence to
coexist with such love for humanity?
These questions sent me on another journey, well after my return to the United
States. I wanted to know who Ernesto “Che” Guevara really was and what he believed.
As a Christian, I wanted to know how a Christian could respond to the social injustices in
Latin America as presented in Motorcycle Diaries, so I sought the example of Gustavo
Gutiérrez, a well-known liberation theologian. Were these two people and their
respective responses comparable or incompatible? And as a Christian and citizen of the
USA, what should my response be to them?
6
The quest for these answers has been my journey for the better part of the last
year. And now I invite my reader to travel with me, through Latin America and the minds
and lives of two revolutionaries, Ernesto “Che” Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez, in order
to better understand the world we live in and through the power of Christ be changed.
7
La Plaza de Cooperación
8
Chapter I
“In 1492 Columbus sailed the ocean blue…” And what happened after that?
There’s no rhyme to tell us. Or if there is, we don’t know it. Most North Americans don’t
know what happened between the arrival of Columbus and the Pilgrims at Plymouth.
From there it’s a short hop to George Washington and the American Revolution. But only
13 colonies were liberated by the American Revolution—what about the rest of the
Americas? As estadounidenses, the Spanish term for citizens of the United States, we
don’t know the history of most Americans. Without knowing the history of the Americas
and the mark the first Spanish explorers made on America, it is impossible to understand
the majority of the Americas today. As both Ernesto “Che” Guevara and Gustavo
Gutiérrez, the men to be examined in this study, are from South America, it is particularly
important for us to understand the historical influences that shape their world and their
revolutionary paths. So, in this section we will endeavor in a brief review of the arrival of
the Spanish in 1492 and their impact on three structures of society that has persisted from
colonial days through the 20th century.1
In 1492 King Ferdinand and Queen Isabel of Spain desired to create one unified,
Catholic empire. They expelled the Jews from the Iberian Peninsula in order to create a
wholly Christian kingdom. Likewise, in the New World discovered that very same year,
1
Information in this section can be found in the books: Elizabeth Burgos, me llamo Rigoberta Menchú y así
me nació la conciencia 15th ed. (Mexico D.F.: Siglo Veintiuno Editores, 1998).; Eugenio ChangRodríguez, Latinoamérica: Su civilización y su cultura (New York: Harper Publishers, Inc, 1991).; Jack
Child, Introduction to Spanish Translarion (New York: University Press of America, Inc., 1992).; John G.
Copeland, Ralph Kite and Lynn A. Sandstedt, Civilización y Cultura: Intermediate Spanish 7th ed.
(Orlando, FL: Harcourt College Publishers, 2001).; Juan Kattán-Ibarra, Perspectivas Culturales de
Hispanoamérica (Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company, 1997).; Teresa Méndez-Faith,
Panoramas literarios América Hispana (Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1998).; and the film Conflict
of the Gods, program II of The Buried Mirror, videocassette, directed by Christopher Railing, Sogetel
(USA: Public Media Film, 1991).
9
the Spanish goal was to conquer and Christianize. The colonists from Spain were almost
entirely military men to conquer the land and clergy to convert the natives. The motives
were both economic and spiritual. Economically, Spain benefited from the raw materials
and riches shipped from the New World. Spiritually, the Spanish devout wished to save
the heathen by bringing them to the Catholic faith. Thus, from the beginning, the
European presence in the Americas was a combination of militarism and clericalism. 2
In addition to the sword and the cross, the Spanish brought three aspects of the
European Medieval Ages that had profound influences in shaping Latin American
society: the social structure, economic structure, and the subsequent oppression of the
lower class, the indigenous people. These three transplantations from Medieval Europe
grew into great thorns in the sides of most Latin Americans.
With the Europeans came the social structure of the Middle Ages, a pyramid-like
hierarchy with few on the top and many on the bottom. Of course, the Spanish, coming
from the height of civilization of the Renaissance, assumed the superior roles over the
indigenous peoples. As the Spanish dominated the new society from their conquest, the
social norms followed suit with the Europeans as the highest class along with their criollo
(Creole)3 children. Beneath them were mestizos, children with European and indigenous
parents, and at the bottom of the social structure were the indigenous peoples. Eugenio
Chang-Rodríguez notes that very few women immigrated from Spain, and this lack of
European women led to many unions between the Spanish men and indigenous women.
2
Eugenio Chang-Rodríguez, Latinomérica: Su civilización y su cultura (New York: Harper Publishers, Inc,
1991), p 83. “Como la espada, secundada por la cruz, realiza la Conquista, y como durante el primer medio
siglo de expediciones a América vienen principalmente soldados y frailes, la historia posterior de América
llevará ese doble signo militar y clerical. El militarismo y el clericalismo unas veces se combaten, pero
otras se unen para luchar contra las nuevas fuerzas políticas y para apoyar al rey, como cuando éste pide y
consigue del Vaticano el patronato real, es decir, el control del nombramiento de las autoridades
eclesiásticas en España y sus dominios.”
3
A criollo (creole in English) is someone with European ancestry, but was born in the Americas.
10
However, very few men married their indigenous partners, not because of their inferior
class, but because of their race. Cortés is a prime example with his concubine, the
princess Malintzin, as is Pizarro with his Peruvian princess.4 This attitude towards race
helped to create a social system wherein those with European heritage were the social
elites and the Native Americans were the large, lower class.5
The social hierarchy affected the economic structure in Latin America. Just as
socially there was one lord over hundreds of serfs in the European medieval context, so
economically hundreds of indigenous people worked on the lands owned by one
Spaniard. The European model gave way to the Latin American latifundios, large tracts
of land owned and managed (but not worked) by the few social elite and worked by the
indigenous people. In the New World, the Europeans owned the land, and the Native
Americans labored on it. The latifundios tended to produce one crop, the majority of
which was sent to Europe. Spain controlled the trade of her American colonies, and
organized them in such a way that many depended on only a few crops or natural
resources to export and support their economies. Furthermore, Spain forbade them from
directly trading with each other.6
In both the social and economic structures, the recently conquered indigenous
peoples suffered oppression. Seen as an inferior, uncivilized people, they were often
taken advantage of and impoverished. During the conquest it was not uncommon for the
4
Eugenio Chang-Rodríguez, Latinoamérica: Su civilización y su cultura (New York: Harper Publishers,
Inc, 1991), p 84-5. “Recordamos los casos de Cortés, que tuvo un hijo en doña Marina; de Pizarro, que tuvo
descendientes en una princesa peruana; y del capitán Sebastián Garcilaso, padre del Inca Garcilaso de la
Vega…Se da por excusa a ésta práctica el hecho de que ni en España el código nobiliario permitía el
matrimonio con personas de clase social inferior. No es válida esta excusa para numerosos padres de
mestizos, ni para Cortés ni para el capitán Garcilaso, que no se casaron con las indias nobles con quienes
convivieron. El impedimento, pues, no fue tanto la diferencia de rango como de razas.”
5
See also Gonzalez, Juan, A History of Latinos in America (New York: Penguin Books, 2000), p 18-20.
6
John G Copeland, Ralph Kite and Lynn A. Sandstedt, Civilización y Cultura: Intermediate Spanish 7th ed.
(Orlando, FL: Harcourt College Publishers, 2001).
11
Spanish, in their goal of creating a Christian empire, to require the indigenous people to
convert and swear loyalty to the Spanish king or die, and this command was not always
made in a language the indigenous people understood.7 Such injustices demanded a
response. Bartolemé de las Casas struggled against the injustices the indigenous peoples
suffered.8 He recounted stories of the Spanish killing indigenous men, women and
children, and then taking the survivors as slaves, but worse than slaves, calling them
pieces, like pieces of cattle.9 His writings, through intentionally bad translations and
exaggeration (by European enemies of the Spanish) led to the Leyenda Negra, or “Black
Legend” describing the inhumane treatment of indigenous people. Thankfully, the legend
resulted in some real reform. For example, in 1542, the New Laws included the
7
For more information on this topic, see the documentary Conflict of the Gods, program II of The Buried
Mirror, videocassette, directed by Christopher Railing, Sogetel (USA: Public Media Film, 1991)., or Jack
Child, Introduction to Spanish Translarion (New York: University Press of America, Inc., 1992), p 52.
8
Teresa Méndez-Faith, Panoramas literarios América Hispana (Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company,
1998), p 22-23. “Conocido como <<Apóstol de las Indias>> o <<Protector de los indios>> por su
incansable actuación en defensa de los nativos del Nuevo Mundo, Las Casas sostenía la idea de que la
evangelización, para ser legítima, debía hacerse por medios pacíficos. Desde su llegada a la isla Española
(hoy República Dominicana y Haití) en 1502, combatió sin descanso los abusos de los conquistadores,
protestando y denunciándolos una y otra vez ante el rey y las demás autoridades españolas.”
“Known as ‘Apostle to the Indies’ or ‘Protector of the Indians’ for his tireless action in defensa of the
natives of the New World, Las Casas supported the idea that evangelization, in order to be legitimate,
should be done through peaceful means. From his arrival to the island Española (today the Dominican
Republic and Haiti) in 1502, he fought without rest against the conquistadors, protesting and denouncing
them time and again before the king and other Spanish authorities.”
9
Méndez-Faith, p25-26. “… andar los españoles a cazallos por montes, que llaman ellos ranchear, vocablo
muy famoso y entre ellos muy usado y celebrado; y dondequiera que hallaban manada de indios, luego
como daban en ellos, mataban hombres y mujeres y aun niños a estocadas y cuchilladas, lo que se les
antojaba, y los demás ataban, y llevados ante Diego Velázquez, repartiéndoselos a uno tantos y a otros
tantos, según él juzgaba, no por esclavos, sino para que le sirviesen perpetuamente como esclavos y aun
peor que esclavos; sólo era que no los podían vender, al menos que a la clara, que de secretos y con sus
cambalaches hartas veces se ha en estas tierras usado. Estos indios así dados, llamaban piezas por común
vocablo, diciendo: <<Yo no tengo sino tantas piezas, y he menester para que me sirvan tantas>>, de la
misma manera que si fueran ganado.”
“The Spanish rode about hunting for them, looting as they called it, a word which was famous and often
used and celebrated among them; and wherever they found a crowd of Indians, as soon as they found them,
they killed men and women and even children stabbing and slashing, whatever they felt like doing, and
those who remained they bound, and brought before Diego Velázquez, dividing them amongst themselves,
however he judged, not to be slaves, but so that they served him perpetually like slaves and even worse
than slaves. This was only because they couldn’t sell them, at least not openly but secretly, by bartering as
was too often practiced in these lands. They called these exchanged Indians ‘pieces’ in common words,
saying ‘I only have these pieces, and they’re not enough to serve me enough’ speaking in such a way as if
they were cattle.”
12
prohibition of the practice of slavery of indigenous people in encomiendas.10 However,
racism and oppression of the indigenous persisted.
During this time, the Church, brought over by the European clergy, identified
most closely with the criollo elite. Like the military men, the Church was granted large
tracts of land, and it relied on alliances with the social and economic elite in order to
survive in the New World.11 The result was that the Church represented the rich, and
many of the common, indigenous peoples converted out of necessity, but never fully
embraced or understood it, in many cases retaining indigenous beliefs and customs and
fusing them into the new, dominant faith. Of course, these are broad generalizations.
There are stories of the indigenous people coming to salvation and of priests who did
minister to the indigenous out of genuine concern and Christian love. Yet it remains that
on the whole, the indigenous peoples suffered beneath the weight of the new civilization
and its abiding religion.
In 1492, the Spanish explorers brought with them social and economic structures
that became norms for Latin American society. The European inheritance of the
stratification of society, social and economic inequality, racism and oppression of the
indigenous peoples, with the Church allied with the ruling elite, characterized not only
the colonial era, but Latin American society throughout its post-Columbian history. Only
10
Méndez-Faith, p 23. “Sin embargo, su persistencia logró la proclamación de las Leyes Nuevas (1542) que
eliminaron, entre otras cosas, la esclavitud indígena permitida y practicada bajo el sistema de
encomiendas.” “Nevertheless, his persistence achieved the proclamation, the New Laws (1542), which
eliminated, among other things, indigenous slavery permitted and practiced under the system of the
encomiendas.”
11
Juan Kattán-Ibarra, Perspectivas Culturales de Hispanoamérica (Lincolnwood, IL:National Textbook
Company, 1997), p 202. “Durante siglos la Iglesia tuvo la protección de los grupos dominantes y de los
elementos más conservadores de la sociedad. La Iglesia no representaba al pueblo sino a las elites
gobernantes. Esta posición fue crucial para su sobrevivencia. En el medio rural la institución era dueña de
grandes extensiones de tierra. En la ciudad poseía escuelas y universidades destinadas principalmente a la
educación de los más ricos. La masa campesina y obrera no se identificaba con la Iglesia y se alejaba de
ella cada vez más.”
13
in recent years has this began to change, largely due to the revolutionary forces of change
in the latter part of the 20th century, the age of our revolutionaries, Ernesto “Che”
Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez.
At the beginning of the 20th century, much of the colonial tensions remained.
Racism was still present; whiter (more European) skin was valued more than darker
(indigenous or African) skin tones. There was still a huge gap between the elite who
owned the majority of the land in Central America. Naturally, the elite owned millions,
while the majority of the population struggled to make ends meet. The latifundios
remained, sometimes masked with names like hacienda, estancia or ranch, but they mean
the same thing—large lands owned by a family or company, or in some cases foreign
North American companies.12 In 1912 Cuba, foreigners owned more than 75% of the
land. “Government employment and managerial jobs with foreign companies became the
main source of income for the native upper class, and public corruption its primary
source of wealth.”13 As before, the latifundio structure continued to produce mono-crops,
with entire countries depending on only a few crops for export. Although politically
independent from Spain, Portugal and France, Latin American countries suffered an
economic neocolonialism, wherein they sold their crops and raw materials to industrial
(European and North American) countries who in turn resold the finished products to
Latin America at higher prices than the original raw goods. The result of this global
market was an impoverishment of Latin American countries. During the 20th century,
12
Kattán-Ibarra, Perspectivas Culturales de Hispanoamérica (Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook
Company, 1997), p 152. “Las grandes haciendas o latifundios dedicados al cultivo de productos de
exportación o a la cría de ganado en gran escala están controlados en gran medida por empresas
extranjeras. Así ocurre en la América central, por ejemplo, donde las grandes plantaciones de plátanos
pertenecen a companías norteamericanas, que realizan también la comercialización. El trabajo de estas
haciendas está relativamente mecanizado y en ellas se emplea frecuentemente mano de obra temporera
durante la cosecha. Los jornaleros o trabajadores agrícolas reciben un salario diario llamado jornal.”
13
Gonzalez, Juan, A History of Latinos in America (New York: Penguin Books, 2000), p 65.
14
several theories attempted to describe the economic phenomena of Latin America, and
they used terms such as neocolonialism and dependency. These 20th century theories play
a major part in the minds of both Ernesto “Che” Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez.
In addition to the latifundios, there were the smaller scale minifundios, also called
granjas or fincas. On these smaller plantations it is not uncommon for the indigenous
workers to work from sunrise to sundown and still barely earn enough to feed their
families. The groups of indigenous people that work are often split up so that they cannot
communicate well with each other. Rigoberta Menchú, a Maya Quiché, managed to learn
Spanish and orally record her experiences growing up as a “squatter” in the Guatemalan
mountains and working in the fincas.14 She recounted the awful conditions of traveling
from their homes in the mountains to the fincas near the coast—40 people with animals
in the back of a truck, unable to get off for any reason until arrival at the finca. The smell
of the animals and people together soiling themselves was enough to make them vomit,
so that by the time the truck arrived, all of the people were weak and sick.15 “The way
that we arrived was a disaster, but a disaster where we appeared like chickens that emerge
from a pot so that we could barely walk to the entrance of the finca.”16 At the finca, they
labored all day, including children like Rigoberta who labored as young as eight years
14
Elizabeth Burgos, me llamo Rigoberta Menchú y así me nació la conciencia 15th ed. (Mexico D.F.:
Siglo Veintiuno Editores, 1998). The first edition was printed in 1985. In this section I will be referring to
information presented in chapter 4, and my excerpts are not nearly enough to describe the horror that she
suffered. I highly recommend the reader to read the book or a translation of it.
15
Burgos, p42-43. “El camión es de cuadrillas para cuarenta personas. Y entre las cuarenta personas, van
animales, perritos, gatos, pollitos que la gente trae del altiplano para llevarlos a la costa durante los días que
van estar en la finca. Y entonces nos vamos con los animales. Había veces que caminábamos en el camión,
más de dos noches y un día. De mi tierra hasta la costa. Cuando íbamos en camino, empezaban a ensuciar
los animales como también los niños en el mismo camión y entonces no se soportaba el olor de toda la
suciedad, de animales y de gente…Entonces, en el camión, también hay gentes vomitando, gente que saca
todo lo que ha comido en el día. Entonces se unen todas esas cosas y casi uno llega a la finca medio tonto.”
16
Burgos, p 43. “De modo que llegamos a la finca como un desastre, pero un desastre que parecíamos
gallinas que salen de una olla que apenas podíamos caminar al llegar a la finca.” 43
15
old. They were barely rationed enough food, and if they did not work (including little
children), then they did not receive food, and the parents had to give up part of their
rations to feed their children. There was a store and a cantina owned by the landowners
where hungry children and depressed parents would rack up such a bill to survive that
almost all of their earnings for the month would be spent to settle the debts.17 These are
just a few examples of the many awful conditions Rigoberta Menchú and other
Guatemalan s suffered in their struggle to survive during the mid 20th century.
The Latin American situation is such that the person next door has millions of
dollars, and Juan Fulano is sitting on the street starving to death. It is not enough for the
Church to say, “keep praying; you will receive your reward in the next life”. Juan may
yet have to live another 40 years in these conditions. The dramatic inequalities and
tensions faced by Latin Americans are bound to snap.
After five centuries, oppression and impoverishment of the majority of the
population were still major problems in Latin America. Social and economic inequalities
were at desperate levels. In an interview, Dr. Julia Villaseñor said, “I think it’s because in
times of crisis, where the conditions are so severe, that there isn’t another way [other than
violence] to deal with it to them. When people are desperate—and it is desperate, we’re
talking about structures that have been established for centuries—and it only benefits a
few, the [violent and revolutionary] situations are bound to happen.”18 This is the
historical and social context of Ernesto “Che” Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez during the
mid 20th century.
17
Burgos, p 44-45.
“I believe in my heart that we are always human in the ways we respond to these situations.” Dr.
Villaseñor April 4, 2008, as a qualifier to the quote above.
18
16
Having come to understand a little of Latin American history which we, as
students in the United States, may not have known, we might ask “What was the USA’s
relationship to Latin America during this time?” After all, we are a nation founded on the
beliefs that “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with
certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”
and we pledge that our nation stands for “liberty and justice for all”.
Shortly after Thomas Jefferson penned the words of the Declaration of
Independence, in 1779, Spain allied itself with the 13 colonies against England during the
Revolutionary War. Spain sold much of its North American holdings to France, who then
sold them to the USA in the 1803 Louisiana Purchase. Spain then sold Florida to the
USA in 1819. The revolutionary fervor of the 13 colonies soon spread throughout the
Americas, and by 1830 Spain retained only the Philippines, Guam, and the Caribbean
Islands out of its former empire over most of the American continents. The 1823 Monroe
Doctrine stated that the USA would stay out of European affairs and European powers
had no business in the American politics, a doctrine that meant to protect the
independence of the newly liberated American countries, from Mexico to Chile.
The USA is known for its continental expansionism, the Oregon Trail, the Alamo,
and such. The Mexican American War, which Mexico felt compelled to declare after its
province of Texas was ‘liberated’ and inducted to the USA, ended with the Treaty of
Guadalupe. This document ceded half of Mexico’s territories (California, most of
Arizona, New Mexico, and the areas to the north, including parts of Utah, Colorado) to
the USA. In 1853, the USA bought the remaining areas of Arizona and New Mexico
which held access to the Pacific Ocean in the Gadsden Purchase. This left Mexico in an
17
impoverished condition, unable to pay off its aggressive and invasive European lenders.
The USA (deep into the Civil War) was unable to make good its promises in the Monroe
Doctrine, and did not help Mexico against the European aggressors.19 After the wars,20
the USA continued expanding, acquiring Alaska, but never accepting the Dominican
Republic’s request for statehood.21 In 1898, the USA took advantage of the Cuban
revolutionary spirit sparked by Jose Martí and declared war on Spain after the mysterious
explosion of the US Maine. Within a year, Spain lost all of its remaining colonies to the
USA (Philippines, Guam and Puerto Rico) and Cuba remained under an undetermined
American military control.22 Near this time, the USA was hoping to build a canal through
Panama and while it was negotiating terms with Colombia, the region of Panama revolted
and Roosevelt immediately recognized Panama as an autonomous nation and began
negotiations with it, abandoning Colombia.23
Roosevelt also extended the Monroe Doctrine from protecting American nations
from European infringement to providing intervention whenever the American country
was internally unstable. While this may seem like being a “good neighbor” and did not
interfere if they “behaved themselves”, it usually meant that the USA supported dictators
rather than elected democracies in times of crisis.24 These dictators depended on the USA
for arms to maintain control, and offered favorable economic trades in return.25 For
19
John G. Copeland, Ralph Kite and Lynn A. Sandstedt, Civilización y Cultura: Intermediate Spanish 7th
ed. (Orlando, FL: Harcourt College Publishers, 2001), p 239-240.
20
The Union was preserved in the USA and Mexico eventually overthrew the French imposed monarchy
on May 5, 1867.
21
Ibid., p 240-241.
22
Ibid., p 236.
23
Colombia believed that the USA incited the rebellion, especially since they waited only three days to
begin new negotiations about the canal. Ibid 245.
24
Ibid., p244-246.
25
The USA supported Somoza in Nicaragua (1934), Batista in Cuba, helped Pinochet overthrow
democratically elected Salvador Allende in Chile (1973), and helped Castillo-Armas overthrow President
18
example, the USA encouraged Batista (Cuba) to stage a coup in 1934, which led to his
dictatorship.26 Despite such involvement in Latin American politics, the USA did not
support Argentina when it requested help in fighting Great Britain in the 1982 Falkland
War. Thus, the USA failed in the original intent of the Monroe Doctrine.
In addition to interfering in Latin American politics in a way that does not always
support democracy or human rights, the USA has also taken advantage of American
nations economically. Although this hasn’t clearly been official US policy, many US
companies and investors have bought or manipulated much of Latin America’s lands,
companies, and politics. Juan Gonzalez has researched and written extensively on this
topic. For example, in 1912 “two Wall Street firms controlled the new National Bank of
Nicaragua (chartered in Connecticut), and the Pacific Railroad (incorporated in
Maine)…For the next thirteen years, a small force of marines remained in the country as
Washington and Wall Street dictated the country’s financial affairs.”27 In Cuba the
United Fruit Company acquired 200,000 acres, and in 1902 the USA controlled 90% of
the exports of Cuba’s Havana Cigars.28
Perhaps some of the USA’s interference was unintentional, not part of a policy
plan, but the result of private businesses reaping benefits from Latin America. This
charitable view does not deny that the government shared in the fruits of the companies’
foreign enterprises, nor that the government deployed military forces to protect the
interests of the United States of America. The result of this unofficial policy was wealth
for the USA, and devastation of the Latin American’s economy.
Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala (1954). It is rumored that the USA is currently supporting terrorist Posada
Carriles in Cuba.
26
Gonzalez, p 65. Note: this is the same Batista whom Che will overthrow with Fidel Castro in 1959.
27
Gonzalez, p 75.
28
Gonzalez, p 64.
19
Pablo Neruda wrote a poem describing the Latin American perspective of the
foreign companies’ domination over Central American countries. Although the reader is
highly encouraged to read the poem in its entirety (See Appendix A), here are two stanzas
from “La United Fruit Co.”
Entre las moscas sanguinarias
la Frutera desembarca,
arrasando el café y las frutas,
en sus barcos que deslizaron
como bandejas el tesoro
de nuestras tierras sumergidas.
With bloodthirsty flies
came the Fruit Company,
amassed coffee and fruit
in ships which put to sea like
overloaded trays with treasures
from our sunken lands.
Mientras tanto, por los abismos
azucarados de los puertos,
caían indios sepultados
en el vapor de la mañana:
un cuerpo rueda, una cosa
sin nombre, un número caído,
un racimo de fruta muerta
derramada en el pudridero.
Meanwhile, the Indians fall
into the sugared depths of the
harbors and are buried in the
morning mists;
a corpse rolls, a thing without
name, a discarded number,
a bunch of rotten fruit
thrown on the garbage heap. 29
Neruda wrote this poem to cry out against the imperialism of foreign countries taking the
economic wealth of Central America to the destruction and oppression of native Latin
Americans.
In response to imperialism, freely elected leftist Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán
(Guatemala) nationalized the lands belonging to the United Fruit Company. This
removed the lands from the hands of foreigners, returning the economic benefits to the
Guatemalan people. The response was a military takeover by General Carlos Castillo
Armas backed by the CIA. In Nicaragua, foreign-owned companies such as the United
Fruit Co. owned most of the country, and through economic pressures manipulated the
government. One American declared himself emperor of Nicaragua. Such arrogance
29
Pablo Neruda, “La United Fruit Co.” in Pasajes: Literatura 5th Ed, ed by Mary Lee Bretz et al. (New
York: McGraw-Hill Companies Inc., 2002).
20
cannot go unnoticed. It is not without cause that Latin Americans resent intervention by
the USA in the 20th century. There is much more written on this topic, and it is not within
the scope to discuss all of the USA’s foreign relations with the Americas. But it should be
clear by now that we have not always been a good neighbor to the rest of the American
countries.
This review of the inequalities and injustices in Latin America and the role of the
USA in its exploitation is not meant to blame the Spanish for colonial days or to be “antiAmerican” with regard to the 20th century. But it is necessary to understand the realities
that Latin Americans have and to a great extent still face. It is in this oppressive context
that Ernesto “Che” Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez find themselves. Naturally, they wish
to change the situation of their countries and beloved Latin America. Now we can look at
each individual, and see what revolutionary steps they took, in ideology and in deed.
21
Chapter II
The story of Ernesto Che Guevara is full of adventure and mystery. There are at
least two diametrically opposed versions of who this man was, why he fought, and what
sort of man he was morally. First, we’ll review the undisputed facts of his life and later
on we’ll discuss the two versions of his character. But in the interim, before we examine
the different versions, we will discuss his ideology—the main focus of this discourse—
and then see how he lived it, and the impact the combination of his words and deeds have
made on people for half a century.
An ideology is always set amidst its believer’s background. Although there are
competing versions of Che, these are the undisputed facts.30 Ernesto Guevara de la Serna
was born on June 14, 1928 in Rosario, Argentina to parents Ernesto Guevara Lynch and
Celia de la Serna. From age two, Ernesto was subject to chronic asthma, and so the
family moved to Alta Gracia, Argentina. His home was filled with interesting people in
addition to his parents and three younger siblings—political exiles from Spain,
professors, and poets wandering in and out of the family’s house, exposing Ernesto to a
wide variety of people and ideas. Due to his father’s bad luck in business, the middle
class family had to sell off its lands and settle in Buenos Aires. Although he originally
30
The following information can be found in almost any biography of Ernesto “Che” Guevara such as the
following: Jon Lee Anderson, Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life (New York: Grove Press, 1997); Jorge
G. Castañeda, Companero: The Life and Death of Che Guevara (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc, 1997).;
Alain Ammar, trans. Heber Cardoso, Che Guevara: el Rojo Cristo (México: Editorial Diana, 2006).; Che
Guevara: restless revolutionary, VHS, A&E Television Network (New York: New Video Group, 1998);
Che Guevara: A Guerrilla to the End, DVD (Princeton: Films for the Humanities & Sciences, 2004); The
True Story of Che Guevara: the Life and Death of the 20th Century’s Most Iconic Rebel, The History
Channel, DVD, A&E Home Video (New York: Distributed by New Video, 2007).This information is not
disputed by Humberto Fontova, Exposing the Real Che Guevara: and the Useful Idiots Who Idolize Him
(New York : Sentinel, 2007).
22
thought of a career in engineering, Ernesto Guevara studied medicine.31 In 1952, one
semester before graduation, he took a road trip across the South American continent with
his friend, Alberto Granado. After returning to Buenos Aires, he finished studying
medicine in 1953 and collected his thoughts, determining that the trip had changed him in
a profound way. Rather than following a career in medicine in Argentina, Ernesto
satisfied his love of travel by making his way to Guatemala. It was here that his
Argentine accent and habit of saying “che” (roughly translated as “hey you” or “dude”)
was noticed and earned him the nickname “Che” by his comrades.32 Here he witnessed
the 1954 overthrow of Jacobo Árbenz’s leftist government by the CIA and withdrew with
other political exiles to Mexico.33 With him came his politically-minded Peruvian lover,
Hilda Gadea, whom he married when she announced she was pregnant in Mexico. They
had one daughter, Hildita Beatrix.34 Hilda introduced Che to members of the Peruvian
Communist Party, and it was in Guatemala that Che began seriously reading Marxist
literature.35
At this time in Mexico, Che was introduced to Raul and Fidel Castro. Che was
deeply impressed by Fidel’s ideas and willingness to fight for them. He quickly joined
their cause of liberating Cuba from the American influenced dictatorship of Fulgencio
Batista. In 1957, the revolutionaries sailed to Cuba on a yacht called “la Granma”. Upon
landing they were attacked by the Batista troops and only 17 out of 82 revolutionaries
31
Anderson, p 40, 42.
There are different versions of exactly when Che received his nickname, from Guatemala and Mexico, to
the Sierra Maestra in Cuba. In any case, he received it in the company of central Americans, due to his
Argentine accent. The True Story of Che Guevara; Fontova 34-5.
33
The True Story of Che Guevara: the life and death of the 20th century’s most iconic rebel, Gillick, Steven
S., “Guevara, Ernesto ‘Che’ ” in Encyclopedia of Latin American History and Culture, Tenenbaum,
Barabara A, ed, vol 3 (Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York: 1996). p145-6.
34
Anderson, p188. Hildita was born on February 15, 1956.
35
Michael Lowy, trans Brian Pearce, The Marxism of Che Guevara: Philosophy, economics, and
revolutionary warfare (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1973), p 11.
32
23
survived to hide out and recruit more guerrilla warriors in the Sierra Maestra mountains.36
There were a few skirmishes here and there, but it was only after the guerrillas took the
city of Santa Clara late December 1958, that Batista’s regime fell. By January 1959 Fidel
Castro was in power over Cuba, with his brother Raúl named as his successor and Che
Guevara as his right-hand man. Che was initially in charge of judging and executing
Batista war criminals, but soon switched to director of Cuba’s economics. He traveled
abroad to establish foreign relations with other countries, such as the Soviet Union and
China. Immediately after the revolution, Che divorced Hilda and married Aleida March,
who had been with him during the revolution, and during this time they had four children
together.
In 1965, Che led a Cuban force to the Congo to help the Congolese in their
revolution, which was crushed by the opposition with the help of Belgium and the CIA.
Che returned briefly to Cuba before beginning his final crusade in Bolivia. There, he and
his men were unable to gain the support of the people whom they fought for, were
perpetually lost and hungry in the jungle, and were eventually tracked down by the CIA.
Only five of Che’s men survived; Che himself was caught and executed by a Bolivian
officer on October 9, 1967. 37
This broad outline of Che’s life ignores controversial information. Why Che
participated in these three revolutions has not been addressed, nor his concern for
humanity, nor the nature of his death. All of these issues are up for heated dispute. But
before we discuss opinions on Che’s actions, let’s let him speak for himself as to what he
believed, what the revolution meant to him, and what life was about.
36
The True Story of Che Guevara
All of this information can be found in multiple sources: Anderson, Fontova, The True Story of Che
Guevara; Che Guevara: A Revolutionary.
37
24
Ideology
“His is a legacy which, like those bequeathed by Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky,
Luxemburg, and Gramsci, contributes not merely to the interpreting of the world but also
to changing it.”38
In studying the ideology of Che Guevara, there are many written works from
which to choose. He kept a diary the majority of his life, published works, and gave many
speeches. This project seeks to compare the declarations to the world of both Che
Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez which explain why and what they were endeavoring
based on their beliefs. So, I selected some of Che’s speeches and articles to study. The
ten that I chose were some of his most famous and “classic” works (such as “Guerrilla
Warfare: A Method”, “Man and Socialism in Cuba” and “On Value”), some of his
frequently quoted speeches (“On Being a Communist Youth” and speeches to the UN
“Our Struggle is a Struggle to the Death” and “There Isn’t Revolution Without
Sacrifice”) and a few others that seemed to best explain the initial reasoning behind the
Cuban Revolution, in which he participated, and the goals thereof (“Cuba: Exception or
Vanguard?”, “A New Attitude Towards Work”, “Notes for the Study of the Ideology of
the Cuban Revolution”, and “What is a Guerrilla?” ).39 These works range in date and
audience from Cuba immediately after the Revolution, re-articulations during the early
1960’s to Cubans of what was done and why, and two speeches delivered at the assembly
of the United Nations in 1964 defending the actions of the revolution and the freedom of
all Latin American countries. These writings and speeches, spanning a five-year period,
38
Lowy, p 9.
Other important speeches on themes such as building the economy in Cuba seemed to be off topic, so I
refrained from studying them. Two major aids in selecting these speeches was the research bibliography
provided by Phillip Althoff and the summaries of the speeches contained in John Gerassi’s table of
contents.
39
25
exemplify the background setting, motives for change, and the hopes for the future that
Che held.40
As I read these ten speeches and articles, four themes stood out: the plight of the
common man in Latin America, the source of the poor man’s troubles (colonialism and
imperialism), the solution (the people take back their power), and how to go about
achieving this solution. Then remain the obvious conclusions of the global consequences
of the liberation of the people. Let us now look at each of these in detail.
The first theme is the horrible conditions that Latin Americans find themselves
living in. The inequalities between the rich, who have millions, and the millions of people
who have barely enough to live on greatly bother Che. Che doesn’t believe in the
American capitalist dream, wherein if one works hard enough one can be a millionaire.
He says that capitalists point to people like Rockefeller who (truly or falsely) were able to
rise independently to greatness, but at what cost? How many cases of misery and
suffering lie beneath his story, they in want so that he may have such a great fortune?41
The theme of social and economic inequality has already been mentioned above in the
biographical section as deeply influential to Che’s course. He rarely goes into detail on
this topic in the works that I read, but in a couple of speeches he described the living
40
It is beyond the scope of this project to read the many diary entries, which may contain Che’s more
intimate, perhaps truer beliefs. Nevertheless, these speeches contain his ideology as declared to the world,
functioning much the same way as Teología de la Liberación by Gustavo Gutiérrez and this point of
comparison is the main purpose of this project.
41
Ernesto “Che” Guevara, “El Socialismo y el hombre en Cuba” in Che Guevara: el pensamiento rebelde,
Ed Almeyra, Guillermo and Enzo Santarelli, (Buenos Aires: Ediciones Continente, 2004), p 72. Note:
Unless directly quoted or stated otherwise, footnotes usually indicate that the information presented is from
a close paraphrase of the original Spanish. For example, compare the above with: “Así lo presenta la
propaganda capitalista que pretende extraer el caso de Rockefeller—verídico o no— una lección sobre las
posibilidades de éxito. La miseria que es necesario acumular para que surja un ejemplo así y la suma de
ruindades que conlleva una fortuna de esa magnitud, no aparecen en el cuadro y no siempre es posible a las
fuerzas populares acumular estos conceptos.”
26
conditions of the poor and fieldworkers as ghastly.42 He points to unemployment, low
salaries, long hours in the fields, misdistribution of wealth, and the overall hunger of the
people from the Rio Grande to the southern tip of Chile as the reasons for discontentment
among the people of Latin America.43
When faced with the miserable condition of the poor, Che looks for the cause. He
says that he, like a doctor, scientifically discovered the ailments of Latin America:
hunger, unemployment, low salaries, one crop for one market, latifundismo. The
prognosis is underdevelopment, the result of colonialism.44 The first reason for the many
working for the benefit of the few is the existence of latifundios.45 Secondly, Che
denounces neocolonialism, a system that keeps each country dependent on one main crop
selling in one market, and buying all developed products at a higher price from the
wealthier nations. Che complains that wealthier, imperialist nations, they keep Latin
America in a state of underdevelopment or unproportional development—colonialism!46
He goes on to say that “it should be clearly felt that the government of the United States
42
Ernesto “Che” Guevara, “Guerra de Guerrillas: un método” in Documentos de la revolución cubana,
([Montevideo]: Nativa Libros, [1967]) p86. and, Che Guevara, ¿Qué es un "guerrillero"? (1959)
http://www.marxists.org/espanol/guevara/59-quees.htm “La situación campesina en las zonas agrestes de la
serranía era sencillamente espantosa.”
43
Ernesto “Che” Guevara, “Cuba: ¿Caso excepcional o vanguardia en la lucha contra el colonialismo?”
Verde Olivo 9 de abril de 1961 in Ernesto “Che” Guevara: Obras Completas (Argentina: Andrómeda,
2002), p 208, 209. “una economía monstruosamente distorsionada” “Este fenómeno del bajo salario y el
desempleo, es un círculo vicioso que da cada vez más bajos salarios y cada vez más desempleos, según se
agudizan de las variaciones cíclicas de su economía crean lo que es el denominador común de los pueblos
de América, desde el Río Bravo al Polo Sur. Este denominador común, que pondremos con mayúscula y
que sirve de base de análisis para todos que piensan en estos fenómenos sociales se llama: HAMBRE DEL
PUEBLO, cansancio de estar oprimido, vejado explotado al máximo (ante el miedo de engrosar la enorme
masa de desempleados) para que se exprima de cada cuerpo humano el máximo de utilidades, derrochas
luego, en las orgías de los dueños del capital.” This is a common theme in Che’s writings, so although the
misdistribution of wealth and long working hours aren’t explicit in this quote, they are nevertheless part of
his writings.
44
“Cuba: ¿Caso excepcional?”, p 209. The symptoms themselves are described in the two sections before
the following quotation. “Aplicamos algunas fórmulas, que ya otras veces hemos dado como
descubrimientos de nuestra medicina empírica para los grandes males de nuestra querida América Latina;
medicina empírica que, rápidamente, se enmarcó dentro de las explicaciones de la verdad científica.”
45
See chapter 1 for more information.
46
“Cuba: ¿Caso excepcional?”, p 208. The above is a summary of the section “¿Qué es el subdesarrollo?”
27
is not the protector of freedom, but the perpetuator of exploitation and oppression of the
peoples of the world and of a good amount of its own people.”47
If the problem is that the working people are in bad working conditions, such as
latifundios, for a few wealthy owners, who in turn are subjected to the markets of
imperialist nations, the solution is simple: the people must take back their power, and
create a new society, free from inequality and injustice. This sort of revolution and
reform is bound to happen. Che believes that revolution in Latin America is inevitable,
due to the ghastly conditions of the workers, the development of the revolutionary
conscience, the crisis of imperialism, and the universal support of subjugated peoples.48
This idea of an inevitable social change comes from Karl Marx himself, who believed
after industrialization, the informed working bourgeois would overthrow the ruling elite.
This process was a natural, Darwinistic process that could not be sped up nor stopped—
there would be revolution when all of the objective, necessary circumstances were
present. While Che believes Marx, that the revolution is inevitable, he takes the next step
in Marxist thought, agreeing with Lenin that the revolutionary process is not fixed, and it
can be sped up. It is not necessary to wait for industrialization, rather it is the workers in
the field who will be the ones to push for revolution. Lenin’s break from Marx is both
ideological (the revolution is not an independent and fixed process that cannot be
affected) and methodological (it will be the workers of the fields pushing for revolution,
47
“No hay revolución sin sacrificios” p 311. “…pero debe quedar claramente sentado que el gobierno de
los Estados Unidos no es gendarme de la libertad sino perpetuador de la explotación y la opresión contra
los pueblos del mundo y contra buena parte de su propio pueblo.”
48
“Guerra de Guerrillas: un método”, p 86. This passage was also part of the Segunda Declaración de La
Habana. “En muchos países de América Latina la revolución es hoy inevitable. Ese hecho nolo determina
la voluntad de nadie. Está determinado por las espantosas condiciones de explotación en que vive el
hombre americano, el desarrollo de la conciencia revolucionaria de las masas, la crisis mundial del
imperialismo y el movimiento universal de lucha de los pueblos subyugados.”
28
not the industrialized proletariat).49 Thus, Che’s ideas of inevitable social revolution due
to the ghastly conditions of the agricultural workers are Marxist-Leninist. The question is
how that revolution is to take place. Che gives a little thought to pacifistic movements
and change by elections, concluding that a successful and sustained revolution will only
be achieved through military means. Let’s look at each of these three means in more
detail.
Che agrees that pacifistic movements sound appealing in theory, of course, but he
is doubtful as to whether they can achieve such drastic social change in reality. He
supposes that in countries where there are huge cities with large populations that aren’t
predisposed to guerrilla warfare, change may be achieved through large organized
peaceful protests,50 in situations of crisis where such pressures would be effective.51
However, Che is doubtful that pacifism is a viable option for two reasons. First, he states
the “truth that the enemy will fight to keep his power; to overcome his army, we need an
army of the people—and this doesn’t happen immediately; one needs to gather them and
train them”. He adds that if the struggle is violent, it won’t be the fault of the
revolutionaries, but the reactions of the government in power.52 Secondly, he believes
49
Interview with Dr. Miller, 14 March 2008.
Cuba: ¿Caso excepcional o vanguardia en la lucha contra el colonialismo”, p 212. “Los paises que, aun
sin poder hablar de una efectiva industrialización, han desarrollado su industria media y ligera o,
simplemente, han sufrido procesos de concentración de su población en grandes centros, encuentran más
difícil preparar guerrillas. Además, la influencia ideológica de los centros poblados, inhibe la lucha
guerrillera y da vuelo a luchas de masas organizadas pacíficamente.” [emphasis mine]
51
“Guerra de Guerrillas: un método”, 86. “La lucha pacífica puede llevarse a cabo mediante movimientos
de masas y obligar - en situaciones especiales de crisis - a ceder a los gobiernos, ocupando eventualmente
el poder las fuerzas populares que establecerían la dictadura proletaria. Correcto teóricamente.”
52
“Guerra de Guerrillas: un método”, 86. “That this should take place through peaceful causes or is
delivered into the world after a painful part, does not depend on the revolutionaries; it depends on the
reactionary forces of the old society, that resists allowing the birth of a new society, that is engendered by
the contradictions that the old society carries in its breast. The revolution acts in history like a doctor who
assists the birth of a new life. Armed force is not used unless it is necessary, but when it is necessary it is
used without vacillation (wavering) to help the new life. This new life brings the hope of a new, better life
to the enslaved and exploited masses.”
50
29
that the objective circumstances of Latin America, the “general situation and character of
the field workers are explosive against the feudal structures that favor local and foreign
exploiters”,53 “will push the masses into violent conflict with the bourgeois
government”.54 So, Che does not really believe that peaceful protests will work in
practice.
The second proposed method of creating this new social order is by bringing
reform through elections. In contrast to the peaceful protests pressuring the existing
government (above), this method seeks to elect a new people’s government that will
bring the desired changes. The chances that that such a dramatic change could occur this
way are remote.55 Up until Che, the attitude of Latin American Marxists had been to wait
for the objective conditions to create the circumstance wherein such an election would be
possible. Marxist scholar and affiliate Michael Lowy writes
“The history of the Latin American Communist parties in this period was one of
continual setbacks, despite the devotion, courage, and spirit of sacrifice of several
generations of militants. There can be no doubt that one of the reasons for this
‘permanent defeat’ was the false understanding these parties had of the
revolutionary process on the continent, an understanding based on the MenshevikStalinist theory of ‘revolution by stages.’56
This sense of defeat and waiting for the right moment resulted in a lack of forward action,
and a tendency to ally with wealthy landowners (and imperialists) who could presumably
53
“Guerra de Guerrillas: un método”, 92-3. “Segundo: la situación general del campesinado
latinoamericano y el carácter cada vez más explosivo de su lucha contra las estructuras feudales, en el
marco de una situación social de alianza entre explotadores locales y extranjeros.”
54
“Guerra de Guerrillas: un método”, 87. “En este continente existen en general condiciones objetivas que
impulsan a las masas a acciones violentas contra los gobiernos burgueses y terratenientes, existen crisis de
poder en muchos otros países y algunas condiciones subjetivas también.”
55
Cuba: ¿Caso excepcional o vanguardia en la lucha contra el colonialismo”, p 213. “Aunque no está
excluida la posibilidad de que el cambio en cualquier país se inicie por vía electoral, las condiciones
prevalecientes en ellos harán más remotas esas posibilidades.”
56
Lowy, p 75.
30
help them into power…a tendency which Che criticized.57 Moreover, Che doubts that this
method would be successful, since the people’s new government would not necessarily
have the backing of the military. If the military should not care for more egalitarian
policies, it has the power to destroy the fledgling people’s elected government in a golpe
militar or military takeover.58 Unlike Lenin’s theory, which predicted that many soldiers
would switch and aid the people’s revolution (which was correct in the Russian
Revolution)59, in Latin America there is a close tie between the upper class and the
military, which would most likely be detrimental to the popular movement. Che speaks
even more strongly on the matter: “it would be unforgivable to limit oneself only to the
electoral and not see other ways of armed struggle in order to obtain power, an
indispensable instrument to apply and develop the revolutionary agenda. If power is not
achieved, everything else is unstable, insufficient, incapable of giving solutions that are
necessary…”60
As can be guessed by his argumentation thus far, and the life he lived, Che
concludes that the only effective way for the people to take power of their country and
bring about the necessary changes for human happiness, is through guerrilla warfare. In
his article on the subject, “Guerra de Guerrilla: un método”, Che affirms Lenin, quoting
that “wars are inevitable while society is divided in classes, while there is exploitation of
one man by another man. And to end this exploitation, we cannot avoid war, which
57
Lowy, p 76-9.
Note: historically speaking, this is what happened to the freely elected socialist government of President
Allende of Chile, who was murdered in 1973, well after Che’s death.
59
Interview with Dr. Miller, 14 March 2008.
60
“Cuba: ¿Caso excepcional o vanguardia en la lucha contra el colonialismo”, p 213. “…sería
imperdonable limitarse tan solo a lo electoral y no ver los otros medios de lucha armada para obtener el
poder, instrumento indispensable para aplicar y desarrollar el programa revolucionario. Si no se alcanza el
poder, todas las demás son inestables, insuficientes, incapaces de dar las soluciones que se necesitan por
más avanzadas que puedan parecer.”
58
31
begins always and in all places by the exploiters, dominators, and oppressors.”61 Che’s
view of who and what guerrillas are is quite telling in his overall view of revolution. In
his mind, it is the entire working population rebelling against the tyranny of the elite; the
guerrillas are just the head, the front of the attack, completely supported by the people.
The guerrillas are the vanguard, the people at the front of the movement: “the first in the
sacrifices that the revolution demands, whatever the nature of these sacrifices. The first to
work. The first to study. The first in the defense of the country.”62 The idea of a vanguard
comes from Lenin, who “emphasized the role played by the historical initiative of the
vanguard and the masses in the revolution.”63 But it is important to note that in both
Lenin and Che’s view, the vanguard is not something detached from the people or the
popular movement. Indeed, in his lengthy article about how guerrilla warfare works, Che
emphasizes that the fighters depend on the country people for food, support, information,
and safe houses. 64 While guerrillas are the few who take the shots, all of the people are
part of the revolution.
This solidarity of the people, fighters and supporters, all involved for the common
good, encapsulates Che’s dream for society. Once power has been taken from the
oppressors, it is up to the people, every one, to help in forming and creating a new society
with a new social and economic order—by helping each other for the common good. This
61
“Guerra de Guerrillas: un método”, 88. “…las guerras son inevitables mientras la sociedad esté dividida
en clases, mientras exista la explotación del hombre por el hombre. Y para acabar con esa explotación no
podremos prescindir de la guerra, que empieza siempre y en todos los sitios las mismas clases explotadoras,
dominantes y opresoras.”
62
Ernesto “Che” Guevara, “Que debe ser un joven comunista” Octubre de 1962 in Ernesto “Che”
Guevara: Obras Completas (Argentina: Andrómeda, 2002), p 89. “los primeros en estar dispuestos para los
sacrificios que la Revolución demande, cualquiera que sea la índole de estos sacrificios; los primeros en el
trabajo, los primeros en el estudio, los primeros en la defensa del país.”
63
Lowy, p 19.
64
For more information on how guerrilla warfare actually works, tactics and strategies, the reader should
turn to “Guerra de Guerrillas: un método” or the English version “Guerrilla Warfare, a Method”.
32
leads me to the final theme to be discussed in Che’s ideology—the freedom of the new
social order.
As with the previous themes in Che’s ideology, the new society that Che sought
to create has several dimensions. Fundamental to Che’s vision is a society marked by
solidarity among the people. Everyone will voluntarily work together to build this new
society, free from social classes and prejudice, and through economic equality everyone
will have enough. The problem of Latin America wasn’t that there wasn’t enough food
for everyone, but that wealth was unevenly distributed. This solidarity will create a sense
of brotherhood and happiness that hadn’t been known in the disproportion and oppression
of the old regime. And this solidarity and economic enough will be brought about
through two new creations: the new communist man, and a new attitude towards work.
The “hombre nuevo”, new man (also translated “new mankind”) 65 is marked by a
new understanding of man and his relationship to society. Men must retain their
individuality and think for themselves, but they shouldn’t think of themselves. Rather,
Che supports a more community based society, where all come together to work together,
help each other, and perhaps sacrifice individual desires for the benefit of the whole
community. Che rejects capitalism and its individualistic tendencies that care only about
‘number one’ leaving the society fragmented in a scramble to get to the top.66 This selfcentered focused must shift to the well-being of others. The new society will liberate man
from vicious competition and provide a way for unity, where all benefit from working
65
In this paper I will use “man” and “men” as Che did, to refer to all people. No gender issues are meant to
be aroused, this is just a simple translation from a gendered language.
66
“El Socialismo y el hombre en Cuba”, p 72. “El premio se avizora en la lejanía; el camino es solitario.
Además, es una carrera de lobos: solamente se puede llegar sobre el fracaso de otros.”
33
together. This transformation will come about through education and moral incentives as
people relearn what it means to be human and to be a community.
The second aspect that must be recreated is the nature and attitude towards work.
In the latifundios, work was seen as slavery, toil to be able to survive, a necessary evil.
Che rejects that view and says that no, work is not our master; we are masters over
nature. Work should not feel like man is subject to the machines he operates in order to
satisfy basic animal needs of food and shelter. Rather, man should realize his superiority
over the machine, and work not out of desperation, but as a part of his social
responsibility as a liberated man.67 Work is now a creative and powerful expression of
man’s dominion over nature; he can mold it, cultivate it, create what he wants out of it.
Once again, Che is indebted to Lenin, this time in his understanding of work as an
opportunity for creativity.68 True, labor can be hard at times, but it brings the sweat of a
liberated man, on his own land, not for the profits of wealthy landlords and imperialists,
but for his beloved community. Che says that Cubans have rediscovered how to do work
with love, how to feel important and happy for having completed a task, how when all
work together there is more than enough for all—and this satisfaction and joy comes
from the people owning their own means of production, and not forced to labor for a rich
67
“El Socialismo y el hombre en Cuba”, p 76. The above is loosely taken from the Spanish. “…el trabajo
debe adquirir una condición nueva; la mercancía-hombre cesa de existir y se instala un sistema que otorga
una cuota por el cumplimiento del deber social. Los medios de producción pertenecen a la sociedad y la
máquina es sólo la trinchera donde se cumple el deber. El hombre comienza a liberar su pensamiento del
hecho enojoso que suponía la necesidad de satisfacer sus necesidades animales mediante el trabajo.
Empieza a verse retratado en su obra y a comprender su magnitud humana a través del objeto creado, del
trabajo realizado. Esto ya no entraña dejar una parte de su ser en forma de fuerza de trabajo vendida, que no
le pertenece más, sino que significa una emanación de sí mismo, un aporte a la vida común en que se
refleja; el cumplimiento de su deber social.”
68
Lowy, p 71.
34
oppressor.69 Work is a privilege, never a punishment. All people should voluntarily give
up some of their time working for the benefit of the new society. Erudite people awarded
with educational scholarships should also be awarded the opportunity to do manual labor.
In this way there is solidarity—everyone knows what it’s like to sweat in the fields, and
everyone can appreciate those who do so, while taking turns to share in the common
economic goals.
The shift from the capitalist society to the communist society will take time, and it
will require unlearning old prejudices and learning new attitudes towards other people
and work. Yet Che believes that his vision will come to fruition, “…because you are the
communist youth, creators of the perfect society, human beings destined to live in a new
world where all the decrepit, all the old, all that represents old society will be destroyed
and will completely disappear.”70 The three keys to the new society are: work, study, and
guns. This may seem a little jarring at first, but allow an explanation. Work is the selfexplanatory unity in achieving common goals. Study includes the academic world but is
focused on the learning of new relationships of man to man, and man to nature. However,
this new, beautiful society will not be warmly greeted by the imperialists who have taken
69
Ernesto “Che” Guevara, “Una Actitud Nueva Frente al Trabajo” Agosto de 1964 in Ernesto “Che”
Guevara: Obras Completas (Argentina: Andrómeda, 2002), p 141. “…Y lo podríamos invitar a los campos
de caña para que viera a nuestras mujeres cortar la caña con amor y con gracia, para que viera la fuerza viril
de nuestros trabajadores cortando la caña con amor, para que viera una actitud nueva frente al trabajo, para
que viera que no es el trabajo lo que esclaviza al hombre sino que es el no ser poseedor de los medios de
producción; y que cuando la sociedad llega a cierta etapa de su desarrollo, y es capaz de iniciar la lucha
reivindicatoria, destruir el poder opresor, destruir su mano armada, que es el ejército, instalarse en el poder,
otra vez se adquiere frente al trabajo la vieja alegría, la alegría de estar cumpliendo con un deber, de
sentirse importante dentro del mecanismo social, de sentirse un engranaje que tiene sus particularidades
propias -necesario aunque no imprescindible para el proceso de la producción- y un engranaje consciente,
un engranaje que tiene su propio motor y que cada vez trata de impulsarlo más y más, para llevar a feliz
término una de las premisas de la construcción del socialismo: el tener una cantidad suficiente de bienes de
consumo para ofrecer a toda la población.”
70
“Que debe ser un joven comunista”, p 99. “Será así, porque ustedes son jóvenes comunistas, creadores
de la sociedad perfecta, seres humanos destinados a vivir en un mundo nuevo de donde habrá desaparecido
definitivamente todo lo caduco, todo lo viejo, todo lo que represente la sociedad cuyas bases acaban de ser
destruidas.”
35
advantage of Latin America for so long. They will want a return to latifundios,
monocrops and the wealthy oligarchy that bends to the imperialist will. Thus, it is
necessary to defend the revolution from the attacks and tyranny of foreign powers that
will try to ruin the new society. Che affirmed that “We want peace, we want to create a
better life for our people and, therefore we avoid falling into the provocations schemed
by the Yankees, but we know the mentality of their government leaders: they want to
make us pay a heavy price for peace. We reply that this price cannot be outside the
bounds of dignity.”71
So, Che speaks for Cuba when he says that they will fight to protect their
newfound freedom from exploitation and oppression for the benefit of “developed”
imperialist nations. He also states that this solidarity is not constrained to the people of
Cuba, but among their Latin American brothers, and humanity world-wide. In his effort
to teach people to be other-focused, not individualistic, he expands it to mean a concern
for global humanity. In some very beautiful portions of his speeches, he says that we, like
real men, “feel on [our] cheek the sting of any man who has been hit in the world.”72
They feel the concerns and oppression of all people worldwide.
One beautiful and succinct statement sums up Che’s vision, the goal of the
revolution. The new man is
71
Ernesto “Che” Guevara, “No hay revolución sin sacrificios” 11diciembre de 1964 in Ernesto “Che”
Guevara: Obras Completas (Argentina: Andrómeda, 2002), p307. This was part of a speech delivered at
the assembly of the United Nations in 1964, afteralter the Bay of Pigs (1961) and the embargos and other
attacks of Cuba from the United States. “Queremos paz, queremos construir una vida mejor para nuestro
pueblo y, por eso eludimos al máximo caer en las provocaciones maquinadas por los yanquis, pero
conocemos la mentalidad de sus gobernantes: quieren hacer pagar muy caro el precio de esa paz. Nosotros
contestamos que ese precio no puede llegar más allá de las fronteras de la dignidad.”
72
Ernesto “Che” Guevara, “Nuestra Lucha es una lucha a muerte” 11diciembre de 1964 in Ernesto “Che”
Guevara: Obras Completas (Argentina: Andrómeda, 2002), p316-317. A reference to the writing of Martí
“todo hombre verdadero debe sentir en la mejilla el golpe dado a cualquier mejilla de hombre. Eso, el
pueblo entero de Cuba lo siente así, señores representes.”p317.
36
“…to be essentially human, to be so human that you approach the best of what is
human, purifying the best of humanity through work, study and the exercise of
continual solidarity with the people and all peoples of the earth, developing the
maximum sensitivity so that you are in anguish when a man in some corner of the
earth is murdered, and you feel enthusiastic when a corner of the earth raises its
flag of freedom.”73
Che continues to say that this freedom knows no boundaries, and this love of humanity is
likewise universal. Here his thought is similar to Trotsky, who envisioned the new
humanity and society spreading all across the globe, creating one communist humanity.
Like Trotsky, Che believed this liberty for all men was inevitable. “By this stand, which
is in line with Lenin’s April theses and Trotsky’s theory of permanent revolution, Che
synthesized in a bold, corrosive, and explosive formula both the lessons of the historical
experience of the popular struggles of Latin America and a lucid forecast of the
conditions for achieving the continent’s future liberation.”74 He believed there would be
(and already were) revolts all across Latin America, because the people know that
liberation is not only possible, as seen in Cuba, but they know it’s their destiny.75
“We have predicted that the war will be continental. This means that it will also
be prolonged; there will be many fronts, it will cost a lot of blood, innumerable
lives throughout the long time. But, more than that, the phenomena of polarization
in the forces in America, the clear division between exploiters and the exploited
that will exist in these revolutionary wars, means that once the armed front of the
people, countries have taken power, they will have liquefied the oppressor, the
imperialists and the national exploiters. The first stage of the socialist revolution
73
“Que debe ser un joven comunista”, p 98. “Es decir: se plantea a todo joven comunista ser esencialmente
humano, ser tan humano que se acerque a lo mejor de lo humano, purificar lo mejor del hombre por medio
del trabajo, del estudio, del ejercicio de la solidaridad continuada con el pueblo y con todos los pueblos del
mundo, desarrollar al máximo la sensibilidad hasta sentirse angustiado cuando se asesina a un hombre en
cualquier rincón del mundo y para sentirse entusiasmado cuando en algún rincón del mundo se alza una
nueva bandera de libertad.”
74
Lowy, p 83. Despite the undeniable similarity between Trotsky and Che with regards to the global spread
of socialist revolution, Lowy does note that “Che’s ideas regarding respective roles to be played by the
peasantry and the proletariat in the revolutionary war were, of course, far from being the same as
Trotsky’s.” p 85.
75
“Cuba: ¿Caso excepcional o vanguardia en la lucha contra el colonialismo”, p 216. “…las masas no sólo
saben la posibilidad de triunfo: ya conocen su destino.”
37
will have crystallized; the peoples will be ready to bind their wounds and initiate
the construction of socialism.”76
Now that we know the key ideas in Che’s thought, as he publicly described them
in various speeches and articles, it is time to see why he stated such things. The ideology
above is most congruent with a positive look on Che, namely that he was and did as he
said. After looking at this view, we will look at the opposition’s understanding of Che
and his ideas. There will be a brief review and critique of these biographies before we
finally consider what these contradictory views mean to people today, and how his
influence lives on.
A Positive Look at Che
Two of the four main themes mentioned above were the poverty in which the
majority of Latin Americans found themselves, and that this was the result of hierarchy
within the society and dependency on foreign markets and exploiters. Some biographers
point to Ernesto “Che” Guevara’s childhood as the foundation for his awareness and
concern for others. Jon Lee Anderson, author of arguably the most complete and
thoroughly researched biography Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life, likes to describe
the Guevara household as Celia’s salon, wherein all types of people were welcome to
stay and share their ideas. The Guevara family did not discriminate against people of
different social classes—everyone was welcome in their home.77 Anderson also points to
Ernesto’s love of reading serious authors during his late teens and early twenties, and his
76
“Guerra de Guerrillas: un método”, p 98. “Habíamos predicho que la guerra sería continental. Esto
significa también que será prolongada; habrá muchos frentes, costará mucha sangre, innúmerables vidas
durantelargo tiempo. Pero, algo más, los fenómenos de polarización de fuerzas que están ocurriendo en
América, la clara división entre explotadores y explotados que existirá en las guerras revolucionarias
futuras, significan que, al producirse la toma del poder por la vanguardia armada del pueblo, el país, o los
países, que lo consigan, habrán liquidado simultáneamente, en el opresor, a los imperialistas y a los
explotadores nacionales. Habrá cristalizado la primera etapa de la revolución socialista; estarán listos los
pueblos para restañar sus heridas e iniciar la construcción del socialismo.”
77
Anderson, p39
38
political bantering with his father during the apex of the Peron regime.78 So, from an
early age, Ernesto was exposed to a more egalitarian, politically and philosophically
inquisitive atmosphere.
Ernesto liked to explore, and often took weekend excursions from Buenos Aires
to Córdoba, and then throughout Argentina. The documentary Guevara: Restless
Revolutionary says that it is at this time Ernesto first discovered the poor conditions of
his country, which caused him to reflect.79 Certainly his longer trek across the continent
with Alberto Granado exposed him to poverty on a dramatic scale, and provided him with
life changing experiences. The introduction to Ernesto’s account of his continental
travels, Notas Del Viaje contains this statement: “I am not me anymore, at least I’m not
the same me I was”.80 This passage is also quoted at the end of the 2004 film “The
Motorcycle Diaries” or “Diarios de Motocicleta” which portrays to a decent degree the
adventure across South America, and the issues of poverty and oppression that impacted
Ernesto Guevara. It was arguably this experience that gave birth to a deep desire to create
a better society in Latin America.
After his travels and completing his medical degree81, Doctor Ernesto Guevara de
la Serna traveled to Guatemala where he befriended leftists and members of the
communist party, his future wife Hilda (based on attraction to her political views, not her
physical features), and friends who would introduce him to the Castro brothers. 82 With
78
Anderson, p 45 (bantering with father), 48 (samples of reading list), 49-54 (Peron and his policies).
Guevara: Restless Revolutionary
80
Ernesto “Che” Guevara, Diarios de Motocicleta: Notas de Viaje por América Latina (New York: Ocean
Press, 2004), p 25-26. “‘Yo’, no soy yo; por lo menos no soy el mismo yo interior.” Translation from
subtitles in the film Motorcycle Diaries, DVD, directed by Walter Salles, (Universal City, CA: Universal
Studios, 2005).
81
Anderson, 97.
82
Guevara: Restless Revolutionary and The True Story of Che Guevara which adds that Ernesto was
threatened with prison and death if he remained in Guatemala, due to his political associations.
79
39
these new acquaintances, the Argentine nicknamed “Che” witnessed the overthrow of
leftist President Jacobo Árbenz by the CIA83, further proving that US imperialism is the
cause of Latin American subjugation, and radically pushing him to the third theme in his
ideology: the need for the people to use armed force to reclaim their society.
Immediately upon meeting Fidel, the Argentine Che joins Cuba’s cause, impressed by
Fidel’s plan to fight for the people. After training in Mexico, saying farewell to his wife
and daughter, and landing in Cuba, Che undergoes another transformation. During one of
the initial skirmishes, Che, brought along as a medic, could only grab his medical kit or
his gun and clip. He chose the weapons, signaling his transformation from doctor to
guerrilla fighter. In the documentary The Story of Che Guevara: The life and death of the
20th Century’s most iconic rebel, Anderson says that Che was rough, not known for
gentleness, and he rushed to the front lines bare-chested while Fidel looked for a place to
hide. “His willingness to confront death, to take life, to risk his own life, came together to
form a charisma that was highly unusual, which gave him an almost legendary reputation,
and he emerged as a man who people feared, but also respected and admired.”84
Throughout the time in the Sierra Maestra, Che moved up to the rank of commandante,
Fidel’s second in command.
After the revolutionaries took Cuba, Che was in charge of the executions of war
criminals, and in the documentary Guevara: Restless Revolutionary, he was said to have
executed only 50 out of 500 people, justly killing only those who had done horrendous
things in the past.85 Che was soon moved to be in charge of Cuba’s economics, wherein
83
“Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara” in Dictionary of 20th Century Culture, ed Peter Standish (Detroit: Hispanic
Culture of S America, Gale Research In., 1995), p 123-4.
84
The True Story of Che Guevara: the life and death of the 20th century’s most iconic rebel
85
Guevara: Restless Revolutionary, such as torture and killing women, that sort of thing.
40
he strove to change the population’s understanding of work and solidarity (as detailed
above in the third theme of his ideology). He used mostly moral incentives to change,
hoping to eventually move to a money-less society.86 He once wrote that “In our ambition
as revolutionaries, we try to walk forward as quickly as possible, opening roads, but we
know that we have to nourish the masses and that this can only be sped up when we feed
them with our example.”87 This explains some of Che’s actions, why Che did voluntary
work on his only day off, why he refused to let his wife ride in the state car and made her
take the bus like everyone else, and why he made her return gifts from foreign
dignitaries. In all this, he refused to let his new family (with Aleida March) have a higher
position, due to his work, than the common people he fought for. This may seem rather
strict, but it shows his integrity and his fervent belief that people and society could be
transformed into the “New Socialist Man, one who contributes for the greater good, not
personal profit”.88
Cuba never did live quite up to Che’s idealistic dreams, and as a foreign diplomat,
he had a bad tendency to speak his mind when he felt that others (for example the
Russians) weren’t living up to their Marxist ideals. In 1965, it was time that he exited the
public sphere, and he left Cuba to continue to fight for what he believed in, freeing the
oppressed from the few imperialist-backed elite. His expedition in the Congo was a
disaster, and Che complained that the Congolese were undisciplined and superstitious,
believing that the witchdoctor’s water would protect them from bullets.89 Che returned to
86
Steven S Gillick, “Guevara, Ernesto “Che” in Encyclopedia of Latin American history and Culture, vol 3,
ed Barabara A, Tenenbaum (Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York: 1996).
87
Ernesto “Che” Guevara, “El Socialismo y el hombre en Cuba” in Che Guevara: el pensamiento rebelde,
Ed Almeyra, Guillermo and Enzo Santarelli, (Buenos Aires: Ediciones Continente, 2004), p 75.
88
The True Story of Che Guevara: the life and death of the 20th century’s most iconic rebel
89
Marcos Bravo, La Otra Cara del Che (Bogota, Colombia: Editorial Solar, 2004), p307ff.
41
Cuba in defeat by the enemy Congolese aided by Belgium and the USA. Che’s attention
began to shift from Africa to the Americas. He had always desired to create a union of the
American states, all socialist and helping each other to rise up economically in spite of
the imperialist oppression. So he looked to the very country of Bolivia as a launching
ground for another American revolution, eventually hoping to return and reform his
native Argentina. In general, indigenous people are oppressed socially and economically
in a society that favors fairer skin and more European heritage, so Bolivia seemed a
perfect place to begin the revolution. However, Che may or may not have been aware that
Bolivia had recently had a land reform, established free press and had held democratic
elections90, so many of the peasants already had the land that Che would promise. They
had not heard of him, and as an outsider he and his men did not gain their trust—the most
basic need of a guerrilla fighter.91 After months in the jungle, Che was caught, and killed.
The women and other people who saw his body said that his eyes seemed to follow them,
and he looked like Christ.92 He, too, died for the poor and the oppressed. The messianic
tones in Che’s life are expanded on in the book Che Guevara: El Cristo Rojo. “‘His
blood’ proclaimed Fidel, ‘was spilled for all the exploited.’”93 In the Bolivian town La
Higuera, where Che was killed, houses have pictures of Che adorned with fresh-cut
flowers, crosses mark the place where Che stopped for a drink of water before being
90
In The True Story of Che Guevara: the life and death of the 20th century’s most iconic rebel a Bolivian
reporter scoffed at Che for not being aware of the land reform, or at least not factoring it into his plans.
However, Michael Lowy writes that Che was aware of the Bolivian land reform, p 81.
91
Che Guevara: A Guerrilla to the End
92
Che Guevara: A Guerrilla to the End
93
Alain Ammar, trans. Heber Cardoso, Che Guevara: el Rojo Cristo (México: Editorial Diana, 2006), p
206. “La sangre de Che—proclama Fidel—se derramó por todos los explotados.”
42
imprisoned and there is a mausoleum for Che.94 A woman from the town, Teresa Royas,
writes about San Ernesto:
“He has always protected me, me and my family—she confesses—; he is the
protector of the travelers and archangel supreme over deliveries. The
Commander—adds Teresa—was very good. He helped women in childbirth. Up
here roads don’t exist. We don’t have any help and our daughters died moments
after giving birth. Also, he was a great traveler. He was displaced a lot. I say that
we should have understood his message when he was still alive. He spoke of
many extraordinary things, of social justice, of reducing inequalities, of schooling
and obligatory medical help. And, above all, he wanted for us, the poor, to never
be hungry. But we were afraid; this is why were didn’t help him. Today we know
why he fought, He died for us, like Jesus Christ.”95
To those who take Che’s ideology to heart, he is a man who exemplified his
beliefs founded in a love for mankind, determined to create a better world for the poor
and oppressed, and restoring the dignity of the hitherto subjugated Latin America.
Ernesto “Che” Guevara was “a man who fought for his beliefs until he could fight no
more”.96
A Negative Look at Che
“For a Cuban exile, reading the scholarly biographies of Che is like reading a Hitler
biography in which the primary sources for the chapter on the Holocaust were Adolf
Eichmann and Julius Streicher who scoff at Elie Weisel and Anne Frank as embittered
frauds. Or it is like reading a biography of Stalin that covers the purge trials of the Gulag
using testimony mainly from Andrey Vyshinsky and Lavrenty Beria, who snort at
Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Cardinal Mindszenty as fanciful cranks. Add to that the
media that hails these books as ‘Superb! A masterly job in separating the man from the
myth!’ as the New York Timesbook Review crowed about Anderson’s Che biography, or
94
Ammar, p208.
Ammar, p208-209. “Siempre me ha protegido, a mí y a mi familia –confiesa—; es el protector de los
viajeros y arcángel soberano en contra de los partos difíciles. El Comandante –agrega Teresa— era muy
bueno. Ayudaba a las mujeres en el parto. Aquí arriba no existen los caminos. No teníamos ninguna ayuda
y nuestras hijas morían en momentos de dar a luz. Además era un gran viajero. Se desplazaba mucho. Yo
digo que debimos haber entendido el mensaje cuando aún estaba vivo. Hablaba de cosas extraordinarias, de
justicia social, de reducción de las desigualidades, de escolaridad y de ayuda médica obligatoria. Y, sobre
todo, quería que nosotros, los pobres, nunca tuviéramos hambre. Pero nosotros teníamos miedo; fue por eso
que no lo ayudamos. Hoy sabemos por qué luchaba. Murió por nosotros, como Jesucristo.”
96
Che Guevara: A Guerrilla to the End
95
43
‘admirably honest and staggeringly researched!’ as the Sunday Times hailed Anderson’s
work.”97
For the opposition, accounts like Anderson’s are completely mistaken in hailing a
hero. Instead, virtually everything that has been described thus far is subject to criticism.
Those that critique Che claim that the scholars have used Che’s diaries, letters, articles,
books and speeches as the basis of their biographies. What they have forgotten, however,
is that all of this material comes from Cuba, and the communist’s propaganda printing
press. Of course it makes Che look like a great humanitarian and moral revolutionary—
it’s all propaganda! To discover the real Che, one ought to ask people who knew him
(eyewitnesses) who are free to speak openly (i.e., not in Cuba)98. These witnesses (Cuban
exiles) will tell a very different tale: Che was a weak, selfish person, who loved to kill
defenseless people, reeked horribly, and was odds with Castro, which is why he was
intentionally sent to his death in Bolivia.
The main, current source for this dark view of Che comes from Humberto
Fontova’s 2007 book Exposing the real Che Guevara: and the Useful Idiots Who Idolize
Him. “Useful idiots” comes from a comment Stalin once made about the American and
Western supporters of the communist regime.99 The people who sport Che T-shirts,
accessories and tattoos, from celebrities to rebellious teenagers, are actually displaying
the face of a murderer. Fontova describes his book by saying “[t]his book will expose you
to many eyewitness accounts of Che Guevara’s cruelty, cowardice, and imbecility.”
97
Fontova, p 89-90.
“The book you are now holding relies on testimony from people who are now free to tell the truth
without fear of Castro’s torture chambers and firing squads.” Fontova, xxvii.
99
Fontova, front flap of book cover. “And yet Che’s followers naively swallow Castro’s historical
revisionism. They are classic ‘useful idiots’ the name Stalin gave to foolish Westerners who parroted his
lies about Communism’s successes.”
98
44
Fontova asserts that Che was racist, demeaning a black member of the Cuban revolution
as “Negrito” and sneering at Mexico’s illiterate population.100 This goes in the face of
the commonly held belief that Che fought for the oppressed, especially the indigenous
and otherwise marginalized population. Che was not well-liked by his Cuban
revolutionary companions, saying that like a typical Argentine; he was arrogant and had
an annoying smirk.101 Che was not a good guerrilla, panicking during his first battle, and
confessing later as a commander that he had no military plans.102 Even the famed
conquest of Santa Clara was the result of bribery, not of battle, so Che never did
participate in a real fight.103 He did not have character to inspire followers, relied on
Castro to give him power, and received criticism from Castro on multiple occasions.104
He was not the military genius, and all that is included in his book on guerrilla warfare is
taken from other (Maoist) writings.105 When actually faced with death in battle, Che
surrendered saying “Don’t shoot! I’m Che Guevara—I’m worth more alive than dead!”106
Fontova claims that Che never finished his medical degree (saying that the Facultad de
Medicina has no record of it [now]).107 Contrary to popular thought, Che was a
100
Fontova, xxiv, 16, 167-8 (The reader should see Fontova’s source, the documentary Guevara: Anatomia
de un Mito, Miami: Caiman Productions, 2005.) Note: this claim contradicts Che’s article “Cuba: ¿Caso
excepcional o vanguardia en la lucha contra el colonialismo?” p208.
101
Fontova, 29. more in Guevara: Anatomia de un Mito. Anderson suggests that some of the Cuban
revolutionaries were jealous that a foreigner was leading them. Anderson, p 190.
102
Fontova, 35, 59. See Guevara: Anatomia de un Mito.
103
Fontova, 41-45.
104
Fontova, 132-3, 135 (see Ortega, Luis, Yo Soy el Che (Mexico: Monroy Padilla, 1970), p 122—some
translation liberties here), 149 (See Bravo 288—significant translation variation, and Fontova says that
Raul Castro was present, but Bravo makes no mention of him.)
105
Fontova, 58-9.
106
Fontova, p192.
107
Fontova, 195 (Note: the footnote is incorrect; see Bravo, Marcos La Otra Cara del Che p 499) I hold
that this entire conversation must be taken in context as to Che’s lived profession with no bearing on his
degree: revolutionary, not doctor.
45
materialist, hoping to earn lots of money, and claiming a mansion in Cuba after the
revolution.108
But Fontova’s main argument against Che is that he was a murderer. He killed
innocent people, both during the revolution (unhelpful campesinos and his own
“traitorous” men) and afterwards (war criminals, contra-revolutionaries and suspects).
Fontova reports that a soldier in the Sierra Maestra had nightmares from having to
execute so many people.109 He claims that Che was merciless towards defenseless people,
and carried out grudges when he was director of La Cabaña,110 the old fortress used as a
prison with the paredón, the wall for the firing squad. The True Story of Che Guevara:
The Life and Death of the 20th Century’s Most Iconic Rebel reports that during the first 18
months of the new rule, hundreds and perhaps thousands were executed by firing squads,
innocents among the guilty, further solidifying Che’s fearsome reputation.111 The war
trials were a sham, with the same madre repeatedly testifying that “this man” served
Batista and murdered her son. Fontova reports that Che boasted that he could
manufacture evidence, judicial procedures were part of the bureaucratic past, and that if
trials were necessary, they could be carried out after the execution.112 One time Che was
seen casually signing a stack of death warrants without bothering to look at the names.
Another time, a mother came to Che’s office to plead for the release of her son. He
responded by picking up a phone and ordering the son’s execution for that very night.
Fontova estimates that thousands of Cubans were killed by this sadistic foreigner. “He
108
Fontova, 24.
Fontova, 68-9. Anderson reports that about 12 people were executed in the Sierra Maestra (The True
Story of Che Guevara).
110
Fontova, 38.
111
The True Story of Che Guevara: the life and death of the 20th century’s most iconic rebel
112
Fontova, 43 (see Ros, Enrique, Che: Mito y Realidad (Miami: Ediciones Universales, 2002), p 194.)
109
46
appeared to revel in the bloodletting for its own sake. You could somehow see it in his
face as he watched the men dragged out of their cells.” 113
“Technically, Che Guevara was no longer in command of La Cabaña after
September 1959. But it was still his system of justice, with firing squads piling up
corpses throughout Cuba. Guevara established it, on Castro’s orders, cranked it
into high gear, and always claimed it proudly, as we saw in his famous U.N.
speech. “Executions? Certainly, we execute!”114
Since Che and the Castros took power, Cuba’s booming economy has become a
disaster, one of the worst in the Americas. Freedom is non-existent as all actions are
closely monitored, and may be punished for appearing counter to the revolution (even
minor things like listening to imperialist rock and roll). Thousands of people have been
murdered in La Cabaña. Far from inspiring, Che’s image and message are met with a cara
de culo (roughly, “shitface”) in the youth, who have desecrated posters of Che, and
secretly rejoiced upon news of his death.115 Fontova cynically laughs at the useful idiots
who believe the hagiographic version of Che, and hopes that his book will cause people
to look at these facts, listen to the testimony of eyewitness free to speak the truth, and
stop idolizing the murderer, Che Guevara.
Reviewing These Views
These two views are completely opposed and mutually exclusive in their accounts
of Ernesto “Che” Guevara. Obviously, the truth of his life will affect the effect of his
ideology; either he is a hero who walked the talk, or he was a murderer whose ideas are
merely empty rhetoric from the communist propaganda machine. The only thing that can
be done in this case is to weigh the evidence on both sides.
113
Fontova, 89 (stack of executions), 84 (execution of son), 70 (thousands), 74 (reveling in bloodletting).
Fontova, 74.
115
Fontova, 20 (cara de culo), 11-12 (posters), 101 (joy at death).
114
47
Let’s start with the most recent: the negative view articulated by Humberto
Fontova. His principal claim is that the entire body of literature supposedly written by
Che has been tampered with in the process of publication in Cuba.116 This is a valid
concern—how much can we trust the information that comes out of communist Cuba?
Some of the public speeches can be verified, as they were presented in public places and
videotaped, such as the address to the United Nations in 1964. Other articles could be
verified by procuring originals of the magazines in which Che published his articles. His
handwriting, preserved in cards and diaries outside of Cuba (such as letters to his
Argentine family members) could be compared to the records in Cuba. All of this
research could theoretically be done. It is beyond the scope of this study to attempt this,
but it may be assumed that Anderson did do this in his research, as he was granted access
by Aleida March (Che’s widow) to unpublished letters and other written works. He also
conducted interviews with people in Cuba, Bolivia and Russia. Granted, the Cuban
context may skew some of his interviews, but it seems that the documents could be
verified.
Anderson states, “I have yet to find a single credible source pointing to a case
where Che executed an innocent.”117 Fontova has a good point, if Anderson only
interviewed the revolutionaries in Cuba, he probably won’t hear of infringements on
justice. Did Anderson intentionally not interview anyone who could tell a different story,
such as the “hundreds of eyewitnesses to Che’s extrajudicial murders…only a cab ride
away for Anderson in New York City”?118 This would be the result of an intentionally
sympathetic bias towards Che by ignoring this body of evidence. Or perhaps Anderson
116
Fontova, 38.
Fontova xxiii; The True Story of Che Guevara
118
Fontova, xxiii.
117
48
does not find these Cubans (exiled for a reason) to be a “credible source”. I have no
answer at the moment.
Fontova himself ignores a large body of evidence: everything that Che had written
and all eyewitnesses still in Cuba. Even though Fontova has expressed his reasons for
doing so, this is a considerably larger body of evidence that he is ignoring, and reveals his
strong bias. Bias fills the pages of his book and its cover Che Guevara and the Useful
Idiots Who Idolize Him. Fontova marks Che guilty by association in comparisons to
Hitler and Stalin (see quote above at the beginning of “The Negative View” section). He
uses ad hominem attacks by pointing out that Che reeked horribly. Fontova conjectures
about how Che might have maltreated animals, or jumped in glee at the thought of new
means of killing.119 Fontova is obviously upset about the favor shown to a man he
understands to be a mass murderer, but his excessive bias deafens the ears of serious
readers to his message.
Fontova never claims to be a scholar, just a Cuban exile explaining how it really
is. However, his lack of scholarship painfully shows through. A great deal of Che’s
quotes, statistics, and “facts” aren’t cited. Some are, but lead to the author’s interviews
with eyewitnesses. While these cannot be verified, they must be assumed to be truthful.
Of the cited statements, at least 15 footnotes were mis-cited, leading to incorrect pages in
the source materials. In at least two instances the translation wasn’t exact, skewing the
story. In some cases where the quotes are correct, they are taken out of context and seem
stronger than they were intended to be. In other cases the quotes are correct, but placed in
119
Fontova, 25 (reeking), xxix (treatment of animals), 27 (“We can imagine Che leaping in joy, slapping
his forehead: “Now why didn’t I think of that!”)
49
a new context to change the meaning, or portray the statements themselves or those who
made them as stupid.120
The sloppiness in Fontova’s scholarship severely discredits his work. However,
we may charitably assume that he did procure his evidence from other sources, regardless
of how he cited it. A scholarly review of recent publications about Che noted that after
his death there was a wave of books published, making him out to be either a saint or a
demon. I would presume that Fontova used some of the demonizing ones as sources.121
However, the documentary Che Guevara: Anatomía de un Mito [Che Guevara: Anatomy
of a Myth] does include many interviews with men who fought with Che, and provide a
negative view of him. These are documented eyewitness accounts and they do carry
weight. They tell us at the very least that Che was not well-liked by everyone, and he did
kill people. To what extent their testimonies are accurate after 50 years mostly spent in
exile is another subject for debate which will not be discussed here.
Anderson’s work is more complete (300-500 pages more than other biographies),
and he has sources that were not available to previous authors. He is certainly
sympathetic to his subject, but I appreciate that he does not make any judgments on Che’s
actions. He merely reports what happened. For example, Anderson reports on young
Ernesto’s active sexuality. He doesn’t promote it as a sign of masculine prowess,
condemn it as a moral failure, or excuse it as normal for hot-blooded latino boys at that
time. He just states events and continues with the biography. Another thing that I
appreciate about Anderson is his inclusion of historical and social context to help the
120
See Appendix B for examples.
Such a list would include Marcos Bravo, La Otra Cara del Che (Bogota, Colombia: Editorial Solar,
2004), Enrique Ros, Che: Mito y Realidad (Miami: Ediciones Universales, 2002), and less biased but still
not hagiographic are: Luis Ortega, Yo Soy el Che (Mexico: Monroy Padilla, 1970), and Jorge Castañeda,
Compañero: The Life and Death of Che Guevara (Los Angelos: University of California Press, 1997).
121
50
reader understand Che in his world. Anderson’s book has been criticized as a book on the
Cuban revolution wedged inside another biographical book on Che.122 I appreciate that he
details these events, which are crucial to understanding what was going on around Che at
the time. Another example of Anderson’s provision of context is his notes on Juan
Domingo Perón and Evita Perón, leaders of Argentina and makers of great social reform
during Ernesto’s late teens and early twenties. My only two faults with Anderson are
these: that he does not address the opposition’s evidence for the other darker Che, and
that he does not cite his sources within the text, but only has an extensive bibliography; it
prohibits me from checking which stories come from which sources.
Ultimately, the debate over Che’s identity is not a debate between Anderson and
Fontova. Nevertheless, these two exemplify the two sides of the debate. Both sides can
claim eyewitnesses, and that the other sides’ witnesses are biased (Communists are proChe, and the exiles are vengeful). Both sides have written books and produced
documentaries to support their cases. I find that the negative view (exemplified here by
Fontova) tends to use dramatic effects, conjectures, and limited scholarship based on a
handful of interviews and information that is not widely circulated, whereas the positive
view (exemplified by Anderson) relies heavily on Che’s written works and speeches
while putting them in context that corresponds with other interviewees.
In doing this research, I have also had to wrestle with my methodology. I decided
to read the ideology in its original language, Spanish, which was wonderful because it
introduced me to the ideas in their natural context, flow and fullness (all translations have
some degree of loss). However, this gave me the task of personally translating all texts on
122
This review comes from a website where the author identifies him/herself as doomsdayer520. The
review is: “An Important, but Rambling, Political Bio” September 8, 2002. accessed 20 March 2008.
http://www.amazon.com/Che-Guevara-Revolutionary-Jon-Anderson/dp/0802135587
51
which I wished to take notes. In my methodology, I watched three documentaries first, so
as to have a general idea of the main path of Che’s life. I then studied his ideology, before
looking in depth at the controversies of his life; in this way I hoped to have a less biased
view as I read his ideas as he stated them. This is why I presented the chapter in the order
I did, to provide my reader with the benefit of an unbiased reading.
Of course, all of us have biases and preconceived notions before we study a
subject. For me, I had fallen in love with the film Motorcycle Diaries, and then when I
was at the plaza honoring Che’s in his birth-city of Rosario, Argentina, I discovered some
troubling graffiti. I determined that there was a contradiction between the humanitarian in
Motorcycle Diaries and the people who wanted to kill capitalists in order to create their
utopia. I hoped that his followers had just misread Che in their violent desire for change.
My bias is to be sympathetic towards Che. Knowing this, I chose to read Fontova’s book,
and I was greatly troubled by this alternate view. When I reacted poorly to Fontova’s
flagrantly biased statements about Che, I constantly had to check myself and ask, ‘Am I
defending Che because he’s defendable, or because I don’t want to believe this?’ In this
way, I tempered my responses and tried to have a fairly objective perspective as I sifted
through the evidence. When confronted by extraordinary accounts of Che in Fontova’s
book, I did my best to verify the stories in their original sources by procuring them and
checking Fontova’s footnotes. Many were sadly inaccurate, or manipulated. Some were
verified, and I must listen to the voice of this evidence. But what to do with the evidence
on the other side, from other eyewitnesses? As simple as it sounds, I feel like my best
option is to weigh the testimonies of the eyewitnesses (both pro and con) against Che’s
own writings, and see which make the most sense. Would asthmatic Che have joined
52
Castro to fight a revolution in Cuba because he liked to kill people, or because he truly
believed that he was creating a better society for the majority of his fellow Latin
American population?
Both sides agree that Che truly believed what he said.123
Importance of Who Che Was
The dispute over who Che was and what he stood for is important—and it is
heatedly argued over today. One of Fontova’s sources is the documentary Guevara:
Anatomia de un Mito, which is conveniently posted on Utube. This film is 70 minutes
long, and has had 150,371 viewings since its posting less than 2 years ago. The
significance of the volume of viewings is matched by the number of comments posted
about it: 1,395 and growing almost daily.124 These comments are almost entirely in
Spanish125 (as is the film) and the commentors heatedly argue back and forth as to who
Che was. The majority of comments attack the film as “imperialist”, “capitalist”, and
“anti-communist” lies and mierda from hijos de puta. The language is often strong, with
words which should not be translated. (Apologies to the readers who did understand that.)
Conversations going back and forth are posted, with some grateful to the film for finally
showing who Che really was. These writers are typically personally attacked in response;
often as not these writers are residents of the United States, and are attacked for their
imperialist connections. The anti-Che commentors tend to be residents of the United
123
Fontova, p145.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8U-bhwNOD4 My first viewing was on 2-17-08 and there were
1,362 comments then.
125
Method: I read all of the comments in the “one year ago” category as of 2-18-08, and the comments
from “3 months ago” to “1 month ago” as of 2-21-08. Of those comments there was one in French, about 5
in Portuguese, and about the same in English, although some thereof seemed to have been automatically
translated from Spanish. When I initially read the comments, it had been viewed 137,040 times. As of 4-1108 there are 150,371 views and 1,609 comments.
124
53
States (mostly Cuban exiles), and the pro-Che writers tend to be from Mexico,
Venezuela, and Argentina.
Amidst these verbally violent arguments, there are also some thoughtful responses
to the film and the dilemma over the conflicting evidence. Some analyze the film and
critically ask why the sound is not in sync with the video of Che, questioning if that was
really his voice. Others are suspicious of the fact that almost every interviewee in the
documentary held the rank of captain or commander. Others defend the ad hominem
attacks on Che, for example why he rarely took baths and therefore smelled bad.126 The
political comments on capitalism, socialism and communism are sometimes backed by
famous quotes, and Che’s military actions are often compared to the USA’s military
actions (in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Vietnam, Korea and Iraq). Some concede that both sides
of the debate are based on lies, and they conclude that either a neutral source should be
consulted, or that we will never know “the real Che” because we did not personally know
him.127
This is a fairly “feel-good” answer to the problem, and to an extent, we cannot
know all of the real Che, but we can know more than this writer suggests. We do this by
weighing the evidence (much like was done above) and analyzing who says what, and
why. Fontova and his Cuban exiles will speak poorly about the revolution because they
and their families belonged to the classes that were doing well under the old regime (i.e.,
professionals and land-owners). Of course they will speak poorly of those who
dispossessed them. However, they do have a good claim (which I do not dispute) that life
in communist Cuba is currently awful. The economy is bad, religion controlled, and
126
His smell may be explained by his counter-cultural and anti-luxury attitude, and his asthma which was
worsened by bathing in cold water.
127
For a sample of the utube comments, please see Appendix C.
54
freedom is restricted. I do think that it is safe to say, based on Che’s writings, that the
current situation in Cuba is nothing like what Che intended. In fact, there is a novel
written on that theme (I, Che Guevara by John Blackthorn). So, it is unfair to blame all of
communist Cuba’s evils on Che, just because he was a leader during the early years of
the revolution. Furthermore, it should be remembered that good has come from the
revolution, such as education and access to medical care.
As to the allegations against Che’s personal actions, who is saying what? The
scholarship of documentaries and books like that of Anderson are in English, so the
audience is the American public. Are they published to clarify details of his life, or to
shift the American mind to be more leftist (a claim of Fontova’s)? The documentary on
Utube is in Spanish, so the audience is mostly not American. It was produced in Miami,
so it may be just anti-communist, or it may be trying to dispel the mythology that Cuba
has draped Che in, in an attempt to keep the Latin American youth from idolizing the
political left. Why is Fontova writing to an American, English-speaking audience (prone
to be anti-communist) about the evils of a communist revolutionary…because of his popculture icon status? Is that really a serious problem or threat in the USA? What are the
stakes for these authors? What does it matter who Che was?
Che’s face on a T-shirt tends to be a trendy way of opposing the American culture
at large. But he is so much more. His ideas live on, and are held dearly by many
throughout the Americas. As I researched online, I discovered that there are youth groups
who take Che’s words seriously and do various voluntary work for the betterment of the
poor in their area. The pictures remind me of summer missions trips—these people
believe in Che’s dream of creating a better world and are willing to step out and act on
55
their beliefs.128 Every ten years there is a memorial to Che’s heroic death. In the late
nineties Anderson’s book appeared with a host of other biographies, special editions of
Che’s writings and memoirs of people who knew him. In 2008 two films about Che are
scheduled to be released, starring Benicio del Toro.129 Undeniably, Che’s life and
ideology are current topics of interest and influence.
Closing Thoughts on Che
If we take Che’s ideology at face value, the main themes are a concern for the
poor and oppressed, a willingness to do what is necessary to remove the oppressing
economic and societal structures, and a desire to create a new society of enough and
brotherhood through a new understanding of human relationships. Both the positive and
negative biographies of Che agree that he did kill people in the process of revolution and
suppressing the contra-revolutionaries—only the amount and nature of these deaths are
disputed.
Either way, is it acceptable for politics to be done this way? Is it necessary for
there to be so much blood shed in order to purchase the clean slate of a new, good
society? Che has been portrayed in many ways and by multiple actors; Fontova suggests
that one of these actors is Antonio Banderas in the 1996 film Evita. During the waltz for
Eva and Che, there are a series of lyrics that relate to our theme:
[Che]
There's one thing I never got clear
How can you claim you're our savior
When those who oppose you are stepped on,
Or cut up, or simply disappear?
[Eva]
128
Juventud Guevarista, http://www.nuevaradio.org/jg/index.php
Currently in post-production “The Argentine” and “Guerrilla” (also called “Che USA”) are scheduled
for a 2008 release. See http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0892255/ and http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0374569/
129
56
How can one person like me, say,
Alter the time-honored way the game is played?
…So what are my chances of honest advances?
I'd say low
Better to win by admitting my sin
Than to lose with a halo 130
Either way we look at Che, people were killed. Innocent people were killed. Is
that just the way that politics are run? Reading Fontova’s account the massacre of
thousands of innocent anti-communists in Cuba sounds unsettling similar to the tens of
thousands or communists and socialists who simple “disappeared” under the rightist
military dictatorships of Pinochet in Chile and the junta militar under Videla, Massera
and Agosti in Argentina. Force and deaths seem common in Latin American countries.
Dr. Greg Miller, historian at Malone College, notes that the concept that society can
transform itself is a modernist idea. Before this time, people could not imagine that
societal structures could be changed—they were fixed, basic parts of the way the world
worked, much like the law of gravity. The problem with the new modern belief is that in
order to create a new society, as shown by the French Revolution, the old must be
removed. When there are people who preferred the old society, they too must be
removed, otherwise they jeopardize the success of the new society.131 This creates a
bloody cycle of cleansing every time the society is born anew.
As a Christian, how can I support such a bloody change in power when Jesus said
“love your enemies as yourself”? Jesus’ life is marked by a love for people, in both the
universal category and the particular persons.132 He never utilized the utilitarian process
130
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/madonna/waltzforevaandche.html I am not convinced that the character
Banderas plays is Ernesto “Che” Guevara; it may supposed to be just the common man. It is ambiguous.
131
Author’s interview with Dr. Greg Miller on February 21, 2008.
132
It has been noted that many communists fall into the trap of loving “people” in the abstract and for the
sake of “them” do not show care and concern for persons that they know—even making their family
57
of sacrificing a few for the sake of the whole. Rather, he gave of himself to show us how
to love unconditionally, unto death, and new life.
Yet, in the Latin American context, there is great oppression and suffering,
labeled “institutionalized” or “systemic” violence. The economic and societal structures
need to be changed. But if Che’s guerrilla method is not the way, what is? Peruvian priest
Gustavo Gutiérrez attempts to blend the need for social change with the words and
teachings of Christ in his Liberation Theology.
members suffer so that they will not privilege their loved ones over others. This is shown in the book by
Jung Chang’s Wild Swans (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2003), and to an extent in Che’s life as he
made his family sacrifice for his ideals, in not using the state car and refusing gifts of foreign dignitaries.
(See above in the Positive View of Che section.)
58
Chapter III
During this same time period, indeed, born just two weeks after el Che, Gustavo
Gutiérrez also looked at his South American homeland and saw the need for change. His
encounters with oppression led him to seek what God says about impoverishment, and his
reading of Scripture blended with the Latin American experience to create Liberation
Theology. This revolutionary, “new” theology, which claims to be a reiteration of the
message of the prophets and the kingdom of God, led to social reform in a more peaceful
way than that of el Cristo rojo. In this section, we shall examine Gutiérrez’ life, context
and Liberation Theology.
Biography
As is the case with all of humanity where we come from affects who we are, so
we will briefly review Gutiérrez’ biography before turning to the theology. Gustavo
Gutiérrez was born on June 28, 1928. One of his biographers, Robert McAffee Brown,
emphasizes early on that Gutiérrez is mestizo—descended from both Europeans and
Quechuans—so he was born into oppression in a society that favors whites over
indigenous peoples. Osteomylitis kept Gutiérrez bedridden for 6 years during his
adolescence, a time in which his faith and his intellectual abilities grew, but left him with
a permanent limp. His illness prompts an interest in a career in medicine, but midway
through his studies in psychiatry he felt the call to be a priest. He left San Marcos
University and the political involvement of youth to study theology, philosophy and
psychology in Europe, along with the most promising Latin American students pursuing
graduate degrees in religion. There, in France, Belgium and Italy (Rome) he studied and
became a Dominican priest in correspondence with the dominant Catholic theology. He
59
earned a B.S., National University, Lima, Peru and S.T.L., Ph.D., Université Catholique
de Lyon. However, the theology of the mid-1900’s in Europe, shaped in response to the
post-Enlightenment population, concerned itself with different questions than those
pertinent to the Peruvian population that Gutiérrez found upon his return to Latin
America. Rather than wondering which spheres of influence religion and the state
belonged to or finding room for God in a world dominated by science (concerns of
Europeans), Latin Americans were concerned with overwhelming poverty, economic
imbalance, social injustice, and the role of the Church as ally of the oppressive
government and ruling elite. The question wasn’t if religion and God had an active,
public role in this world, but how Christians (the majority of the population being
Catholic) should think of and respond to the desperate needs of society. European
theology was inadequate to answer the needs of Latin American society.133
As he studied, lived with the poor and understood their struggle, he read Scripture
with open eyes and gradually broke from European “dominant theology” and applied
Scripture to the situation of the poor (the people to whom Jesus ministered the most).
Understanding of the poor, their condition of oppression and their power as a social class
was facilitated by Marxist social analysis.134 Gutiérrez was summarized as saying “When
I discovered that poverty was something to be fought against, that poverty was structural,
that poor people were a class {and could organize}, it became crystal clear that in order
to serve the poor, one had to move into political action.”135 Liberation theology was born
in 1968 at a conference in Chimbote, Peru, sponsored by ONIS (Oficina Nacional de
Información Social), where Gutiérrez and some “radical priests” spoke of a theology of
133
Robert McAffee Brown, Gustavo Gutiérrez (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1980), p 21-22.
Brown, Gustavo Gutiérrez, p 24.
135
Brown, Gustavo Gutiérrez, p 23-24.
134
60
liberation for the first time. Gutiérrez’ activities as a liberation theologian have included
teaching as a principal professor at the Catholic University in Lima in Peru where he
challenged students to think about the practical and political actions required by taking
Jesus and his Gospel seriously. He lived among the poor in the Bartolomé de las Casas
Center in Rimac, the slum area of Lima. He has traveled, given lectures, written and
contributed to many books on theology such as Beber un su propio pozo. En el itinerario
espiritual de un pueblo [We Drink From Our Own Wells: The Spiritual Journey of A
People] and En busca de los pobre de Jesucristo, el pensamiento de Bartolomé de Las
Casas [Las Casas: In Search of the Poor of Jesus Christ]. He currently holds a position at
the University of Notre Dame. He is characterized as authentic by those who know him,
his arguments are simple and direct, he is open to new ideas, and his time is largely
occupied by his activities as a priest. 136
Ideology and Theology
Having now become familiar with Gutiérrez’ life, it will be helpful to understand
the general context of his foundational work of Liberation Theology. The first definitive
work on the subject Teología de la Liberación, was written in 1971, as the result of
seminars that Gutiérrez had been giving since 1969. He was greatly influenced by the
recent Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) and the Church conferences in Latin
America (especially in Medellín, Colombia and Puebla, Mexico). At this point in time,
the USA and the USSR were locked in the Cold War, Cuba had spent a decade under the
communism of Castro, and Chile had freely elected a socialist president (Allende). There
had been social reforms in the 40’s, 50’s and especially the 60’s, and there had been
many military dictatorships. The major thought patterns had been influenced by Marx,
136
Brown, Gustavo Gutiérrez, p26-27.
61
Freud, humanism, existentialism and more. It is important that we understand the
historical context of Gutiérrez, as his theology was intentionally relevant to his time.
Although much has since been written about Liberation Theology through its
development over time, this study will limit itself to the ideas contained in the first
declaration to the world of what it is, its reasoning and goals, Teología de la Liberación
by Gustavo Gutiérrez.
When speaking of Liberation Theology, we first must understand what “theology”
is. In his book Teología de la Liberación, Gutiérrez says that theology has had two
traditional roles: theology as wisdom, and theology as rational knowledge. Beginning
with the early church, wisdom theology was (and is) the spiritual life based on reflection
of the Bible. Near the twelfth century, theology developed a new dimension, theology as
rational knowledge. Through theologians and philosophers such as St. Abelard, St. Albert
the Great and St. Thomas Aquinas, theology became an intellectual discipline, a science,
wherein God’s gift of reason was used responsibly to discover truth about the world,
God, and humanity’s interaction with both.137
Gutiérrez makes the interesting point that reason is not just embodied in the
“philosophy” of the medievals—in more recent times reason is found and used in such
disciplines as biology, psychology, sociology and the social sciences.138 This is only as a
passing comment as Gutiérrez goes on to review that theology is both wisdom (spiritually
based) and rational knowledge (reason based). But I find it striking. Gutiérrez uses the
social sciences (especially tools of understanding economic and social systems) in his
137
Andrés Gallego, and Rolando Ames, eds, Acordarse de los Pobres-Textos Esenciales-por Gustavo
Gutierrez (Fondo Editorial del Congreso del Perú, Perú: 2004), p7-8.
138
English, p5. Anthology, p9. “La fe y razón no es solamente la fe y filosofía, sino, especialmente la razón
en las ciencias sociales, biología, psicológica…Un pensamiento teológico que no presente este carácter
racional y desinteresado no sería verdaderamente fiel a la inteligencia de la fe.”
62
understanding of theology. While this may seem an odd method to some, it is perfectly
logical and acceptable according to his understanding of reason as not limited to
philosophy, but useful in other disciplines. This may defend him later from attacks from
critics who say that it is wrong to interpret Scripture and theology in terms of economic
theories but allow interpretations through philosophy. As I infer from Gutiérrez, both are
interpretations through the same gift of reason.139
The text moves on to describe theology as critical reflection on praxis (practice or
action). Theology must be both spiritual and rational, but it cannot stop there. It isn’t just
a series of premises that we affirm, it must be a posture of the heart and a commitment,
and that means that it must affect our actions.140 Gutiérrez refers to the Second Vatican
Council, which stated that the role of the Church is not to be self-centered, but to serve
others and share in their joys, hopes, sufferings and anxieties. The actions of the church
are thus subjects for theological thought.141 Therefore, as we consider the role of the
Church in this world and its necessary actions herein, we are theologizing and creating
theology. As we see the signs of the times, we do not just intellectually analyze them, but
are called to action.
Liberation theology is just that; it sees the world fraught with injustice and
oppression and it seeks to act, change the situation, and create a world closer to the
kingdom of heaven. We help bring in the Kingdom of God—our current actions are
139
To take the point a step further, theology is heralded as the “Queen of the sciences” and philosophy is
her “handmaiden”. If what is being said is that reason (the basis of philosophy) serves theology, then we
should accept that reason in all forms (social sciences) as faithfully serving theology.
140
Anthology, p11. “…la inteligencia de la fe aparece como la inteligencia no de la simple afirmación—y
casi recitación—de verdades, sino de un compromiso, de una actitud global, de una postura ante la vida.”
141
Span, p13. Anthology, p7. “El concilio Vaticano II ha reafirmado con fuerza la idea de una iglesia de
servicio y no de poder, que no está concentrada en ella misma, y que no “se encuentra” sino cuando “se
pierde”, cuando vive “las alegrías y esperanzas, las tristezas y las angustias de los hombres en nuestro
tiempo. Todo lo cual da un nuevo enfoque para ver la presencia y el actuar de la iglesia en el mundo en el
punto de partida de una reflexión teológica.”
63
important. Theology as wisdom and rational knowledge are our starting points, and they
need to be followed by change in practice. God doesn’t give us his word just to guard it,
but to do it.142 The church has to address the problems of the day—it needs to be the
church of the future, acting now to usher in a better future, which is marked by
brotherhood among men and communion with God. This is the goal of Christianity—to
better the world through the love of Christ. This isn’t a new theology—just a new way of
doing theology, liberating it from the hypothetical and giving it tangible life in the
practical.
So, what is this world that the Church is in? Looking at it from a secular
perspective, we see that the world is developing at different paces. It had been thought
that all countries would benefit from progress and development, but Raul Prebisch
noticed that this is not the case. The industrialized and rich “core” countries continue to
increase wealth, while the poorer, underdeveloped, third-world, “peripheral” countries
are struggling with extreme poverty and inequality…and they can’t seem to pull out of it.
Prebisch described the effect in what is now called “Dependency Theory” which in a
sense blames the rich countries for taking advantage of the poorer countries in
international trade by buying raw materials and then selling back finished products at
prices that exceed the initial sale, sending the poor into deeper poverty.143
Marxists saw the capitalistic global trade as a system where the rich increase in
their wealth and the poor became poorer. They closely identified with the Dependency
142
Anthology, p16, 18. “Dios no elige a los mismos hombres para guardar su palabra que para cumplirla.”
Moreover, a theology that isn’t actualizad is a false theology. “…una telología que ya no fuese actual, sería
una teología falsa.”
143
Vicent Ferraro, “Dependency Theory: an Introduction” (July 1996; accessed November 19, 2007).
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/depend.htm; “Dependency Theory” in Encyclopedia of Latin
American history and Culture Vol 2, ed Barabara A Tenenbaum (Charles Scribner’s Sons: New York,
1996), p 366-7.
64
Theory and used it to support the notion that capitalism perpetuates poverty. “The
immediate political implication of the dependency critique is that Latin America can only
develop by severing its ties to the core and promoting self-sustaining economic growth
through an industrialization program based on the expansion of the domestic market by
agrarian reform and income redistribution.”144 Since Latin America had fallen prey to the
richer European and North American capitalistic nations, Marxists claimed that socialism
was the key—it is a self-sufficient system wherein a few do not oppress the many, but all
have what they need to live with dignity and freedom. Freedom includes the ability to
understand oneself and take ownership of who one is and what one does. Hegel says that
the whole of history shows man’s becoming aware of freedom.145 Man must be able to
think for himself and think of himself as free. He needs to be able to shape his own
destiny by being free to make his own choices—that comes with freedom from poverty
and oppression which dictate man’s actions through the necessity of survival and a
restrictive class structure. Marxist categories help understand the science of history, and
by examining capitalist countries we see that one socioeconomic class takes advantage of
the other. In socialism people are able to live freely and humanely because there is no
private appropriation like there is in capitalism. Mankind wants and needs exterior and
interior liberation and that can be found in socialism.146
144
Paul J. Dosal, “Dependency Theory” in Encyclopedia of Latin American history and Culture Vol 2 , ed
Barabara A Tenenbaum, (Charles Scribner’s Sons: New York, 1996), p367.
145
Span 101-2. “…el proceso dialéctico –el ser humano se construye a sí mismo, alcanza una conciencia
real de su propio ser, se libera en la adquisición de una genuina libertad, por medio del trabajo, que
transforma el mundo y educa a las personas. Para Hegel ‘ la historia universal es el proceso de la
conciencia de la libertad.’”
146
Span 103-5. 103 “Analizando la sociedad capitalista en la que se da en concreto la explotación de unos
seres humanos por otros, de una clase social por otra, y señalando las vías de salida hacia une etapa
histórica en la que la persona human pueda vivir como tal, Marx forja categorías que permiten la
elaboración de una ciencia de la historia.” 103-104 “Iniciativa que debe asegurar paso del modo de
producción capitalista al modo de producción socialista…creadas las condiciones de una producción
65
Gutiérrez agrees with the Marxists that Latin America should not look to the
advanced capitalist societies for guidance,147 since the situation in Latin America is
fundamentally different from that in Europe. On top of that, the system that perpetuates
poverty and oppression is a sinful system. It betrays the love of our neighbor that
Christians are called to. The capitalist system must not be imitated. Although Gutiérrez
acknowledges that Freud thinks that all industrial societies (capitalist and socialist)
include some sort of repression, he thinks that democratic socialism is closest to the
teachings of the Bible insofar as it promotes equality, freedom and solidarity. We should
not be so focused on development like that of the “developed nations”, but rather on
progress in the political, social, economic and cultural realms. We should hope for
liberation—freedom from oppression and poverty…not just in social and economic
terms, but also spiritually. This liberation occurs on three levels that cannot be separated
from each other: 1) liberation expresses the aspirations of the oppressed, 2) history is a
process of liberation and we find ourselves in that context, and 3) we look to Scripture
and theology for guidance. Gutiérrez is adamant that all of these are essential to
liberation.148
socializada de la riqueza, establecido el socialismo, las personas puedan comenzar a vivir libre y
humanamente. Pero los hombres y mujeres no apiran sólo a liberarse de aquello que viniendo del exterior,
les impide realizarse en tanto que miembros de una clase social, de un paíz o de una sociedad determinada.
Buscan, igualmente, una liberación interior, en una dimensión individual e íntima.”
147
Span, p99. “…habrá que cuidarse de todo tipo de mimetismo, así como de nuevas formas de
imperialismo –revolucionario esta vez—de la humanidad. Ello sólo llevaría a los grupos revolucionarios
del tercer mundo a un nuevo engaño sobre su propia realidad y a luchar, por consiguiente, contra molinos
de viento.”Poor countries should not mime any forms of imperialism from the rich countries—that would
only lead to deception about their reality and be a struggle against windmills.
148
This information is more in depth in chapter 2. See especially Span, p 106, 109, 112-115. 115 “No se
trata, sin embargo, de tres procesos paralelos o que se suceden cronológicamente; estamos ante tres niveles
de significación de un proceso único y complejo que encuentra su sentido profundo y su plena realización
en la obra salvadora de Cristo. Niveles de significación que, por lo tanto, se implican mutualmente. Una
visión cabal de la cuestión supone que no se les separe. Se evitará así caer, sea en posiciones idealistas o
espiritualistas que no son sino formas de evadir una realidad cruda y exigente; sea en análisis carentes de
66
So, having established the state of the world (Latin America is poverty ridden and
dependent on other nations) and the desires of the world (a society of social and
economic equality and freedom), we can now turn to the Church. What is the Church’s
role in the world? How should it respond to the cares of the world?
Gutiérrez takes his readers on a brief history of Christian thought on the matter.
He begins his review with Augustine, wherein the Church is to care for people’s souls,
while the government is to concern itself with temporal affairs. Thomas Aquinas follows
this foundation by saying that government rules by the sword and it is under the moral
and spiritual authority of the Church. Secular authorities answer to the Church. A neoThomist, Jacques Maritain furthers this line of thought in “new Christianity”149 by saying
that the planes of the Church and the State are completely different. The Church does not
lord authority over the State, but as it is recognized as the spiritual and moral authority,
the State should look for guidance from the Church.150
Gutiérrez presents a couple of problems with the distinction of planes in “new
Christianity”. He says that the first issue is a pastoral problem. As the laity involved
themselves in social and political activity they had a hard time distinguishing themselves
as separate from the Church, since they were Christians, and their radical activities
brought the Church (or at least part of it) to be associated with radical political
movements. On the other side, the Church (as a hierarchical institution of power) has
connections with the wealthy and conservative political leaders. Both of these ties negate
the understanding of the Church as “above” the political and temporal realm. The second
profundidad y, por lo tanto, en comportamientos de eficacia a corto plazo, so pretexto de atender a las
urgencias del presente.”
149
Spanish, p 129.
150
Spanish, p133.
67
problem is found in the theological understanding of man in relationship to God. Through
secularization, man uses science to redefine himself, and that brings change to his
concept of his role in the world. Correspondingly, man’s understanding of his
relationship with God changes. Thus, theology changes. It doesn’t make sense to say that
the spiritual and the temporal are on two different planes, since the secular clearly
influences the spiritual (theology) and the Christians tied to the Church necessarily bring
it into the temporal (political) realm. There has never been a “pure” Church free from the
temporal plane, because the Church consists of temporal human beings. The distinction
of planes just doesn’t make sense. The distinction of planes model does not work and
cannot be rescued—the church is in the world and made up of people who are a part of
the world.151
Furthermore, dualism is particularly problematic for Gutiérrez, who has a more
holistic view of the role of the Church—the function of the Church is to bring salvation to
people for this world and the next. The Church is equally concerned and involved with
the here and now. Thus, according to Gutiérrez, the Church must fulfill its role of
bringing the Kingdom of God by actions…actions that have social and political
implications. Christians must meet together and discuss the (political) options for change.
Gutiérrez restates the situation, reminding the reader of the dependency of Latin
American countries on the richer “more developed” countries. He states that the
dependency theory is best understood in Marxist terms of class struggle. He concludes
that Latin America must break away from the dominating capitalist countries and follow
one of the many types of socialism, creating an indo-American democratic socialism.
This will require a social and cultural revolution, and Gutiérrez uses the words of Ernesto
151
This information comes from Chapter 5, pages 137-144 in Spanish.
68
“Che” Guevara to remind us that revolutions are born out of love, love for the oppressed,
and love for justice.152 Gutiérrez draws heavily from the thought of Paulo Freire. For
there to be true cultural revolution, it must come from the values of the oppressed, so that
they will create their own destiny, and not copy what other models have taught them.
Freire has started in this by stressing the conscientization of people in the pedagogy of
the oppressed (as they become aware of their condition, they can express it in their own
language and become freer).153
The hope is that as democratic socialism works to bring social equality, it will
bring a change in values and lessen egoism, forming a sense of brotherhood among all
people—a brotherhood and equality that more closely reflect the teachings of Jesus.
Gutiérrez sees socialism (social and economic equality and lack of oppression) paired
with Christian teachings and spirituality as the equality, love and brotherhood that marks
the Kingdom of God. But all changes of the social and economic structure will fail and
are worthless without the help of the Church. Based upon the texts at the Medellín
conference, it is not enough for the Church to denounce the injustice of the system—it
must remove itself from the system. There also needs to be evangelization that brings
conscientization, renewal of people. The participation of the poor is a must, and so far the
152
Spanish, p 361.This quote of Che’s “Socialismo y el Hombre en Cuba” is in Gutierrez’ footnote 45.
“Déjeme decirle, a riesgo de parecer ridículo, que el revolucionario verdadero está guiado por grandes
sentamientos de amor. Es imposible pensar en un revolucionario auténtico, sin esta cualidad…En esas
condiciones, hay que tener una gran dosis de humanidad, una gran dosis de sentido de la justicia y de la
verdad, para no caer en extremos dogmáticos, en escolasticismos fríos, en aislamientos de las masas. Todos
los días hay que luchar porque ese amor a la humanidad viviente se transforme en hechos concretos, en
actos que sirvan de efectos de movilización.”
153
Chapter 6 Spanish 178-179. “En este proceso, que Freire llama ‘concientización’, los oprimidos
‘extroyectan’ la conciencia opresora que habita en ellos, cobran conocimiento de su situación, encuentran
su propio lenguaje y se hacen ellos mismos, menos dependientes, más libres, comprometiéndose en la
transformación y construcción de la sociedad. Precisemos, además, que la conciencia crítica mo es un
estado al cual se llega de una vez por todas, sino un esfuerzo permanente del ser humano que busca situarse
en el espacio y en el tiempo, por ejercer su capacidad creadora y asumir sus responsabilidades. La
conciencia es, por ende, relativa a cada etapa histórica de un pueblo y de la humanidad en general.”
69
structure of the church has been inadequate to bring the change necessary—there needs to
be change in the style of the pastoral life.154
The option155 for the Church is to participate in bringing the actions of this social
revolution. Gutiérrez reinforces that an unjust system is really a system that has
institutionalized violence.156 That injustice breaks with the code of law that we have been
called to as Christians; it is therefore a sinful system. For the Church to do nothing is to
support injustice through complacency.157 It is a sin. The Church must act—it is the only
Christian thing to do. It cannot be afraid of stepping up. It cannot be afraid of doing
something theologically new.158 It cannot be afraid of getting involved in politics, being
misunderstood as communist, or maybe even not succeeding at first. The point is that it
must take action.
154
Chapter 7. Spanish, p 204-7, 212, 217-220
In an interview Gutiérrez spoke about the difference in translation, and what is meant by “option”. He
said “In English, the word merely connotes a choice between two things. In Spanish, however, it evokes the
sense of commitment. The option for the poor is not optional, but is incumbent upon every Christian. It is
not something that a Christian can either take or leave. As understood by Medellín, the option for the poor
is twofold: it involves standing in solidarity with the poor, but it also entails a stance against inhumane
poverty.” Daniel Hartnett, “Remembering the Poor” (America, 00027049, 2/3/2003, Vol. 188, Issue 3).
http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=2755 This idea of an “option for the poor”
is frequently used in the phrase “preferential option for the poor”. The idea comes from the many
Scriptures where God takes an interest in the well-being of the poor, oppressed, aliens, and widows—God
often takes the side of the lowly, speaking against the actions of the rich who take advantage of them. (See
for example Amos 2.) The Church, like God, must have a preferential option for the poor, and take their
side against those who are unjust and oppress the needy, and in doing so bring social justice.
156
Span, p 196-197. 196“En cuanto a la visión de la realidad, la miseria y la explotación del hombre por el
hombre que se vive en América latina es descrita como una situación “de injusticia institucionalizada”, que
produce la muerte de millares de inocentes.” 197 “La violencia institucionalizada viola tan fuertemente
derechos fundamentales que los obispos latinoamericanos han advertido ‘no hay que abusar la paciencia de
un pueblo que soporta durante años una condición que difícilmente aceptarían quienes tienen una mayor
conciencia de los derechos humanos’.”
157
Chapter 8, see Span, p 229. “Pero la influencia social de la Iglesia es un hecho macizo. No jugarla a
favor de los oprimidos de América latina es hacerlo en contra, y es difícil fijar de antemano los límites de
esa acción. No hablar, es constituirse en otro tipo de Iglesia del silencio; silencio frente al despojo y la
explotación de los débiles por los poderosos.”
158
Gutiérrez remarks that the dependency of Latin America isn’t just economic and political, but it affects
the thinking of the Church, the Latin American church has only reflected what it has received from the east,
and hasn’t been a fountain of theology. The implication is that the Latin American Church needs to grow
up and stand for itself, supporting its own people spiritually and physically in its situation. Spanish, p 231.
155
70
The Church does have great social (and therefore political) power, which it can
use to bring change. How should it do that? The church must first denounce with humility
the injustices in the country and point out the wrongness of the system, recognizing that it
is part of the system. This is more than just words, it is a posture of the heart, and as the
Church uses its social weight, its members will do what they can to break the structures
of injustice. This brings a second component, the proclamation of the Gospel, of God’s
love, which reveals the root of injustice as the lack of brotherly love. Spreading the
Gospel spreads the love which undoes injustice. The proclamation brings a
conscientization that allows people to recognize the oppression, and it has a political
function to bring change to the situation; but this announcement of the Gospel and
conscientization won’t do anything without the solidarity of the people.159 This includes
Christians of all confessions (denominations) working together to build the kingdom of
God.
Gutiérrez continues, explaining that some Church members have already begun
working to stop injustice. The laity have formed social movements (some have worked
and others were ill-prepared, but they’re learning through experience). Priests and
religious people have traditionally followed the government, and now that some are
helping leftist movements they are seen as subversive…perhaps they are particularly
threatening since they usually are complacent. Bishops in poorer areas speak against the
injustice and misery, but when they face the larger economic systems they may be
labeled Marxists, even if they aren’t. Most express themselves in writing, but some have
159
Chapter 12, see pages 389-391 in Spanish.
71
joined in strikes, protests and manifestations to lobby for workers’ rights and fair
wages.160
So far we have looked at the situation of Latin America, the relationship of the
Church with the temporal world and politics, the need for the Church to act, and some
possible actions that can and have been taken. But I would be remiss to stop my
presentation of Gutiérrez’ thought here. He takes very seriously the theological and
Biblical reasons that the Church should be involved. This latter section of Teología de la
Liberación is marked with references to Church councils and traditional teachings, and it
is peppered with scriptural support. Christianity shapes his views of the connection of
creation with redemption, Jesus as involved in politics, and poverty.
Gutiérrez claims that there are not two histories, one sacred and the other profane;
rather, God is involved in all dealings of man and all of creation has felt His touch.
History isn’t limited to the Greek view of memories looking back, but it is also (and
perhaps most importantly) looking forward to how God will work in the future…and the
future is dependent on how we work through and with Him now in the present. With this
view of history, the past takes on new meaning of how God has worked, and how He has
promised to work with us and our future. The whole Bible is a promise—God’s promise
to humanity, to interact with them. First there was the old covenant of communication
between God and man, and with the new covenant we are assured salvation in Christ. The
Bible is a place of receiving God’s promise by faith, even though it is not yet completely
160
Chapter 7, pages 191-195, Spanish. Gutiérrez was also particularly encouraged by the free democratic
election of socialist President Allende of Chile at the time of writing this book.
72
fulfilled. We have been promised resurrection, but it has not yet happened. We have been
promised the Kingdom of God, and it is here, but not fully.161
Let’s go back to the beginning of history to see what God has revealed.
Gutiérrez sees creation as the first redemptive act. When God creates his nation
Israel by rescuing them from Egypt, the Exodus reflects the creation account. Before God
created there was nothing, and the Holy Spirit hovered over the waters; out of that God
created the world and man. In the Exodus God brings His people out of the waters of the
Red Sea (waters being a symbol of chaos and nothingness, here as well as in Genesis)
and He creates a new people. Creation is an act of redemption, bringing the children of
Israel liberation from oppression (in Egypt) and bringing them to a land of peace. When
Israel rebels, the prophets (and God himself) define God as the one who created heavens
and earth, and who will redeem and deliver them if they repent. This title appears over
and over again throughout the Old Testament, leading Gutiérrez to link creation
inextricably with redemption.162
The practical implication of this link is that when we participate in actions that
stop injustice and oppression, we are participating in the salvific process. When we create
a new society, we are (with God) redeeming humanity in history. When, through this
society, man is redeemed to think of others as equals and love each other in the
brotherhood of humanity, a “new man” is created. We are able to participate in both the
redeeming and creating processes of God in history.
161
Chapter 9. Spanish, p 259. “Cumpliéndose ya en realidades históricas, pero todavía no plenamente;
proyectándose incansablemente hacia el futuro, creando una permanente movilidad histórica, la Promesa se
va revelando en toda su universalidad y concerción.”
162
Chapter 9. Spanish, p 247-9, 256.
73
How do we participate in this creation and redemption in the political world? We
look to the best example ever: Christ Jesus. Gutiérrez takes his readers on another review
of theological thought, remarking that in the past people have looked at Jesus’ actions as
only having spiritual and theological significance—not as social or political commentary.
However, recent study (for him in the 1970’s) was showing that Jesus’ actions were very
political. Jesus was a friend of Zealots (Simon, for one) and he lived a radical lifestyle
which fit in with the Zealot movements. He was certainly seen as a social deviant,
speaking and traveling with women, defying laws of the Pharisees (the Sabbath, for
example), and proclaiming a kingdom other than Rome. Jesus was executed for religious
and political reasons (claiming to be king of the Jews was a spiritual and political
statement), and he died as a Zealot leader (exchanged for the Zealot Barabbas). Jesus was
most certainly a political figure, and he called us to follow him. This means that, like
him, we must stand up against systems of injustice and embody a life of indiscriminate
love. We must proclaim liberation for all people, just as Jesus did.
Jesus blessed those that were poor. Gutiérrez ends his book with examining
poverty under a Christian lens. The words for “poor” in the Bible are those who are
beggars, who lack and hope for something, who are weak, underweight, needy, unable to
sustain themselves.163 The Bible condemns the scandalous situation of the poor and the
prophets often condemn those who take advantage of the poor and do deeds that cause
other people to become poor. In addition, Deuteronomy and Leviticus provide laws that
will prevent some from becoming rich at others’ expense, and install the Sabbath and
Jubilee so that the poor can regain their places.164 The situation of the poor is wrong—
163
164
Span, p 415-416.
Chapter 13, Spanish, p 418.
74
scandalous. But what then does Jesus mean when he blesses the poor in the Beatitudes?
Some have interpreted this as blessing those who are poor in spirit. The Bible does use
“poor” to refer to the spiritual attitude of God’s people, wherein they give up their pride
and put their trust in God. Being poor in spirit means having faith in God. It is not a
reflection of material goods—so people can be wealthy and still be poor in spirit and
materially poor people can be rich in heart. But, this spiritual use of the word poor
doesn’t make the most sense to Gutiérrez in the context of the Beatitudes. He suggests
another interpretation: the (materially) poor are blessed because of the Kingdom of God.
It is the Kingdom of God—radical love and equality for all that undoes injustice and
oppression—that blesses to the poor.165
And thus, Gutiérrez is back to his main and closing theme: the Church is called to
enact the Kingdom of God here and now by denouncing injustice and proclaiming a new
way of life marked by equality, love, and solidarity; perfect communion between men,
and with God. This freedom and love is the end of Liberation Theology.
Revolutionary
Liberation Theology is in many ways radical. Its theologians engaged in
revolutionary ways of thinking. Two of the ways it is particularly revolutionary are in its
methodology and its social consequences.
165
Span, p 425. “Si creemos que el Reino de Dios es un don que se acoge en la historia para que ésta sea
llevada a su plenitud; si pensamos, como el tema de las promesas escatológicas—preñadas de contenido
humano e histórico—nos lo indica, que el Reino de Dios trae necesariamente consigo el restablecimiento
de la justicia en este mundo, hay que pensar que Cristo declara bienaventurados a los pobres porque el
Reino de Dios ha comenzado: ‘Cumplido es el tiempo, y el reino de Dios está cercano’ (Mc 1,15). Es
decir: se ha iniciado la supresión de la situación de despojo y pobreza que les impide ser plenamente seres
humanos, se ha iniciado un Reino de justicia, que va incluso más allá de lo que ellos podrían esperar.
Bienaventurados son, porque el advenimiento del Reino pondrá fin a su pobreza creando un mundo
fraternal.”
75
The first way in which Liberation Theology is particularly new and radical is its
methodology. For the majority of Church history the educated clergy has read and
interpreted texts of the Bible, and then presented the biblical truths to the laity during the
homilies. The common people receive theology from their priest. With the Second
Vatican Council, this one-way road of theology is opened to a two-way street. The laity is
invited to participate more in the Church, in missions and mass.166 Thus, the Second
Vatican Council frees up the ability to theologize, an opportunity taken by the “oppressed
and believing” Latin Americans.167 The significance of this is that the one-way stream of
theology, wisdom from on high trickling down through the hierarchy, has been diverted.
It was now possible for all Christians to look at Scripture and determine its application. In
the Latin American context, it allows the clergy and the laity to work together in
discovering how to work through their problems in a Christian way.168 Liberation
theology is not done in the “ivory tower” of the theologian, but on the ground with the
people.169 Other liberation theologians, Leonardo and Clodovis Boff, write, “Above all
else, they have to be vehicles of the Spirit so as to be able to inspire and translate the
166
“Vatican Council, Second." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2007. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 19 Oct.
2007 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9074901>.“The ‘Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy’
establishes the principle of greater participation by the laity in the celebration of mass and authorizes
significant changes in the texts, forms, and language used in the celebration of mass and the administration
of the sacraments.” “The teaching of the constitution on the nature of the laity (those not in holy orders)
was intended to provide the basis for the call of lay people to holiness and to share in the missionary
vocation of the church. By describing the church as the people of God, a pilgrim people, the council fathers
provided the theological justification for changing the defensive and inflexible stance that had characterized
much of Catholic thought and practice since the Protestant Reformation.”
167
Elsa Tamez, “Liberation Theology” in vol 8 of Encyclopedia of Religion 2nd ed, edited by Lindsay
Jones (Thomson Gale, Detroit: 2005).
168
The Second Vatican Council “gave Latin American theologians the courage to think for themselves
about pastoral problems affecting their countries” and “intensified reflection on the relationship between
faith and poverty, the gospel and social justice.” Leonardo and Clodovis Boff, Introducing Liberation
Theology (Orbis Books, Marynoll, NY: 1986, 2006), p 69.
169
Granted, Gustavo Gutierrez, author of Teología de la Liberación is a clergyman writing this book, but
the theology developed and practiced in Liberation Theology comes from living with the poor, developing
ideas together. The book as a final product did come from the hand of a clergyman, but in contrast to earlier
theology, it was developed with the help of living in community with the poor.
76
demands of the gospel when confronted with the signs of the times as they are emerging
among the poorer classes of society, in faithful reflection, hope, and committed love.”170
With this new permission for more involvement of the laity and encouragement to
think about and apply Scriptures to their context, a new methodology arises. Theology
becomes a conversation between the people and the clergy, trying to live out the biblical
truths. The people struggling in poverty look together with the clergy to the Scriptures for
guidance, and they find that the Bible is filled with messages about the poor, for the poor.
And since they are poor, they can best understand what Jesus meant. A common phrase
in Liberation Theology is the “epistemic privilege of the poor.” The epistemic advantage
of the poor is not that they are inherently wiser than anyone else, but since Jesus was
speaking to an audience that was poor, currently poor people have a better opportunity of
understanding what Jesus meant in the gospel since they are akin to the original
audience.171 So, the real life poverty of Latin Americans can help inform the clerics in
understanding and applying Scripture, in a word, doing theology. The methodology of
Liberation Theology is thus radically different from Catholic Christianity up to this point
of history. Rather than the clergy always telling the laity what Scripture means, the poor
now reciprocate, informing the clerics what the poor in Galilee would have heard Jesus
say. This is revolutionary—the poor can do theology, they have ownership of their
beliefs, they inform the Christian Church as a whole.
The consequence of this new methodology is that theology begins to have a
different focus. Rather than engaging in intellectual intricacies (can God create a rock
that no one can lift?), theology done in unison by the clergy and laity focuses on praxis.
170
Leonardo and Clodovis Boff, Introducing Liberation Theology, (Orbis Books, Maryknoll, NY: 2006), p
19-20.
171
Brown, Gustavo Gutiérrez, p 57.
77
How do the people live out Scripture? The majority of Latin Americans live in abject
poverty. What does the Bible say? As has been discussed above, the Bible is full of laws
to protect the poor, prophecies condemning those who exploit them, and frequent calls to
social justice. The application of such Scriptures is to work for justice, to change the
social and economic structures. Such action inevitably has political overtones. In the past,
the Church has been aloof from the secular and has had ties with the wealthy elite. Now
the church stands in solidarity with the poor, struggles with the poor to reform societal
structures, struggles for justice. If the Church remains complacent and doesn’t join the
struggle, how is it following Scripture? Leaving the status quo empowers the oppressors,
and sins against the poor. You cannot love God and not love your neighbor (look at all of
the prophets who called the people to justice). Likewise, as we love our neighbors we are
loving Christ, just as Jesus taught in the parable of the sheep and the goats. Our actions
towards the poor, the masses, in political love (caridad política as said by Pope Pius XII)
conforms us to the Will of God, to love people in concrete actions with political
implications.172 The Church must take action. The Church must take a radical stance. In
contrast to the sluggish Church of the wealthy officials, the Church now takes action on
behalf of the poor. The consequences of this new way of doing theology lead to
revolutionary action.
So, Gustavo Gutiérrez is revolutionary in his thought, as he supports a radically
different path for the Church than what it had traditionally followed in Latin America.
Siding with the poor, widespread involvement in social issues and political alignments
are all revolutionary stances. However, Gutiérrez is still orthodox in holding his
172
Spanish, p 310. “La caridad es, hoy, una ‘caridad política’ según la expresión de Pío XII. En efecto, dar
de comer o de beber es en nuestros días un acto político: significa la transformación de una sociedad
estructurada en beneficios a unos pocos que se apropian de la plusvalía del trabajo de los de más.”
78
Christianity tightly, finding the basis for his revolution in the teachings of Christ, the
Scriptures, and the Church.
Controversy
Any ideology or theology that promotes such radical change is bound to incur
some criticism. Just as there are two competing accounts of Che’s life in comparison to
his ideology, there is controversy over the orthodoxy of Gutiérrez’ theology. Liberation
theology has been criticized on many fronts. Robert McAfee Brown addresses eight
critiques in chapter 4 of his book on Liberation Theology, Theology in a New Key. In this
section I shall discuss four critiques that have repeatedly come up in my research and
discussions I have had. The four critiques of Liberation Theology that I shall address are
about its methodology, reductionism, radical separatism from the Church, and violence.
The first critique that I shall address is the methodology of Liberation Theology.
The criticism is that Liberation Theology uses questionable methods, particularly
allowing the social context to shape the theology, rather than vice versa. Since Liberation
Theology depends so heavily on a methodology based on the perspective of the poor, it is
too tied to its context.
This criticism comes from the emphasis liberation theologians place on the
liberation and empowerment of the people to reexamine Christian themes from the
perspective of the poor, and to do theology with the poor. Like the Church, theology has
until this time been the property of the rich, at leisure to contemplate such things; the
poor have had everything (class, economics and even theology) determined for and
imposed upon them until now. Juan Luis Segundo, a liberation theologian, says that even
79
theology is liberated, because now it is no longer constricted to the thought of the elite.173
Gutiérrez refers to Freire, agreeing that only the poor and oppressed can imagine and
reflect upon this new utopia, because the rich can only think in terms of maintaining or
reforming the current situation.174 It is the poor who can truly look at the passages about
Jubilee, cancelling debts, provision for the poor, and spiritual renewal along with an
economic renewal without fear of disrupting the system (a concern for those comfortable
in the current system). The poor can see aspects of Christian theology that other
Christians may be blind to. The liberation of theology through the perspective of the poor
obviously ties Liberation Theology tightly to its socioeconomic context.
The methodological criticism is that Liberation Theology is too contextually
conditioned—the context shapes the theology rather than theology shaping the
understanding of the context. The response to the methodological critique is that all
churches and their theologies are shaped by their context, and it has always been this
way. As in Andrew Walls’ pithy statement, “all churches are culture churches”.175 The
first Christians were tightly tied to their context of Judaism, re-understanding the Hebrew
Scriptures in light of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. The early church was
immersed with Greek thought, in philosophical attempts to understand how one God may
be three (the Trinity), and what souls are like. Each of these has understood Scripture in a
different way, due to their context, and brought great depth to Christianity because of it.
173
Robert McAfee Brown, Theology in a New Key: Responding to Liberation Themes (Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1978), p 118. “Segundo claims that the important contribution is a new methodology
that makes possible ‘the liberation of theology’ from methods that have allowed it to accept outrageous
inequalities complacently.”
174
Spanish, p 359. “Tiene razón Freire cuando dice que en el mundo de hoy sólo el ser humano, la clase, el
país oprimidos pueden denunciar y anunciar. Unicamente ellos son capaces de elaborar utopías
revolucionarias y no ideologías conservadoras o reformistas. El sistema opresor no tiene más futuro que el
de mantener su presente de opulencia.”
175
Andrew Walls, The Cross Cultural Process in Christian History (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2002).
80
Likewise, Liberation Theology from the context of the Latin American poor can bring to
light the many passages of social justice in the Bible. Gutiérrez said in an interview,
“People today often talk about contextual theologies but, in point of fact, theology has
always been contextual. Some theologies, it is true, may be more conscious of and
explicit about their contextuality, but all theological investigation is necessarily carried
out within a specific historical context.”176 So, theology coming from a specific context
in order to speak to a certain situation in no way deviates from the norm, nor detracts
from its validity. If anything, the methodology of Libration Theology provides new
insight to the ever-new Word of God.
The second critique of Liberation Theology is the reductionist critique, which
fears that Liberation Theology reduces Christianity to ethics, politics, sociology, or
another brand of Marxism. As has been shown, Gutiérrez is concerned with the ethics of
the Latin American political, economic and social situations. It is unethical for the few to
exploit the many—moreover, the extreme poverty of Latin America is unbiblical. That
ethics, politics, and sociology play a large role in Liberation Theology is no secret. But in
response to the critique, Brown writes,
“Much of the emphasis in liberation theology of ethics, politics, sociology, and
Marxism is explained by the fact that other theologies have neglected those areas
of concern and there is a vacuum to be filled…If we are to take liberation
theologians at their word, they are not ‘reducing’ the faith, but looking for ways to
expand the faith so that it can speak to the situations where God has placed
them.”177
Liberation Theology is expanding theology from just the personal, soteriological
sector (which it does address) to the larger social issues of ethics, politics, economics and
176
Daniel Hartnett, “Remembering the Poor,” America 188, no 3 (2/3/2003).
http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=2755
177
Brown, Theology in a New Key, p 114.
81
sociology. Then there is the reductionist critique that Liberation Theology is just another
brand of Marxism. Almost with frustration, liberation theologians insist that they are not
Marxists or communists;178 rather, they use Marxist tools of interpretation to understand
their context and how to move to make a more just society. Gutiérrez says one doesn’t
have to have a Marxist interpretation to see struggle between the classes; interclass
struggle is a fact as the oppressed struggle against unjust policies.179
Brown writes in his summary and defense of Liberation Theology,
“Perhaps Marx’s most important contribution has been to provide tools for social
analysis that help to make sense of the Latin American situation. This does not
mean accepting Marx’s whole world view, Gutiérrez’ world view is provided by
biblical and Catholic Christianity. But it does mean letting certain concepts of
Marx inform how we approach injustice and exploitation in the world in which
the God of the Bible has placed us.”180
Brown makes three points that he believes are important to fairly understand
Gutiérrez in his use of Marx. “The importance of an idea is not who came up with it, but
whether or not it accurately describes the world in which we live.” “When an insight is
found in the Bible and also in Marx, its presence in Marx does not invalidate its presence
in the Bible.” “There is a radical side to the Christian tradition that has been submerged
for centuries and also long antedated Marx.”181 These are straightforward, logical
statements—simple, yet often overlooked in the concern against the red scare of
Marxism.
“One cannot help noticing an important convergence between such an analysis
and the ‘good news’ of the gospel. Listen to Jesus: ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon
178
Spanish, p 202,. Some people find that being a part of the liberation process and seeking out the roots of
capitalism that perpetuate injustice means not being afraid of being accused of being a communist—and
maybe even affirm socialism as a means of creating a society where man does not prey upon man 202 (65)
Bishops in poorer areas speak against the injustice and misery, but face the economic systems and are
labeled Marxists, even if they aren’t. 193-4
179
Spanish, 399.
180
Brown, Gustavo Gutierrez, p 36.
181
Brown, Gustavo Gutierrez, p 38.
82
me, because he has anointed me to preach the good news to the poor, He has sent
me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set
at liberty those who are oppressed…’ (Luke 4:18) At this point, the message of
Marx and the message of the gospel are strikingly similar.”182
So, Liberation Theology, while containing a heavy dose of Marxism, is not
reduced to Marxism. The categories are used because they help Latin Americans identify
concepts that explain the situation they face. It also happens that Marxist ideas overlap
with Jesus’ teachings and other Scriptures. Mary’s Magnificat especially challenges
unjust social structures. Liberation Theology uses Marxism because of its helpfulness and
correlation with Scripture, but it is in no way “reduced” to another brand of Marxism.
The third critique that I wish to address, which although it is not noted by Brown
came up several times in my research so I wish to mention it, is that Liberation Theology
breaks away from the Church. There were critiques from the Vatican, most notably from
Ratzinger,183 including criticism that Liberation Theology undermines the role of the
Church. This is a warranted concern since for centuries Christians have looked up for
theological guidance from the Vatican and now Liberation Theology is developed by the
poor—a grassroots theology developed on the ground as opposed to theology coming
down from the hierarchy of the Church. Leonardo Boff spoke so favorably of the
theologizing of the poor and the charismatic leaders on the ground that he undermined the
authority of the Church so much as to be silenced by the Vatican for a year. In contrast to
Boff, Gutiérrez always checks his theological developments with Church teachings. He
believes in the empowerment of the poor to theologize for themselves based on the
conclusions of the Second Vatican Council. He supports social justice based on Scripture.
He refers to Church teachings almost as often as he quotes Scripture. Although there are
182
183
Brown, Gustavo Gutierrez, p 37.
Note: Ratzinger is now the Pope.
83
some liberation theologians such as Boff who have branched away from Church teaching,
Liberation Theology as presented by Gustavo Gutiérrez does not cross that line.
The fourth and final critique of Liberation Theology is its allowance for violence.
Much has been made of the phrase of liberation theologians to use violence “as a last
resort”. The problem is that critics emphasize violence disproportionately to its role in
Liberation Theology. “It is true that ‘violence plays an important role,’ but this is because
it is already a reality in the societies where liberation theologians dwell, and there is no
way that they could ignore it.”184 Gutiérrez states the fact that there already is
institutionalized violence. If development and justice are aspects of peace, then Latin
America is fraught with violence.185 Any violence done by the liberation theology
movement would be reactionary violence to what already exists, and in the few cases
when all other methods of changing society (protests, legislation, etc) fail and violence is
necessary, it would be to a much lesser degree than that which already exists.
To disdain Liberation Theology due to its allowance of violence as a last resort is
unfair. Most Christian theologies accept violence in certain circumstances.186 Christians
do not tend to reject the thought of St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther,
John Calvin or Karl Barth because they allow violence when necessary. Since the
theologies of these men are not invalidated by their allowance of violence in certain
circumstances, neither can Gutiérrez’ Liberation Theology be invalidated.
184
Brown, Theology in a New Key, p 110.
Spanish, p 402. “El documento sobre la paz en Medillín se abre, inspirado por Pablo VI, afirmando: ‘Si
“el desarrollo es el nuevo hombre de la paz”, el subdesarrollo latinoamericano, con características propias
en los diversos países, es una injusta situación promotora de tensiones que conspiran contra la paz’.”
186
I find it particularly odd that American Christians (who tend to support just-war) would reject the last
resort of violence as used by Liberation Theology.
185
84
Gutiérrez does not advocate violence. He is described as a peaceful man, and he
has a deep respect for the humanity of the “oppressor”, so hatred is not an option. As said
before, violence has played too large a role in the discussion of Liberation Theology and
it obscures its true calling. The heart of Gutiérrez’ message is this: Once we know of the
injustice, to sit complacently by and do nothing is not Christian—we must unite and
stand up and say that this is wrong and do all that we can to change the situation. Christ
didn’t call us out of the world, but he prayed that we would be one, just like he and the
Father are one. This isn’t just a message for Catholics, but a calling for all Christians. 187
Conclusion
Gustavo Gutiérrez, like Che Guevara, faced the Latin American situation in the
20th century and wrestled over its injustices, underdevelopment, and poverty. His
Christian foundation and reliance on Church teachings led him to help found Liberation
Theology, which seeks to understand Scripture in light of the Latin American context,
and proclaim God’s promises to Latin America. Gutiérrez’ development of a theology
that requires such a radical response is revolutionary, yet fully within the realm of
Christian teachings. Despite criticisms, Liberation Theology as proclaimed by Gustavo
Gutiérrez seeks to bring the Kingdom of God on earth, proclaiming liberation from
injustice and a new era of communion between God and man.
187
Spanish, p 406, 407. 406 “Jesús no pide al Padre que nos saque del mundo en el que las fuerzas del mal
tienden a disociar a sus discípulos. Pide que seamos uno como lo son el Padre y El.” “Una tarea importante
y urgente de la Iglesia en América Latina es consolidar esta unidad; unidad que no esconde los problema
existentes, sino que los evidencia y juzga desde la fe.” 407 “Esta vocación a la unidad se extiende, por
cierto, más allá de las fronteras de la Iglesia Católica, y alcanza a todos los cristianos. Este es el resorte del
ecumenismo al que el Vaticano II dio un gran impulso. Tal vez los caminos del ecumenismo en América
Latina no sean exactamente los mismos que en Europa. Entre nosotros, la experiencia prueba, el
compromiso por anunciar el amor de Dios a todos desde los más pobres es un fecundo lugar de encuentro
entre cristianos de diferentes confesiones. De este modo, todos intentamos colocarnos en la sende de Jesús
hacia el Padre universal.”
85
Chapter IV
Having described the Latin American context and the lives of two revolutionary
men, it is now time to realize the intent of this study. My goal with this presentation is to
compare and contrast the thought of Ernesto Che Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez.
Hopefully, throughout the past two chapters the reader has noticed that there are many
similarities between these revolutionaries, and yet differences in their fundamental beliefs
have dramatic implications. While there are many possible points of comparison, in this
section I shall focus on four facets: the issue of poverty, Marxism, the revolutionary
climate, and humanism.
First, it should be clear by now that endemic poverty in Latin America is a major
issue in the revolutionaries’ lives and thoughts. It features prominently in the first chapter
of this work, and it is the springboard for the change which both Che and Gutiérrez seek.
Both men were born in 1928 in South America. From his youth, Che’s family
environment encouraged friendships with people of different social and economic levels,
and as a young adult he came into close contact with the poor as he traveled throughout
Argentina and South America. Gutiérrez was born into oppression by nature of his
mestizo heritage (mix between European and Indian) in a society that looks down on the
indigenous, and he lived near the poorer sections of town as both a youth and a priest.
From the close contact these men had with the poor, they knew firsthand the misery and
oppression, and it caused them to bring revolutionary change.
86
The ideology of Che and theology of Gutiérrez both begin with the state of the
poor. Che reiterates that the conditions of the poor are ghastly.188 Gutiérrez writes that
poverty is an evil, a scandalous state.189 Poverty is an unavoidable fact in the Latin
American context, so naturally it features as the basic fact foundational to their thought.
The similarity between Che and Gutiérrez’ attitudes towards poverty is undeniable.
The thought of Che and Gutiérrez parallels again in the second theme as they
discuss dependency and Marxism in Latin America. Both emphasize that poverty is a
result of the latifundios and the exploitation of Latin American countries by wealthier
“Western” countries. Che often criticizes colonialism for keeping Latin American
countries on one crop, depending on the more developed nations for their business and
provision of industrialized products.190 Gutiérrez thinks Dependency Theory leads to the
need for liberation and Latin America can only have liberty by overthrowing the
domination of capitalist countries, especially the United States of North America, who
has ties with the national, oppressive governments in Latin America. Latin American
countries can only get out of their situation through social revolution which will radically
and qualitatively change living conditions. 191
188
Ernesto “Che”Guevara, “Guerra de Guerrillas: un método” in Documentos de la revolución cubana,
([Montevideo]: Nativa Libros, [1967]) p86. and, Guevara, Che ¿Qué es un "guerrillero"? (1959)
http://www.marxists.org/espanol/guevara/59-quees.htm “La situación campesina en las zonas agrestes de la
serranía era sencillamente espantosa.”
189
Spanish, p 420-421. “La pobreza es un mal, un estado escandaloso.”
190
“Cuba: ¿Caso excepcional?”, p 208. The above is a summary of the section “¿Qué es el subdesarrollo?”
191
Spanish, p 171. “Hoy , los grupos más alertas, en quienes se abre paso lo que hemos llamado una nueva
consciencia de la realidad latinoamericana, creen que sólo puede haber un desarrollo auténtico para
América latina en la liberación de la dominación ejercida por los grandes capitalistas y, en especial, por el
país hegemónico: los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. Lo que implica, además, el enfrentamiento con sus
aliados naturales: los grupos dominantes nacionales. Se hace, en efecto, cada vez más evidente que los
pueblos latinoamericanos no saldrán de su situación sino mediante una transformación profunda, una
revolución social, que cambie radical y cualitativamente las condiciones en que viven actualmente. Los
sectores oprimidos al interior de cada país van tomando conciencia—lentamente, es verdad—de sus
intereses de clase y del penoso camino por recorrer hacia la quiebra del actual estado de cosas, y –más
lentamente todavía—de lo que implica la constucción de una nueva sociedad.”
87
Both Che and Gutiérrez use Marxist categories to understand the oppression of
the many by the few as a conflict between the classes. Brown observes, “When Gustavo
looks at how Latin American society operates, the above is an almost letter-perfect
description of what he sees. There is a “struggle” between the “classes”, between the rich
and the poor, between oppressors and oppressed. Marx did not invent class struggle, he
merely observed and described it.”192 Che concludes, as did Lenin, that such drastic
differences between the classes “will push the masses into violent conflict with the
bourgeois government”.193 Both revolutionaries read Peruvian communist José Carlos
Mariátegui, who is credited as the great ancestor of Latin American Marxism. Che is
depicted as reading 7 Ensayos de la Interpretación de la Realidad Peruana [7
Interpretive Essays on Peruvian Reality] in Motorcycle Diaries.194 Gutiérrez refers to and
quotes Mariátegui to a large extent at the end of chapter 6 of Teología de la
Liberación.195 Mariátegui leads to the idea of original revolution by Indians, based on
their civilization, culture, values, etc.196
However, neither of the revolutionaries blindly swallows all of Marxist thought.
Che was anti-dogmatic in his Marxism; he did not think of Marx’s words as perfect, and
he critiqued them. Che also didn’t want scholasticism (like Stalin’s indoctrination),
knowing the need for creativity in developing Marxism-Leninism as society
192
Brown, Gustavo Gutiérrez, p36. Social conflict and class struggle is a large section of chapter 12 of
Teología de la Liberación.
193
“Guerra de Guerrillas: un método”, 87. “En este continente existen en general condiciones objetivas que
impulsan a las masas a acciones violentas contra los gobiernos burgueses y terratenientes, existen crisis de
poder en muchos otros países y algunas condiciones subjetivas también.”
194
This is supported by Anderson, 85-86. On page 136 Anderson also notes that Che delved into
Mariátegui’s ideas while in Guatemala with Hilda.
195
English, p56 (1988)
196
The result of this sort of thought is that we as members of the USA cannot help them determine what
this new society should look like for them (this would be yet another form of imperialism and directing
their steps for them); it must be their own, but we can support their attempts of a more just society.
88
progresses.197 Similarly, Gutiérrez doesn’t accept Marxism uncritically. His foundation is
Christian teaching, his tools are the social sciences of his day. He uses the Marxist
categories of classes, and hopes for the creation of a classless society; however, his new
society is based on Christian love for humanity, not Marx’s atheistic humanism.198 So
Gutiérrez reads Marx, applies Marx, criticizes Marx, and teaches Marx, especially in
terms of what Latin Americans might learn from him for carrying out a ‘gospel inspired’
Christian struggle.”199 Once again, the thought of Che and Gutiérrez parallels in the use
of Marxism.
In these first two areas of poverty and theory over its source, the thought of Che
and Gutiérrez has been parallel, both agreeing that something has to be done. The status
quo is not good enough. Che states that not taking up arms to change the situation is
unforgivable.200 Gutiérrez also speaks out strongly, calling the current system sinful, and
pushing for public change.201 Che and Gutiérrez come from similar historical, cultural
and theoretical backgrounds, so their thought thus far has been parallel. But now the
parallelism stops. Although these next two themes are shared, the thought of these
revolutionaries goes in different directions.
197
Lowy, p 14.
Also, Gutierrez does not accept the need for violent revolution, characteristic of Marxist-Leninism.
199
Brown, Gustavo Gutiérrez, p38.
200
“Cuba: ¿Caso excepcional o vanguardia en la lucha contra el colonialismo”, p 213. “…sería
imperdonable limitarse tan solo a lo electoral y no ver los otros medios de lucha armada para obtener el
poder, instrumento indispensable para aplicar y desarrollar el programa revolucionario. Si no se alcanza el
poder, todas las demás son inestables, insuficientes, incapaces de dar las soluciones que se necesitan por
más avanzadas que puedan parecer.”
201
Spanish, p 352 (Sinful) “La miseria y la injusticia social revelan ‘una situación de pecado’, de quiebra
de la fraternidad y la comunión; al librarnos del pecado Jesús ataca la raíz misma de un orden injusto. Para
Jesús la liberación del pueblo judío no era sino un aspecto de una revolución universal y permanente, con lo
cual lejos de desinteresarse por esa liberación la colocaba en un nivel más profundo y de fecundas
consecuencias.” and 401 (need for change) “En efecto, esas situaciones son provocadas por profundas
injusticias que no podemos aceptar. Pero superar significa ir a las causas de donde provienen estos
conflictos sociales, abolir lo que produce un mundo de privilegiados y de despojados, de razas superiores o
inferiores. Crear una sociedad fraterna y de iguales—sin opresores y oprimidos—supone no engañar, ni
engañarse frente al actual estado de cosas.”
198
89
The third element of their thought is the revolutionary climate. In terms of their
revolutions, Che in Cuba and Gutiérrez in theology, Che partially provides a basis for
Gutiérrez. Historically, Che had his revolution first, and it became part of the context
which shaped Gutiérrez’ thought.
Che became politically active in the mid 1950’s. He was involved with the leftist
groups in Guatemala and rode to glory in the Cuban Revolution in 1959. As a member of
the Cuban Revolution and writer of such works as “Guerrilla Warfare”, it is obvious that
the revolutionary climate is a fundamental part of Che’s thought. Gutiérrez began writing
about social revolution in Teología de la Liberación a decade later. Che’s revolution is
not only a temporal antecedent to Gutiérrez’; it shapes the thought of the liberation
theologian. As Che stated, now that Cuba has led the way to revolution, the people know
that revolution and a people’s government is possible. Cuba’s example provides hope and
proof that it can and will be done.202 This confidence shapes Gutiérrez’ understanding of
the revolutionary possibilities for Liberation Theology. Gutiérrez even quotes Che twice
in Teología de la Liberación. Gutiérrez envisions Che’s new man, and he quotes Che in
acknowledgement that it is hard to teach people the new system and the new way of
being human while still using the old methods of teaching from the old society. 203 To
solve this problem, Gutiérrez refers to Freire who said that the oppressed must learn and
teach themselves the transformation; otherwise they are still being imposed upon by the
overlording (however well-intended) power. Repeating the theme of the new man,
202
“Cuba: ¿Caso excepcional o vanguardia en la lucha contra el colonialismo”, p 216. “…las masas no sólo
saben la posibilidad de triunfo: ya conocen su destino.”
203
English, p 156; Spanish, 177. “Los revolucionarios—escribía Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara—carecemos,
muchas veces, de los conocimientos y la audacia intelectual necesarios para encarar la tarea del desarrollo
de un hombre Nuevo por métodos distintos a los convencionales; y los métodos convencionales sufren de
la influencia de la sociedad que los creó.”
90
Gutiérrez also quotes Che’s statement that the purpose of socialism and communism is
not to improve industry only, it is to create the new man; if they produce only products
and not a new form of humanity, the revolution has failed.204 Gutiérrez’ use of Che’s
words show not only that their ideas of the possibility, need, and even nature of
revolution go in the same direction, but also that Gutiérrez’ thought partially branches out
of Che’s. Of course, Gutiérrez had many other influences (Mariátegui, Gramsci, Metz,
Freire, and above all Catholic teaching and the Bible).205 Yet it remains that Che’s Cuban
Revolution helped set the revolutionary climate of Gutiérrez’ Liberation Theology.
The desire for revolution, for both Che and Gutiérrez, is born out of love for
humanity. Humanism is the fourth and final common element in the ideology of Che and
Gutiérrez to be discussed. Both of these revolutionaries have a profound understanding of
humanity, but their humanism has different foundations and these different angles
necessarily cause their humanism to have a different slant. I shall discuss their humanism
and the effect of their foundations in the following areas: love of humanity, belief in a
new man, and the permissibility of killing people.
Observing endemic poverty is not enough to spark a revolution. Identifying with
the poor, having compassion for them, and loving them sparks indignation at their
situation and leads to reform and revolution. This love for humanity, source of the
revolution, is a basic part of the revolutionary thought of Che and Gutiérrez, although
each interprets humanism through different lens.
204
English, p 138; Spanish, p361. “El socialismo ahora—decía el ‘Che’ Guevara—, en esta etapa de
construcción del socialismo y del comunismo, so se ha hecho simplemente para tener fábricas brillantes, se
está haciendo para el hombre integral, el hombre debe transformarse conjuntamente con la producción que
avance, y no haríamos una tarea adecuada si solamente fuéramos productores de artículos y no fuéramos
productores de hombres.”
205
These authors are all mentioned by name in the text of Liberation Theology by Gustavo Gutierrez, as
part of the intellectual background for the new theology.
91
For Che, humanism is seen through the lens of Marxism. Marx was influenced by
Feuerbach. Feuerbach sees faith as something that divides and love as something that
unites, so he rejects faith in favor of love, rejecting God for human love—this is the truth
and the heart of true religion: love. So out of love for humanity Marx wants real action in
the present so that there can be hope for the future.206 In atheistic Marxism, humanism is
the god of communism. The telos of humanity is communism, wherein humanity is
finally reunited in solidarity and brotherhood, all working together so that everyone may
have enough, as opposed to the isolating competition of capitalism. Humanity is meant to
be in community. It is in the communist environment that humanity flourishes.
“‘Communism is a goal of humanity that is reached consciously.’ This theme constitutes
one of the richest and most significant contributions made by Che to the development of
Marxist humanism.”207 Lowy says that love of humanity as the basis for Marxism, not
vague philanthropy, is expressed in solidarity. It is not the same as Christian love,
because it includes hatred.208
For Gutiérrez, human love has an important role in the world, but ultimately love
for humanity is based in Christian teaching and understanding of God. Gutiérrez writes,
“In human love there is a depth which the human mind does not suspect: it is
through it that persons encounter God. If utopia humanizes economic, social, and
political liberation, this humanness—in light of the Gospel—reveals God. If doing
206
Spanish, p 330-332.
Lowy, p 22. Marx had written “[Communism] is the solution to the riddle of history, and it knows itself
to be this solution.” Che rephrases this as, “Man is the conscious actor of history. Without the
consciousness which encompasses his awareness as a social being there can be no communism.” This
shows Che’s understanding of communism as liberation form man’s alienation (induced by the
individualism and competition of capitalism) through conscious effort to be a more other-oriented society
of the new man. Che’s new understanding of the conscious choice of man to create the new society is one
of his contributions to Marxist thought.
208
Lowy, p 31.
207
92
justice leads to a knowledge of God, to find God is in turn a necessary
consequence.”209
Gutiérrez’ understanding of love is based on the idea that all men are created in the image
of God, and that because God loved the whole world (each and every man) he came and
died for our sins. Such a deep understanding of man’s origins and value precludes the
hate endorsed by Marxism. While Christians feel indignation at injustice, they hate only
the evil of the system while loving those who perpetuate it. This is part of what is meant
when Jesus said to “love your enemies”.210 Gutiérrez writes “Finally, man was made in
God’s image and as a sacrament to God. When some people are oppressed it is the same
as oppressing God. Poverty rejects solidarity and negates love between men and is a
scandalous situation.”211 It is out of this biblical understanding of the value of man and
his relationship to God that Liberation Theologians such as Gutiérrez are compelled to
struggle against injustice.
Love for humanity is a common component of these revolutionaries’ thought.
Yet, their humanism comes from different vantage points. While Che sees love of
humanity and brotherhood as the telos of humanity, Gutiérrez’ love is a reflection of
God’s love for humanity with a telos of communion between men and God.
The second facet of Che and Gutiérrez’ humanism is the belief in the new man.
Both believe that man can be changed and as a result society can be changed. Both
209
English p139. Also, Spanish “En el amor humano hay una densidad que el ser humano no sospecha: en
él se da el encuentro con el Señor. Si la utopía da una faz humana a la liberación económica, social y
política, a la luz del Evangelio esa faz humana es reveladora de Dios. Si obrar la justicia nos lleva al
conocimiento de Dios, encontrarlo es, a su vez, una exigencia de compromiso.”
210
Matthew 5:44; Luke 6:27; Luke 6:35
211
Spanish, p 420-421. “En una palabra, la existencia de la pobreza refleja una ruptura de solidaridad entre
personas y de comunión con Dios. La pobreza es expresión de un pecado, es decir, de una negación del
amor. Por eso es incompatible con el advenimiento del Reino de Dios, Reinos de amor y de justicia. La
pobreza es un mal, un estado escandaloso: escándalo que en nuestros días adquiere enormes proporciones.
Suprimirlo es acercar el momento de ver a Dios cara a cara, en unión con otros hombres.”
93
characterize this new man as having a deep sense of brotherhood and solidarity with other
people. Both believe this new man capable of a higher moral code, functioning out of
love for each other to create a world where everyone has enough and oppression is nonexistent.212 However, based on their different worldview foundations, they believe in
different methods of the creation of the new man.
Che believes that all men want this brotherhood (it is the telos of humanity).
However, man has been taught to compete with each other in order to earn enough to
survive, a slave to work. The new, complete man, supported in solidarity with his
comrades, will be discovered as the people unlearn the distrust and competition of
capitalism. Man will change through moral incentives (not material incentives), and a
relearning of how to live in community. Through education and new experience, man
will be able to change—the new man will be born.213
212
Note: neither Che nor Gutierrez naively embrace utopianism. They both write against it, yet have deep
hope in man’s capability to create a better, good (albeit not perfect) society. Che recognizes that humans
are imperfect, we like adventure to break the monotony of work, and that’s okay, but we ought to strive for
our best, and the best society possible through voluntary work. “Que debe ser un joven comunista”, p 95.
“Ahí hay una falla. Un fallo de organización, de esclarecimiento, de trabajo. Un fallo, además, humano. A
todos nosotros—a todos, yo creo—nos gusta mucho más aquello que rompe la monotonía de la vida,
aquello que de pronto, una vez cada cierto tiempo, lo hace pensar a uno en su propio valor, en el valor que
tiene dentro de la sociedad.” Gutierrez believes that a longing for utopia helps raise consciousness,
declaring announcing what good society may come, and denouncing the flaws of the current system.
Achieving such a utopia is a historical, rational, scientific, economic and political process, and we may
hope for success based in the work of God through men. Spanish, p 363. “El proyecto histórico, la utopia
de la liberación como creación de una nueva consciencia social, como apropiación de la gestión política y
en definitiva de la libertad, es el lugar propio de la revolución cultural, es decir, el de la creación
permanente de una persona nueva en una sociedad distinta y solidaria. Por esta razón, esa creación es el
lugar de encuentro entre la liberación política es el lugar de encuentro entre la liberación política y la
comunión de todos con Dios, comunión que pasa por la liberación del pecado, raíz ultima de toda injusticia,
de todo despojo, de toda disidencia. La fe anunciada que la fraternidad humana que se busca a través de la
abolición de la explotación del hombre por el hombre es alguno posible, que los esfuerzos por lograrla no
son vanos, que Dios nos llama a ella y nos garantiza su plena realización, que lo definitivo se está
construyendo en lo provisional. La fe nos revela el sentido profundo de la historia que forjamos con
nuestras manos, al hacernos conocer el valor de comunión con Dios—de salvación—que tiene todo acto
humano orientado a la construcción de una sociedad más justa, e inversamente nos hace ver que toda
injusticia es una ruptura con él.”
213
“El Socialismo y el Hombre en Cuba” The method of creating this new man should be fundamentally
moral inclination, without forgetting a correct use of material stimulation. Values need to be reorganized in
new categories—society as a whole should become one giant school. “…es necesario el desarrollo de una
94
Gutiérrez partially agrees with Che insofar as he also hopes that as socialism
works to bring social equality, there will be a change in values and less egoism, forming a
sense of brotherhood among all people.214 However, once again, Gutiérrez’ love of
humanity, sense of brotherhood and belief in a new man comes from his Christian beliefs.
While social reform and solidarity with the poor are critical, the third vital point of
Liberation Theology is that this change will come about through the enabling of the Holy
Spirit. Gutiérrez believes that this new man is possible as a new creation215, God
changing men’s hearts and allowing them to create the new society. As he did in the
Bible, God can now redeem and reform people and their societies. Gutiérrez hopes for a
brotherhood and equality that closest reflects the teachings of Jesus, which he believes to
be democratic socialism. In addition to men who are better morally and more cohesive as
a society, the goal of the new man in Gutiérrez’ view is also to be in communion with
God. Liberation Theology’s hope of bringing the Kingdom of God to earth is communion
both between men and with God.216 So, while both Che and Gutiérrez believe in the birth
of a “new man”, Che relies on man’s education in contrast to Gutiérrez’ hope of
supernatural transformation.
conciencia en la que los valores adquieren categorías nuevas. La sociedad en su conjunto debe convertirse
en una gigantesca escuela.” 74 “The important thing is that each day men continue acquiring more
consciousness of the need for their incorporation to society and at the same time, their importance as
movers of the same. “Lo importante es que los hombres van adquiriendo cada día más conciencia de la
necesidad de su incorporación a la sociedad y al mismo tiempo, de su importancia como motores de la
misma.” 75
214
Spanish, p 204-7.
215
Spanish, p 236. Gutierrez quotes Vatican II, saying we don’t struggle for others, but we join the
oppressed in their struggle. This struggle is not paternalistic but liberating. “Por ello importa tener presente
que más allá o, major, a través de la lucha contra la miseria, la injusticia y la explotación, lo que se busca es
la creación de un hombre Nuevo. El Vaticano II decía ya: ‘Somos testigo de quenace un nuevo humanismo,
en el que el hombre queda definido principalmente por su responsabilidad hacia sus hermanos y ante la
historia’ (GS 55). La aspiración a la creación de un hombre nuevo es el resorte íntimo de la luch que
muchos han emprendido en América latina…Esta búsqueda cuestiona y desafía a la fe cristiana.”
216
Span, p 359. “Pero de una unidad compleja…dentro de ella diversos niveles de significación: liberación
económica, social y política; liberación que lleva a la creación de hombres y mujeres nuevos en una
sociedad solidaria; liberación del pecado y en entrada en comunión con Dios y con todos los de más.”
95
The last aspect of humanism, a common thread in the thought of Che and
Gutiérrez, is the issue of killing. As evidenced by his life, Che found it necessary to fight
and kill in the revolution. In correspondence with Trotskyist thought, it was necessary to
eliminate the opposition so that the new, clean, good society is not jeopardized.217 Che
emphasized that pacifist movements and elections did not work, so guerrilla warfare was
necessary to liberate the poor. Gutiérrez rejects this automatic acceptance of violence. He
believes that all channels of legal action must be tried. He supports peaceful protests. He
says that violence can only be used as a last resort. Change is necessary—the inherent
violence of the unjust systems must be stopped, but human lives are valuable. Gutiérrez
writes that as we struggle against oppression, we cannot forget the humanity of the
oppressor, and love him also.218 There is only a small allowance for violence in
Liberation Theology; the point is that God loves all men and killing is not supported in
Christian humanism. So once again, Che and Gutiérrez diverge in their understanding of
humanism.
It is important to recognize that the key difference between the thought of Che
and the thought of Gutiérrez is Christianity; however, even if Gutiérrez were not a
Christian, his Marxism would not be the same as Che’s. Che is a Marxist-Leninist, who
217
Perhaps it is a Trotskyist influence that necessitated executions in the Sierra Maestra of traitors, and the
counter-revolutionaries after the communists had taken control. For this reason Che says to the UN
“fusilamientos, sí, hemos fusilado; fusilamos y seguiremos fusilando mientras sea necesario.” And “Our
struggle is a struggle to the death. We know what would be the result of a lost battle and the gusanos must
also know what results from a lost battle today in Cuba. In these conditions we live within the imposition
from North American imperialism.” “Nosotros sabemos cuál sería el resultado de una batalla perdida y
también tienen que saber los gusanos cuál es el resultado de la batalla perdida hoy en Cuba. En esas
condiciones nosotros vivimos por la imposición del imperialismo norteamericano. “Nuestra Lucha es una
lucha a muerte”, p 320.
218
English, p 157; Spanish, p 400. “‘No se puede justificar sin embargo el odio o la violencia contra
personas; pero hay que decir que el “combate por la justicia” (la expresión es de Pío XII) que lleva la lucha
obrera es, en él mismo, conforme a la voluntad de Dios.’ Estamos siempre al nivel de la constatación de
una situación de facto, pero a esto se añade la indicación de los principales responsables de la situación; al
mismo tiempo que se recusa la presencia del ‘odio o la violencia entre personas’.”
96
quotes Lenin often, and was accused of being a Trotskyist. This means that not only does
he believe that there will be a revolution by the people (Marx), the people of the
countryside can create the revolution when they want—they do not have to wait for
industrialization, or the opportune objective situations that Marx required—they can
create the opportune moment (Lenin). Furthermore, once the revolution succeeds in one
place, it should not stop; all people should benefit from the good of solidarity and
working together. Communism should not be confined by country borders—there should
be one mutually supportive communist world. This requires revolutionaries traveling
from one country to another, helping to spark the communist flame across the world
(Trotsky). Gutiérrez does not have any references to Trotsky and only mentions Lenin in
passing as someone who has dealt with the theories of colonialism and imperialism, but
does not seem to adhere to Leninist thought. So, Gutiérrez remains only a Marxist in the
sense that he does believe that a people’s revolution or reform is coming. Gutiérrez’
Marxism is different from Che’s Marxist-Leninism.
As has been shown in this chapter, there are many points of comparison between
Ernesto Che Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez. From their births in South America, these
men share comparable experiences and attitudes towards poverty, dependency and
Marxism. They have lived in a revolutionary climate and are motivated to act by their
humanism. Although their thought often travels in the same direction, their fundamental
beliefs about humanity, based on secular and theological worldviews, often set them at
different angles.
The contrast between Che and Gutiérrez in their humanism is striking. Lowy
observes:
97
“To hold life in profound respect and to be ready to take up arms and, if need be,
to kill, is contradictory only in the eyes of Christian or pacifist humanism. For
revolutionary humanism, for Che, the people’s war is the necessary answer, the
only possible answer, of the exploited and oppressed to the crimes and the
institutionalized violence of the oppressors: ‘They themselves impel us to this
struggle; there is no alternative other than to prepare it and decide to undertake
it.’”219
This offers an interesting point of discussion. Lowy says that only Christian
humanism finds killing to protect life contradictory. As a Christian, I note that not all
Christians are pacifists; especially in the United States I find many Christians to be just
war theorists, or even crusaders for democracy and American freedom. When we
qualitatively evaluate the ideology of Ernesto Che Guevara and the theology of Gustavo
Gutiérrez, inevitably the issue of violence is raised. How can we support Che who killed
to establish communism? How can we support Gutiérrez in his radical and revolutionary
ways of bringing social change for the kingdom of God? How do we react to the thoughts
of these revolutionaries? These questions form the basis of the conclusion to this section
of the greater study.
The key issue is, as Christians, can we support violent men? A strict pacifist
would say no. The implication is that he could not support the guerrilla Che. He would
also have certain doubts about Liberation Theology, which although it does not promote
violence, recognizes that at some point violence may happen when dealing with such a
powerful, selfish unwillingness to change system of institutionalized violence.220
219
Lowy, p 32.
In Liberation Theology, the clergy join with the poor to use legal means, and social protests to show the
injustice and change the system. Gutierrez mentions some clergy who have participated in protests and
written against the system, while making their home with the poor. It is through this personal contact that
Liberation Theology develops, and together the poor and the clergy move to change the system. At the
point of writing Teología de la Liberación in 1971, the actual methods of bringing about were still
developing and Gutierrez writes that they are still learning and developing how this is to be lived out.
220
98
Although Christians do not promote violence, many recognize that it may be
necessary to defend the helpless from an attacker. It has been shown above that the
situation in Latin America is already violent, with the rich preying upon the poor (think
of the latifundios and Rigoberta Menchú’s stories). It is with such an argument that Latin
Americans could say that they are responding in counter-violence to protect the weak,
defenseless and oppressed (the poor) from the violence already instigated by the unjust
system which responds in violence when the people protest their maltreatment.
Many Christians in the USA do support violence and war when there is a justified
political reason. Many respond with pride when they think of the American Revolution
and set off firecrackers on the Fourth of July. This is a war brought on by unfair taxes,
and the enlightened belief that we have the “right” to procure justice for ourselves. So we
threw off the oppressive yoke of England. How much more so do Latin Americans have
cause to overthrow the yoke of dictators and oppressive regimes that deprive the people
basic necessities of life? This is not an issue of leftist governments or rightist
governments, it is a question of just cause to protect the people from oppressive
governments that violate the basic rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, or
maybe just daily bread. If we as ‘just-war theorist’ Christians affirm these rights, there is
no reason to support the American Revolution overthrowing the British rulers and not
support the Cuban revolution which overthrew the American puppet Batista. Violence is
violence. Will Christians allow it with just cause or not?
Whatever our response to Ernesto “Che” Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez, it must
be as Christians.221 What does our faith command us? If we are pacifists, then we do not
support the revolutionary violence. If we are not pacifists, then we should look to why
221
Not as our political party or nation responds. We are first citizens of heaven, and then citizens of earth.
99
they are revolting, and ask if it is a just cause, and if the Bible supports such motives.
Whatever our answer to the issue of violence, it must come from a Christian
perspective.222
The final piece of this project shall be just that. Setting aside the issue of violence,
we shall examine both Ernesto “Che” Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez in light of the
themes and truths of the Bible. Then, we shall close the discussion on these
revolutionaries with thoughts on how we as followers of Christ ought to respond to their
thoughts and lives.
222
Of course these tough questions ricochet back at me. The honest truth is that I am struggling over the
issue of violence. I have grown up adhering to the stance of just war. But now as I learn about the people
on the other side of the battle lines, the double-roles my dear country has played, and how so many
innocent people are senselessly killed on both sides—soldiers on each side honorably dying for their
countries, I wonder why. God created life, not death. Although I have not taken a hard stand on either side
of the debate, more and more I feel myself moved towards pacifism. This is hard, because I am a feisty
person, and I wonder what I would do in a real situation. I do not know if I can live up to being a pacifist,
but more and more I think it is what best fits with the teachings of Christ and the love of God. So, I
personally support Che’s humanistic ideas, but not his methods. I also believe that Gutierrez and his
followers were doing a good job at looking at Scripture and embodying it in their lives.
100
Conclusion
A Look at Che and Gutiérrez in Light of Biblical Truths and Themes
This study is a cycle of journeys. As I was traveling through Argentina, I shared
in Ernesto “Che” Guevara’s journey across South America through the movie Motorcycle
Diaries. Reading the graffiti on the brick wall in La Plaza de Cooperación sent me on a
journey to discover what Che really believed and stood for, how cooperation could
coexist with such violence. In search for a Christian response to the Latin American
condition, I looked to Gustavo Gutiérrez’ movement in Liberation Theology. All
journeys are somehow a path towards or away from God. In this final section, I shall rely
heavily on the words of wisdom, inspired in Alexandra Robbins223, which reflect on the
themes of God as Love and Life, of human life as characterized by love, of apathetic
death when that Love is absent, and salvation as finding God and living in love with God
and our human brothers and sisters. These are universal themes, rooted in the biblical
story. As Christians, it is important to understand our lives through the truths of the Bible.
So, this conclusion shall be a reflection on Ernesto “Che” Guevara and Gustavo Gutiérrez
in light of the biblical narrative, and an application of how we as Christians can
understand and follow the example of these fallen men who seek to do the best they can
in this world.
In order to see the revolutionaries of this study in light of the biblical narrative,
let’s begin with a declaration of the main themes and truths of Scripture. We believe that,
in the words of Alexandra Robbins,
223
See Appendix D “Personal Theology of Translation” for the work in its entirety; I shall only refer to
phrases here and there as the biblical themes apply to the discussion at hand of Che and Gutierrez.
101
“With a word He created us…and by His Word, we live. Without Him, we die,
for He is Life and Love, without which we cannot exist. This glory and hope—
Salvation from apathetic death; meaningless, ignorant and purposeless—Has been
made known to the created through words; A sacred book of love from the Lover
to the Beloved, That they might live forever. And so, we fill our lives with love.”
We understand life and love as God has revealed it to us through the Bible. Now, let’s
understand the beliefs and actions of Che and Gutiérrez using the Bible and these biblical
truths as our lens.
Ever since the Fall, the world has been struggling in sin. Without God’s
intervention and love, the world is characterized by death from sin. The situation in Latin
America during the 20th century was oppressive. Che called the conditions of the workers
“ghastly” and Gutiérrez said that society was filled with systemic or institutionalized
violence. The situation was one of death, literally people starving and working to death. It
was purposeless, the selfishness of the elite depriving the majority of the basic necessities
of life. It was apathetic, it was stagnant. Without the Love of God to characterize our
lives, we are left with apathetic death.
On his motorcycle journey, in a series of moments Che came to know and love
people. He encountered firsthand the oppression, the apathetic death of the Latin
American situation. He recognized the need for salvation. As Christians, we know that
life and salvation come from Love, from God. However, Che was not a Christian; as an
atheist salvation came from love, human love and love of humans. This is why in Che’s
mind the highest goal of humanity was communism, because it allowed men to live in
solidarity and brotherhood, characterized by concern for others—love. Salvation is
humanism. In his humanist dream, Che desired for Cuba—and the world—a change of
heart in addition to a change in the economic system. This is the basis of his article “Man
102
and Socialism in Cuba”. Che had it half-right. Jesus said that the greatest commandment
was to “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all
your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as
yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.” 224 Che understands the second
half. As has already been mentioned in previous chapters, Che believed in a new
communist man, with higher values, based on concern for others. This new man goes
hand in hand with the new economic system; one cannot have an altruist society without
altruist men, and such men cannot be so in a society that does not allow for such a
lifestyle. Che wanted moral, not material, incentives to change Cuba, because of his faith
in men. When God is not a part of the picture, faith in the goodwill of men is the only
hope of salvation (as characterized by love).
The opposite of this salvation is the apathetic death; the opposite of other-focused
love is selfishness. The death and oppression of Latin America is largely because of
selfishness which results in aristocracy and imperialism taking advantage of those poorer
than themselves to hoard or “earn” more. In Che’s mind, this is yet another reason
capitalism is so bad. Not only do the North American countries economically take
advantage of Latin America in an imperialist way, but capitalism itself is based on people
competing in the market to get what they need. This competition necessarily divides
people along the lines of selfish interests—it divides rather than unifies, contrary to the
unifying love of humanist (and communist) salvation. Capitalism has no good end,
because there will always be people lacking. It is purposeless because it does not serve
the best interests of the people.
224
Mark 12:30
103
If we only have half of the picture, a world without God, Che’s communist
humanism makes sense because it promotes a utilitarian happiness and “enough” for
everyone as opposed to the divisiveness of capitalism motivated by an egoistic desire to
accumulate enough for oneself. As estadounidenses, we like capitalism because we
believe that if we work hard enough, we can achieve whatever we desire. We like a
system where we get what we deserve—what we deserve is what we have earned. If we
do not receive what we have earned, we feel that it is unfair. On the other side, leftists
believe that it is unfair that poor people should be denied food, schooling and health care.
All people deserve these things, whether they are able to earn them or not, by nature of
being human. The difference is in the values. A good question to ask is which value Jesus
promoted. Just desserts or mercy?
So for Che, humanism is salvation. In a world without God, Che did the only
thing that made sense—he fought to save himself and everyone else from death: injustice,
imperialism, and capitalism. Once Che picks up the gun, he has to keep it in order to
protect what he has done. If he doesn’t, then other societies that do not share his
philanthropic goals will prey on the young society in an effort to regain the economic
advantage. This indeed happened, as evidenced by the Bay of Pigs. Fighting to protect
the new way of life is necessary, which is why the three core words of Communist Cuba
were study, work and the gun.225 Without God, to achieve salvation in terms of human
love and protect such a humanist environment requires violence.
However, when Gustavo Gutiérrez addresses the same death and oppression in
Latin America, he does so with the whole picture. As a Christian, he knows all of Jesus’
225
These three are: voluntary work, new conscientización, and the gun to defend the revolution. Ernesto
“Che” Guevara, “Una Actitud Nueva Frente al Trabajo” Agosto de 1964, p152.
104
command in Matthew 22:37-39 “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with
all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And
the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’” Salvation is found in God’s Love,
and we live it through loving God and our neighbors. “We love because he first loved us.”
(1 John 4:18)226 Gutiérrez responds to the death in sin of the world with the life and love
of Christ. He looks to the Scriptures and sees God’s concern for the poor and oppressed
in the Law of Moses and the prophets, and in Jesus’ teaching of a new social order. Luke
emphasizes inversion in his gospel—the least is the greatest, the poor are the blessed.
John Howard Yoder discusses how Jesus’ message was that of dramatic social change,
and Wink talks in depth about the third way that Jesus provides, to not apathetically
accept the status quo, nor to react in violence, but to creatively expose the injustice of the
system and through awareness and peacefully aggressive movement push for change.
For Gutiérrez, salvation is based on the fact that Jesus suffered at the hands of
violent men.227 Christ has already won the battle over sin. Because of the violence Christ
suffered, he has “overcome the world.”228 Christ’s triumph over death, both literal,
spiritual, and this apathetic lack of love on earth, gives us hope and confidence as we
continue to live and work in this world. Through Christ, Christians can claim verses such
as Galatians 2:20 “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives
in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and
226
1 John 4:20 “If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not
love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen.”
227
1 Peter 1:21-25 “To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that
you should follow in his steps. ‘He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.’ When they
hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted
himself to him who judges justly. He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to
sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. For you were like sheep going astray,
but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.”
228
John 16:33 “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have
trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”
105
gave himself for me” and 1 John 4:4 “You, dear children, are from God and have
overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the
world.” Gutiérrez recognizes these Christian truths. He does not just hope in humanistic
love like Che (although he does say that it does play a role in leading us to understanding
God’s love), but he claims Scripture that attests to God’s faithfulness and action in the
world. He believes that by creating a more just society, he and his fellow followers of
Liberation Theology are helping to bring the Kingdom of God on earth. They can bring in
the Kingdom of God because of what Christ has done, and all that they do is
accomplished through the help of the Holy Spirit. Unlike the Church of the past,
Liberation Theology serves both the spiritual and social needs of the people.229 Working
to create a more just society and usher in the Kingdom is the opposite of the apathetic
selfish death, because it is based on life in Christ and love, because he is Love. The
Christian response to the death and oppression in Latin America is rooted in and in
response to God’s love for us.
The end of the Motorcycle Diaries is the beginning of Ernesto “Che” Guevara’s
story. The motorcycle named la poderosa (“the powerful one”) only carried Ernesto to
Peru before it died, and he was left to wander Latin America on foot. From there he did
not know where he would end up. As the film repeats, he let the world change him, and
then changed the world. But for us as Christians, our Poderoso, our All-Powerful one is
not a machine nor a human philosophy that dies and leaves us to wander—He is alive!
229
They would do this by creating comunidades de base, small communities that would help each other
economically and gather in weekly Bible studies to learn about God and interpret their situation in light of
the Scriptures.
106
And he has promised that he knows the plans he has for us.230 He is a God who proclaims
peace, freedom to the captives, and jubilee. Our journey is not over, and his Spirit is the
living vehicle that carries us along the paths that he has planned for us to do the good
works that he has planned for us.231
Conclusion
There are multiple purposes in this study. The first goal was to understand Latin
American history and conditions during the 20th and 21st centuries. Now we can better
understand why struggles for justice are so important to Che and Gutiérrez, why they are
so frustrated with the economic and foreign policies of the United States. The second
goal was to learn who Che was and what he believed because his ideas are repeated daily
by people all over the world, he is an icon for the struggle against the oppressor, and two
movies about him are coming out this year. He is important. The third goal was to look at
a Christian response to the Latin American condition as articulated by Gustavo Gutiérrez
in Liberation Theology. The reason I chose these two revolutionaries was because I
believe that there are many points of comparison between them, which as my fourth goal,
I have hopefully shown. We have looked at both of these men through the light of
Christian themes and Scripture: God as Love and Life, death and salvation.
Yet one thing remains, its application and effect on us as Christians in the United
States. At the end of such a large work, I hope that our learning can give us a greater
empathy for the atheists who are doing the best they can, and the Christians in Latin
America who are working through their faith and their cultural situations, and from their
230
Jeremiah 29:11“‘For I know the plans I have for you,’ declares the LORD, ‘plans to prosper you and not
to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.’”
231
Ephesians 2:10 “For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God
prepared in advance for us to do.”
107
examples examine our cultural context and struggle against the things that hold us in
apathetic bondage.
First, something that greatly troubles me, and has for years, is the automatic,
American assumption that communists are evil. I told someone that Che was a
communist, and his reaction was “so, he was a bad man”. I know that this is baggage
from the Cold War, but that’s what it is, baggage. Statements like that negate the
humanity of the people, just because they believe in a different economic system than we
do here in the United States. It’s just as offensive as the graffiti in that said “the world
will never be happy until the last bureaucrat is hung by the intestine of the last capitalist”,
although less grotesque. Such violent divisions of “us” and “them” are not befitting
children of the Kingdom of God.
Furthermore, as we have seen through learning about Che’s ideology, he wasn’t
necessarily a “bad man”. After all, he was created in God’s image, yet another member of
fallen humanity. He was an atheist who did the best he could to love people and bring
about a better, more other-focused society. I hope that after completing this study we can
have more compassion for the leftists of Latin America who do hold values that we share
(solidarity, brotherhood, justice, freedom) and are doing the best they can to create a just
society, but lack the founding love of Christ. And we should not forget that some
Christians may find that a leftist society best fits the teachings of Jesus. Although we may
not agree with that, we should remember that we are first their brothers and sisters in
Christ, and then participants in a rightist society. I’m not promoting “tolerance” in its
politically correct sense; rather, I am promoting love between Christians and compassion
for communists.
108
Secondly, I hope now that we have studied the Latin American context we can
better sympathize with followers of Liberation Theology. It is true that they focus heavily
on the oppression of the poor and social justice, but those are the issues that they are
facing and which need to be addressed by Christianity there. Furthermore, this emphasis
is not to the exclusion of other matters of faith. So, I hope that we can support them in
their efforts. Our Latin American brothers and sisters must know that we are Christians
first, and we love them more than our earthly homeland.
Thirdly, even though we do not live in Latin America nor follow Liberation
Theology, we can follow their example. They identified the cause of “apathetic death” in
their society as large-scale poverty, oppression and societal injustice; so, as a body of
believers they answered it with life through Christ and the Kingdom of God. Likewise,
we must identify that which keeps us in bondage in our society…selfishness. Here we
value independence, earning what we need and looking out for number one. Often times
our selfishness expresses itself in materialism. We must identify that which keeps us in
bondage and struggle against it. Whatever our bondage is, it is idolatry, and it keeps us
from God. Just as staying in apathy would have kept Che from communism / people /
love / humanism (Che’s god), if we stay in our apathy it keeps us from Love, God and his
justice. If we do not connect to God, because of our idols, then we cannot be filled with
his love, and we will not connect to the plight of our brothers and sisters.
We must seek God first.
We must identify ourselves as Christians first. Saving the world has more to do
with praying than lobbying and guns. We must journey to the heart of God, find salvation
in Jesus, and get to the beginning of God’s Kingdom on earth, as prayed for by the
109
Liberation Theologians and as taught by Jesus to his disciples—in communion with God
and men. May we say in faith, “To this end I labor, struggling with all his energy, which
so powerfully works within me”.232
232
Colossians 1:29, 19 “For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to
himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.”
110
Appendix A: “La United Fruit Co.” By Pablo Neruda233
Cuando sonó la trompeta, estuvo
todo preparado en la tierra,
y Jehova repartió el mundo
a Coca-Cola Inc., Anaconda,
Ford Motors, y otras entidades:
la Compañía Frutera Inc.
se reservó lo más jugoso,
la costa central de mi tierra,
la dulce cintura de América.
When the trumpet sounded,
everything was prepared on earth,
and Jehova divided the world
among Coca-Cola Inc., Anaconda,
Ford Motors, and other entities:
the United Fruit Inc.
reserved for itself the most juicy,
the central coast of my land,
the sweet belt of America.
Bautizó de nuevo sus tierras
como "Repúblicas Bananas,"
y sobre los muertos dormidos,
sobre los héroes inquietos
que conquistaron la grandeza,
la libertad y las banderas,
estableció la ópera bufa:
enajenó los albedríos
regaló coronas de César,
desenvainó la envidia, atrajo
la dictadora de las moscas,
moscas Trujillos, moscas Tachos,
moscas Carías, moscas Martínez,
moscas Ubico, moscas húmedas
de sangre humilde y mermelada,
moscas borrachas que zumban
sobre las tumbas populares,
moscas de circo, sabias moscas
entendidas en tiranía.
It rechristened its lands
as “Banana Republics,”
and above the sleeping dead,
above the restless heroes
that conquered greatness,
with liberty and flags,
it established a mock-opera:
it threw discretion to the wind
it gave away Caesar’s crowns,
it unsheathed envy, attracted
dictatorships of flies,
Trujillo flies, Tacho flies,
Carías flies, Matrínez flies,
Ubico flies, flies wet
from spilled humble blood and marmalade,
drunk flies that buzz
over the people’s graves,
circus flies, wise flies
trained in tyranny.
Entre las moscas sanguinarias
la Frutera desembarca,
arrasando el café y las frutas,
en sus barcos que deslizaron
como bandejas el tesoro
de nuestras tierras sumergidas.
Among bloodthirsty flies
the Fruit Company disembarks,
dragging coffee and fruits
to its ships which slid to sea
like trays with the treasure
from our submerged lands.
Mientras tanto, por los abismos
azucarados de los puertos,
caían indios sepultados
en el vapor de la mañana:
un cuerpo rueda, una cosa
sin nombre, un número caído,
un racimo de fruta muerta
derramada en el pudridero.
Meanwhile, through the sugarcoated
abyss of the ports
fell Indians entombed
in the mists of the morning;
a body swirls in place, something
without name, a fallen number,
a bunch of dead fruit
dropped in a desecrated heap.
233
Original Spanish poem by Pablo Neruda; translation by Dana Discher.
111
Appendix B: Samples of Fontova’s Scholarship
Footnotes mis-cited:
s Ch.2 ft.3 (p11)
s Ch.5 ft 8 (p71)
s Ch.6 ft 6 (p88) is after story of false madre witness, citation goes to story of Che
speaking behind another commander Jesús Carrera’s back and being caught. (Bravo
p194) 196 in my notes
s Ch.6 ft 32 (p104) is after story of strangled puppy, citation leads to story of reading
Che’s letter that says that he discovered he liked to kill (Ros p136)
s Ch.9 ft 4 (p134) Che is supposed to take control from Sotus, citation is to story of
Che speaking behind another commander Jesús Carrera’s back and being caught.
(Bravo p194)
s Ch.11 ft 3 (p147) is after saying that “Cuba’s sugar production in 1963 was less than
half of its Batista era volume”; the citation doesn’t say anything of the sort, only that
Che was a failure economically (Bravo p267)
s Ch.12 ft 4 (p169) is one paragraph below the quote that is actually cited quoting Ros
262, so as to appear to cite a different quote.
s Ch.12 ft 5 (p170)
s Ch.12 ft 7 (p171)
s Ch.13 ft 4 (p179)
s Ch.13 ft 6 (p183) the page for ft 6 may be the one cited in ft4
s Ch.13 ft 30 (p195) citation is incorrect as Bravo p487; it’s actually at Bravo p467
s Ch.13 ft 31 (p195) citation is incorrect as Bravo p467; but it is actually at Bravo p499
s Ch.13 ft 32 (p196)
s Ch.13 ft 33 (p196)
Citation Correct but Details Incorrect:
s Ch 4 ft 3(p36) Fontova says “Faustino Perez later recounted that he was nearly
wounded himself—not by the whizzing bullets, but by a hernia while trying to stifle
his laughter as the look on Che’s face, especially after seeing the nature of Che’s
wound.” But his source says that Perez laughed years later at the memory, not at that
moment with Che. (Bravo 97)
s Ch.11 ft6 (p149) Fontova records a fight between Fidel Castro and Che, with Raul
Castro and Aleida March being present. The source does not mention Raul in the
context of this story.
s Ch 12 ft 6 (p170) Fontova portrays Che as being unconcerned with the Congolese’
superstitions, whereas his source says that Che thought it was a joke, and then the
superstitions caused him trouble with his men. (Bravo p 307ff)
Skewed Translation:
s Ch.11 ft6 (p149) The omission of “carajo” which is offensive, and the addition of
“please” makes Che appear submissive, requesting respect, rather than the original
demand.
◊ “¡Fidel, a mí me respetas, carajo! ¡Yo no soy Camilo!”
◊ “Fidel! Please show me some respect! I’m not Camilo!”
112
s
Ch. 9 (p134-5) Che is supposed to take control of Sotus’ column, but doesn’t; Castro
reprimands Che. This is in Ortega’s piece p122, but Fontova takes translation liberties
to make Che look sniveling in an already humiliating anecdote
Quotes out of Context:
s “individualism must disappear!” (Fontova, xix) The statement’s original meaning is
to stop putting individual needs over the needs of the community at large. Later in
this speech, Che criticizes the youth for thinking as a crowd; they also need to think
as individuals, and be aware of their own actions, so as to bring honor to their own
names, and to bring honor to the revolution. (p 90)
“definir al individuo, actor de ese extraño y apasionante drama que es la
construcción del socialismo, en su doble existencia de ser único y miembro de la
comunidad.”
s Fontova manipulates Jorge Casteñada’s quote about Che’s extraordinary military
feats. (p xxv)
Statements Not Cited:
s In 1962 there were 400 firing squad blasts in one week. (p74)
s Che ordered a sugar plantation and orchard with ripening fruit to be destroyed so that
he could create a soccer field and Cubans could learn to play like Argentineans.
(p146)
s (many more, especially quotes from Che)
113
Appendix C Comments Posted on Utube about Che Documentary
http://www.yoUtube.com/watch?v=B8U-bhwNOD4
Pro-Che
arizona80 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply Mexico
arizona80 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply Mexico
putos cpitalistas, es pura logica ustedes son unos
egocentricos asquerosos que con tal de tener dinero
pa pagar a sus putas gringas son felices y ni
piensan un segundo en la pobreza y la
discriminacion, lean la biblia en la biblia esta
clarisimo el ejemplo que dios nos impone a seguir y
es el socialismo, viva la revolucion viva fidel viva el
che viva mexico y viva la lucha por la libertad y la
felicidad.
f***ing cpitalists, it’s pure logic you are filthy
egocentrics that as long as you have money
to pay your f***ing gringas you are happy and never
think for a second about poverty and
discrimination, read the bible in the bible it’s
very clear the example that god instructs us to follow
and it’s socialism, long live the revolution long live
fidel long live che long live mexico and long live the
struggle for liberty and happiness
Anti-Che
wdmedina (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Venezuela
Cualquiera Fusila gente inocente, es eso un logro
para ti?... deberiamos colocarte en el paredon a ti y
a tu familia a ver si te parece chistoso y una gran
hazaña.
wdmedina (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Venezuela
Whoever executes innocent people, is this an
accomplishment to you? We should put you and
your family on the firing wall to see if it seems funny
and a great deed.
Ad hominem
hingisfan (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply USA
La jente de MEJICO (como se dice en espana, que
estoy seguro que lo rechazas porque eres un indio
vergonzoso) han elejido un presidente
CONSERVADOR que esta comprometido a
denunciar el regimen Castrista y el comunismo en
todo los paises latinoamericanos. Asi que tu mira
ver lo que dices de mejico por que en el dia de
manana, quzias acaban con usted por ser un indio
que habla tantos horrores y dice tanas ignorancias.
metalkat77 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Mexico
Para empezar, es MÉXICO, con X, y no con J,
segundo, no somo indios, indios los ciudadanos o
nativos de la India, y tercero, VIVA MI
PRESIDENTE CONSERVADOR, VIVA FRANCO
y MUERA EL CHE GUEVARA, MUERA LA
REPÚBLICA ESPAÑOLA. ESPAÑOLETE
PENDEJO.
arizona80 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Mexico
Y solo demuestras mas ignorancia, estupido
frankista de mierda, llamandonos indios. Indios en
realidad son los que viven en la india, tu gente
hizo el error de confundir el continente de america
con la india y no les llamo idiotas por esos,
respeto a los españoles pero a la gente que
estupida y pendeja como tu que le da un mal
nombre a su pais a esos si no respeto. y luego ve
como hablas ve en un diccionario no se dice
"jente" se dice gente pero que pendejo.
hingisfan (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply USA
The people of MEJICO (as we say in spain, that I’m
sure that you reject because you’re a shameful )
have elected a CONSERVATIVE president that is
committed to
denounce Castro’s regime and communism in all
latin american countries. Now that you look to see
what you say about mejico why tomorrow, perhaps
you’ll fit in by being an that speaks so horribly and
says such ignorant things.
[Note the italicized words emphasize this person’s
use of the “j” for [h] sounds, common use in Spanish
from Spain.]
metalkat77 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Mexico
To begin with, it’s MEXICO, with an X, not with a
J, second, we’re not s, s are citizens or natives of
India, and third, LONG LIVE MY CONSERVATIVE
PRESIDENT, LONG LIVE FRANCO, AND DIE
CHE GUEVARA, DIE REPUBLIC OF SPAIN.
SPANISH B******D
arizona80 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Mexico
And you only demonstrate more ignorance, stupid
sh***y frankist, calling us s. s in reality are those
who live in india, your people mad a mistake in
confusing the american continent with india and
we don’t call you idiots for that,
I respect the spaniards but stupid b*****ds like
yougive a bad name to your country and this isn’t
respect. and later watch how you speak and look
in a dictionary it doesn’t say “jente” [people] is
says gente [people] but what a b*****d.
114
tvdude70 (11 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Vivi en Cuba hasta los 19 años. Fui adoctrinado por
la revolucion desde niño. Milite en la UJC y conozco
Cuba a fondo. Creannos cuando les decimos que
Cuba es un desastre economico y moral. No pedes
hablar, pensar, expresarte, leer, opinar,
viajar...soñar. Lo se porque lo vivi en carne propia y
mis familiares y amigos en Cuba lo continuan
viviendo. No desescuchen las advertencies de los
cubanos que nos expresamos en contra de Fidel.
31094876rama (11 months ago) Show Hide 0
Reply
sabes que no te creo, si vivieras o hubieses vivido
en Cuba escribirías bien, vos sos un analfabeto,
seguro no tenés sexto grado.
tvdude70 (11 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Bueno, para ser untipo tan instruido deja mucho
que desear tu uso de los signos de puntuacion.
Yo si creci en Cuba. Emigre a los Estados Unidos
con 19 años y soy trilingue. Cuantos idiomas
hablas tu? Me da tristeza acabar con tus sueños
de ti idolo Guevara, pero ya es hora de que vayan
todos los que lo idolatran despertando de ese
letargo izquierdista uqe les han embutido.
corazondeleonricardo (10 months ago) Show
Hide 0 Reply
anda vete a dysney tomate una coca y cojete a
britney "americandream”
tvdude70 (11 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
I lived in Cuba until I was 19 years old. I was
indoctrinated by the revolution since I was a child.
Milite en la UJC y conozco Cuba a fondo. Believe us
when we tell you that Cuba is an economic and
moral disaster. You cant speak, think, express
yourself, read, have an opinion, travel…dream. I
know this because I lived there myself and my family
and friends in Cuba continue to live it. Don’t ignore
the warnings from the Cubans when we express
ourselves against Fidel.
31094876rama (11 months ago) Show Hide 0
Reply
You know I don’t believe you, if you were to have
lived in Cuba you would write well, you are
illiterate, surely you did not pass sixth grade.
[Note: the italicized words reflect the use of el
voseo, the Argentine form of Spanish.]
tvdude70 (11 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Well, for being a person so instructed/educated,
there is much to be desired in your use of
punctuation. Yes I did grow up in Cuba. I
emigrated to the United States when I was 19
years old and I’m trilingual. How many languages
do you speak? It makes me sad hearing your
dreams of your idol Guevara, but now is the time
that all who idolize him wake up from this leftist
lethargy that you have been filled with.
corazondeleonricardo (10 months ago) Show
Hide 0 Reply
go to dysney drink a coke and f*** britney
“americandream”
Thoughtful Responses
cabota (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply Venezuela
puedo aceptar que hayan exagerado en este
documental, pero definitivamente el peso de la
historia es una cosa que no se puede ocultar, por lo
tanto, la version del guevara victorioso es igual o
mas mentira que esto. guevara es un icono historico
demasiado sobrevalorado, y casi santificado de una
forma muy exagerada
rayala70 (1 year ago) Show Hide -1 Reply
Guatemala
No hay peor sordo que el que no quiere oir, ahi esta
la evidencia con testimonios de gente que fue parte
de la revolucion y que conocio de cerca al che...
selket06 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Las necesidades reales son limitadas.Las
necesidades humanas de afecto, seguridad,
protección, condiciones ambientales que permitan
vivir,de ser capaz de decidir sobre la propia vida,de
ser libre,de poder participar,no pueden ser
satisfechas por el mercado.
selket06 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
el sistema capitalista y la sostenibilidad son
directamente incompatibles,pq el sist. cap. se basa
en el crecimiento ilimitado,en el consumo creciente,
en la cultura de usar y tirar, en la creación de
necesidades artificiales y en su satisfacción a través
de los productos que la publicidad determina que
cabota (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply Venezuela
I can accept that they have exaggerated in this
documentary, but the weight of history is definitively
something that is not able to hide, ____
The verson of victorious guevara is equally or more
a lie than this. Guevara is a historical icon too much
overvalues, and almost sanctified in a
very exaggerated way.
rayala70 (1 year ago) Show Hide -1 Reply
Guatemala
There isn’t anyone more deaf than he who doesn’t
want to hear, here is evidence with witnesses from
people who were part of the revolution and closely
knew che…
selket06 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
The real necessities are limited. The human
necessities are affection, safety,
protection, environmental conditions that permit
living, of being able to decide about one’s own life,
of being free, of the power to participate, these
cannot be satisfied by the market.
selket06 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
the capitalist system and sustainability are directly
incompatible, b/c the cap. syst. is based on unlimited
growth, in consumer growth,
in a culture of use and discard, in the creation of
artificial necessities and one’s satisfaction through
the products that publicity determines
115
son adecuados para hacerlo
hellwire666 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
account closed
Esto es todo una gran mentira. el che no estaba
formado ideologicamente hasta tener veititantos
años o asi, pero lo importante es que se dio cuenta
de los problemas que habia. Cuando dicen que era
racista y faltaba el respeto a todos, es una gran
mentira: los argentinos tienen un sentido del humor
muy sarcastico e insultante. A parte, no vas a dejar
la revolucion en manos de analfabetos que despues
no podran formar un gobierno fuerte. Sediento de
sangre: para vengar a los compañeros caidos.
alguzmn (11 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
USA
Este video parece que lo elaboro algun fanatico
ultraderechista, esta lleno de errores y mentiras,
cuando supuestamente el che habla de los
fusilamientos, se nota en el video que el esta
diciendo otras cosas, y que la voz no es la de el, es
montada, asi como esta hay muchas mentiras...
FUSER77 (11 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Puerto Rico
Esto lo hicieron los gringos yanquis !! Capitalistas de
mierda!!! Q casualidad q todoslos q hablaron fueron
capitan o comandantes y mierdas asi ahh!!
tvdude70 (11 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
no, no fue hecho por fanaticos ultraderechistas
pedazo de miope. No ves que todos son testimonios
de personas que vivieron las atrocidades cometidas
por el che de primera mano? El documental esta
repleto de testigos oculares de los hechos, al
contrario de los documentales de izquierda que solo
usan las "opiniones" de llamados "analistas".
lteles (2 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply United
Kingdom
Es facil a veces criticar las cosas sin saber de lo que
se dice. Es decir, utilizais argumentos ad hominem
para descreditar el trabajo del historiador este en el
video sin poner datos para comprobar porque
estaria el equivocado. Aconsejo leer el libro de
Anderson, que es considerado una de las mejores
biografias de Guevara. Anderson dice LO MISMO
que esta en el video. Y digo aun que a Anderson le
gusta el imagen de guevara.
jdgmaster (2 days ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
dominican republic
No es relevante en el video:1ro "que no se baña" el
Che era asmático y el agua fría le haría mucho daño
y las medicinas de la época no hacían mucho contra
el asma. 2do "ropa sucia calcetines rotos" eso es
prueba de su humildad tenia tan poco y dio tanto
que eso era lo único que podía tener.
Relevante los posibles fusilamientos y matanzas,
pero igual era una guerra "Revolución" se esta
supuesto a matar. Y Estados Unidos esta matando
en Irak por petróleo y El Che por Justicia, cual es
peor?
are adequate.
hellwire666 (1 year ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
account closed
This is all a big lie. The che wasn’t ideologically
formed until he was twentysome years old or so, but
what is important is that he became aware
of the problems there were. When they say that he
was racist and lacked respect for others, it’s a lie:
Argentineans have a very sarcastic and insulting
sense of humor. Also, you’re not going to leave the
revolution in the hands of illiterates who afterwards
wouldn’t be able to form a strong government.
Thirsting for blood: to avenge his fallen comrades.
alguzmn (11 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
USA
This video appears to be elaborated by an ultrarightist fanatic, it’s filled with errors and lies,
when che is supposedly speaking about
executions, you’ll note that in the video he is
saying other things, and that the the voice isn’t his
voice, it’s dubbed, so there are many lies…
FUSER77 (11 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
Puerto Rico
This was made by the Yankee gringos! Sh***y
capitalists!!! W[hat] coincidence t[hat] all those t[hat]
spoke were captains or commanders and sh*****ds
ah!! [Note: “Fuser” was Che’s nickname as a youth.]
tvdude70 (11 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
no, it wasn’t made by ultrarightist, piece of
shortsightedness. Don’t you see that all are
testimonies of people who lived the atrocities
committed by che in the first place? This
documentary is filled with eyewitnesses of the facts,
contrary to the leftist documentaries that only use
“opinions” of the so-called “analysts”.
lteles (2 months ago) Show Hide 0 Reply United
Kingdom
It’s so easy to sometimes critique things without
knowing what you’re talking about. I mean, you use
ad hominem arguments to discredit the work of the
historian in this video without providing supporting
evidence because you would be mistaken. I
suggest you read the book by Anderson, which is
considered one of the best biographies of Guevara.
Anderson says THE SAME as this video. And I still
say that Anderson likes the image of guevara.
jdgmaster (2 days ago) Show Hide 0 Reply
dominican republic
st
It isn’t relevant in the video: 1 “that he didn’t bather”
Che was asthmatic and the cold water would have
caused him a lot of damage and the medicines of
nd
the time didn’t do much against asthma. 2 “dirty
clothes with torn socks” this is a test of his humility
he had so little and gave so much that this only thing
he could have. The possible executions and killings
are relevant, but equally so was a war of
“Revolution” which is supposed to kill. And the
United States are killing in Iraq for petroleum and
The Che for Justice, which is worse?
116
Appendix D “Personal Theology of Translation”
Reprinted with kind permission of Alexandra Robbins
April 1, 2008
They say to begin at the beginning, but as it is not a searchable point—
for I am not the Word, simply a messenger of Him…and He was there with God, being
His self-declaration of light and love when all things began—
I suppose I must start with a finite moment somewhere in the middle.
And, yet, it has been a series of moments built on many part of one gradual revelation,
still being unveiled to us as we sojourn into the heart of God.
It is this: To live is to love…
And the mysteries of life and love can be and must be known only through Love Himself,
as He has been revealed.
With a word He created us…and by His Word, we live.
Without Him, we die, for He is Life
and Love, without which we cannot exist.
This glory and hope—
Salvation from apathetic death; meaningless, ignorant and purposeless—
Has been made known to the created through words;
A sacred book of love from the Lover to the Beloved,
That they might live forever.
And so, we fill our lives with love.
That is, we work to share His Word, the revelation of love, to a dying world.
The Word was there in the beginning,
And since the Fall,
until the revelation of God’s heart is made complete…
the work of believers has, in essence, been that of translation:
a metaphysical wrestling to understand and make understood The Word of God,
the Love of the Father and salvation through Jesus Christ in the fellowship of the Holy
Spirit.
~Alexandra Robbins~
117
Bibliography
Sources for Ernesto “Che” Guevara
Primary
Guevara, Ernesto “Che”, “Cuba: ¿Caso excepcional o vanguardia en la lucha contra el
colonialismo” Verde Olivo 9 de abril de 1961 in Ernesto “Che” Guevara: Obras
Completas (Argentina: Andrómeda, 2002). Orig. pub. In Cuba? military magazine
Guevara, Ernesto “Che”, “Guerra de Guerrillas: un método” in Documentos de la
revolución cubana, ([Montevideo]: Nativa Libros, [1967]).
Guevara, Ernesto “Che”, “Notas para el estudio de la ideología de la revolución cubana”
in Ernesto “Che” Guevara: Obras Completas (Argentina: Andrómeda, 2002).
Guevara, Ernesto “Che”, “Nuestra Lucha es una lucha a muerte” 11diciembre de 1964 in
Ernesto “Che” Guevara: Obras Completas (Argentina: Andrómeda, 2002).
Guevara, Ernesto “Che”, “No hay revolución sin sacrificios” 11diciembre de 1964 in
Ernesto “Che” Guevara: Obras Completas (Argentina: Andrómeda, 2002).
Guevara, Ernesto “Che”, “Que debe ser un joven comunista” Octubre de 1962 in Ernesto
“Che” Guevara: Obras Completas (Argentina: Andrómeda, 2002).
Guevara, Che ¿Qué es un "guerrillero"? (1959)
http://www.marxists.org/espanol/guevara/59-quees.htm
Guevara, Ernesto “Che”, “Sobre la concepción del valor: Contestando algunas
afirmaciones sobre el tema” 26.01.08 Publicado en la revista Nuestra Industria
Económica, octubre de 1963.
Guevara, Ernesto “Che”, “El Socialismo y el hombre en Cuba” in Che Guevara: el
pensamiento rebelde, Ed Almeyra, Guillermo and Enzo Santarelli, (Buenos Aires:
Ediciones Continente, 2004).
Guevara, Ernesto “Che” “Una Actitud Nueva Frente al Trabajo” Agosto de 1964
in Ernesto “Che” Guevara: Obras Completas (Argentina: Andrómeda, 2002).
Secondary
Althoff, Phillip, “Review [untitled]” The Hispanic American Historical Review, 50, no. 1
(Feb., 1970): pp. 176-178.
Ammar, Alain, trans. Heber Cardoso, Che Guevara: el Rojo Cristo (México: Editorial
Diana, 2006), p 206.
118
Becker, Marc “The Motorcycle Diaries: Notes on a Latin American Journey” Hispanic
American Historical Review, 85 no. 1, (Feb2005): p123-125.
Che Guevara: restless revolutionary, videocassette, A&E Television Network (New
York: New Video Group, 1998).
Che Guevara: a guerrilla to the end, DVD (Princeton: Films for the Humanities &
Sciences, 2004).
Childress, Boyd, “Traveling with Che Guevara: The Making of a Revolutionary” Library
Journal, 129, no 14 (9/1/2004).
“Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara” in Dictionary of 20th Century Culture, ed Peter Standish
(Detroit: Hispanic Culture of S America, Gale Research In., 1995).
Fontova, Humberto, Exposing the real Che Guevara: and the useful idiots who idolize
him (New York : Sentinel, 2007).
Gerassi, John, Venceremos! The Speeches and Writings of Ernesto Che Guevara (New
York: The Macmillan Company, 1968.
Gillick, Steven S., “Guevara, Ernesto “Che” in Encyclopedia of Latin American history
and Culture, vol 3 ed Barbara A. Tenenbaum (Charles Scribner’s Sons: New
York, 1996), p 145-6.
Hernandez, Rafael and Juan Marinello, “Review [untitled]” The Journal of American
History 86, No. 1 (Jun., 1999), pp. 317-319.
Kantor, Elizabeth. “Exposing the Real Che Guevara—and the Useful Idiots Who Idolize
Him” Human Events, 63 no.18 (5/21/2007): p11-11.
Lowy, Michael, The Marxism of Che Guevara: Philosophy, economics, and
revolutionary warfare, trans. Brian Pearce (New York: Monthly Review Press,
1973).
Marx, Karl and Frederick Engels, The Communist Manifesto, ed John E. Toews (Boston:
Bedford/St. Martin’s, 1999).
Neill Macaulay, “Review [untitled]” The Hispanic American Historical Review 49, no. 4
(Nov., 1969), pp. 786-788.
Motorcycle Diaries, DVD, directed by Walter Salles, (Universal City, CA: Universal
Studios, 2005).
Ros, Enrique Ernesto Che Guevara : mito y realidad (Miami, Fla. : Ediciones Universal,
2002). 430 p.
119
Scauzillo, Roberto J., “Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara: A research Bibliography” Latin American
Research Review, 5 no. 2 (Summer, 1970): pp. 53-82
The True Story of Che Guevara: the Life and Death of the 20th Century’s Most Iconic
Rebel, The History Channel, DVD, A&E Home Video (New York: Distributed by
New Video, 2007).
Sources for Gustavo Gutiérrez
Primary
Gutiérrez, Gustavo, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics and Salvation, trans.
Sister Caridad Inda (London: SCM Press, 1988).
Gutiérrez, Gustavo, Teología de la liberación : perspectivas (Lima, Perú : CEP, 1988).
Gutiérrez, Gustavo, Textos Esenciales : Acordarse de los Pobres (Lima : Fondo Editorial
del Congreso del Perú, 2004).
Secondary
Boff, Leonardo and Clodovis, Introducing Liberation Theology, (Orbis Books,
Maryknoll, NY: 2006).
Brown, Robert McAffee Gustavo Gutiérrez (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1980).
Brown, Robert McAffee Theology in a New Key: Responding to Liberation Themes
(Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1978).
“Dependency Theory” in Encyclopedia of Latin American history and Culture, vol 2ed
Barbara A. Tenenbaum (Charles Scribner’s Sons: New York, 1996), p 366-7.
Gill, Anthony, “The Study of Liberation Theology: What Next?” Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion 41, no. 1 (Mar2002): 87-89.
“Gutiérrez, Gustavo.” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2007. Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
29 Nov. 2007 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9433083>.
Hartnett, Daniel, “Remembering the Poor,” America 188, no 3 (2/3/2003).
http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=2755
Klaiber, Jeffrey, “Catholic Church” in of Encyclopedia of Latin American history and
Culture, vol 2 ed Barbara A. Tenenbaum (Charles Scribner’s Sons: New York,
1996), p 35-37.
120
Niehaus, Thomas, “Liberation Theology” in Encyclopedia of Latin American history and
Culture, vol 3 ed Barbara A. Tenenbaum (Charles Scribner’s Sons: New York,
1996), p 415-7.
O’Meagher, Matthew J., “Gutiérrez, Gustavo” in of Encyclopedia of Latin American
history and Culture, vol 3 ed Barbara A. Tenenbaum (Charles Scribner’s Sons:
New York, 1996), p 152.
Siker, Jeffrey S, Scripture and Ethics : twentieth-century portraits, (New York : Oxford
University Press, 1997).
Smith, Christian, “Las Casas as Theological Counteroffensive: An Interpretation of
Gustavo Gutiérrez’s Las Casas: In Search of the Poor of Jesus Christ,” Journal for
the Scientific Study of Religion 41, no.1 (Mar2002).
Smith, Michael L., “Liberation Theology Should Frighten,” Newsweek International,
56 (December 10, 1984). http://www.gci275.com/news/nwswk01.shtml
Tamez, Elsa “Liberation Theology” in of, Encyclopedia of Religion 2nd Ed, vol 8 ed
Lindsay Jones (Thomson Gale, Detroit: 2005), p5438-5442.
“Vatican Council, Second." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2007. Encyclopædia Britannica
Online. 19 Oct. 2007 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9074901>.“
Sources for Broader Historical background
Primary
Burgos, Elizabeth, me llamo Rigoberta Menchú y así me nació la conciencia 15th ed.
(Mexico D.F.: Siglo Veintiuno Editores, 1998). First edition 1985
Robbins, Alexandra, “Personal Theology of Translation”, unpublished manuscript, 2008.
Secondary
Chang-Rodríguez, Eugenio, Latinoamérica: Su civilización y su cultura (New York:
Harper Publishers, Inc, 1991).
Child, Jack, Introduction to Spanish Translation (New York: University Press of
America, Inc., 1992).
Conflict of the Gods, program II of The Buried Mirror, videocassette, directed by
Christopher Railing, Sogetel (USA: Public Media Film, 1991).
Copeland, John G., Ralph Kite and Lynn A. Sandstedt, Civilización y Cultura:
Intermediate Spanish 7th ed. (Orlando, FL: Harcourt College Publishers, 2001).
121
Kattán-Ibarra, Juan, Perspectivas Culturales de Hispanoamérica (Lincolnwood, IL:
National Textbook Company, 1997).
Méndez-Faith, Teresa, Panoramas literarios América Hispana (Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Company, 1998).
Neruda, Pablo, “La United Fruit Co.” in Pasajes: Literatura 5th Ed, ed by Mary Lee Bretz
et al. (New York: McGraw-Hill Companies Inc., 2002).