I really can't stand Glenn Beck, but I liked this observation:

"Honestly, though, I'm afraid I'd be sued. The communist revolutionary who dedicated his life to fight capitalism has now become nothing more than a piece of merchandise. Lesson learned: In the end, capitalism always wins."

Full article here:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/17/beck.c ... index.html

oh, the irony. thanks for the excellent read Rog.

I've got a hardcore Socialist buddy with a great sense of humor and I always toyed around with the idea of getting him a Che wallet for his birthday. But in the end that little bit of money will just encourage them to produce more, so it's really not worth it for 2 minutes of irony.

My wifes step-dad wears a Che shirt that says "Viva La Merchandising!" with a money sign on his lil hat.

Did it came with a Coors sixpack ?

No? Should it have? (i also don't believe he drinks coors)

...just like the circle-A!

Beck is right to remind people that the ubiquitous high-contrast image based on a famous poster based on a famous photograph represents the murderous side of Che as much as anything else. However despite appropriate judgments about his bloodiness, typical of every Communist revolution, a truly honest account of the man takes into account the whole life. Beck refers dismissively to Hollywood movies that glorify Che. "The Motorcycle Diaries" (not a Hollywood movie) focuses on the awakening in the pre-revolutionary Guevara that led to the revolutionary. It's all the more poignant for sticking to that (pre)story and leaving it up to the audience, who know the rest, to think about the contrast between that young riches-to-rags idealist and the later flaws. Most people haven't seen Soderbergh's "Che" yet.

Both the communist-yet-capitalist-icon irony and the hero-but-monster irony are there, but don't most heroic icons unrealistically omit the human "dark side" of their lives, in consensual memory? In a post cold war world, isn't it possible that a lot of the hipsters wearing the icon casually actually do get the irony, that being specifically why they don't feel a moral conflict, wearing it? It's been a long time since it was supposed to be ironically hip to wear a Warhol Chairman Mao t-shirt. Wearing one never necessarily meant "All Power to the People's Party!" by any means. Beck is no doubt right to an extent, but maybe not as much as he seems to assume. Maybe I should have just credited him for addressing the moral irony and stopped thinking right there, but I kinda got the feeling that the article was a build-up to the "capitalism always wins" declaration of victory at the expense of bigger pictures.

A a final point of irony, Alberto Korda, the photographer who took the image, has never made any money from its use by others, so I doubt if anyone would be sued for their own commercial iteration, given precedent.


Jim Fitzpatrick's 1967 poster based on Korda's photograph.


Gerard Malanga's forgery of an Andy Warhol print of Fitzpatrick's poster of Korda's photograph.

Sadly, it's almost inevitable that this happens. Look at how much money people have made off a "mao" bust or Stalin etc...it's pathetic.

I read Mao: the Unknown story last year and it was horrific. Why anyone would want to profit off that guy baffles the mind.

But the reality is is that all of these "evil" people or "good" people end up being merchandise somehow. I've seen ben franklin, van gogh and several other toys. It's just a matter of time till we get a bin laden action figure with 6 points of articulation.

I do believe Che is wearing a

Just kidding... The combination could work, but it has to be Coors Light.

Ya hear that, Kozik?

Lamour that was hilarious, but at least Che had the good sense to wear Michael Jackson's glorified Members Only jacket, instead of his burqa.

Glenn Beck may have a point, but all he's doing is building his propaganda machine.

That's what the media is for, liberal or conservative. Building hype for their respective machines. I wish they were real machines and would fight in an arena and than kill each other.

Whoohoo, Glenn Beck has something to say and we're all dignifying it by applauding or decrying it. It's easy to have an opinion and shout it from the rooftops when you're nothing but a mouthpiece for the right (or the left).

People I FART A LOT about the service records and flip-flopping of the politicians but when it comes to these do-nothing talking heads like Beck, Coulter, Franken (yeah, Al Franken), we don't care. We just open our ears and let this hateful bullshit in.

Beck points out his own argument's flaw talking about Cameron Diaz in Peru. Symbols can mean different things in different countries. One man's oppressor is another man's liberator and like both Castro and Bush have said... history will absolve them. Inevitably, people co-opt other people's symbols often times regardless of their meaning. Does the kid in Menemonee Falls, Wi know or care who Che is or why he's on his shirt? Probably not, and it doesn't really matter. Did Rachel Ray really support terrorists by wearing a keffiyeh or was it just fashion? The right wing thinks it's a huge fucking victory that they're showing up the Left by pointing and ridiculing all these kids with a worthless t-shirt who probably identify with whatever side of the political fence that will help them get laid or be popular in school.

Talking about this crap, doesn't make my life, or your life, or anyone's life better other than the mental midget saying it. You get enough hits on your blog and you're the pundit that whatever talking-head tv show books that week.

Screw them all, and screw me for validating them by posting this.

I am just thankful that as America turns itself into a 3rd World nation, we have people like Glenn Beck to focus on the crucial issue of what the kids are buying at Hot Topic. At last, this is out in the open.