December 17th, 2009
New boogeyman is mostly well, though there's a problem with 64-bit support that might make me return my motherboard and get a new one in its stead. Other than that, it's just constant work.
This has regrettably put off a number of things, including my further vacation retellings.
That said, this compelled me to post: I decided to look up some of the many reasons why Che Guevara is a jerk to articulate to people why it bothers me when I am compared to him when I wear a beret. Unfortunately, I found this article and it bugged the hell out of me.
It's not just the author's asides which attempt to debase liberals. Pretty much all through the article, her arguments are specious, fallacious, and poorly formed.
Here’s a list of just a few of the humanitarian acts performed or sanctioned by the Left’s favorite pinup:
* Killed dogs for sport as a child – a common trait in psychopaths
The first point makes the fallacious implicit point that Che Guevara was a psychopath.
* Imprisoned, forced into hard labor and tortured countless Cubans he considered enemies – including artists, dissidents, homosexuals and those in the wrong place at the wrong time
The second one assumes that being an artist, dissident, homosexual, or "being in the wrong place at the wrong time" means that you are not in violation of laws. Seriously, criminals in jail were by definition in the wrong place at the wrong time (or, more accurately, either the right place at the wrong time or the wrong place at the right time). I suspect that prison populations also have demographics in the "artist", "dissident", and "homosexual" sectors.
If you want to convince me that he punished the wrong people, give me details! Don't tell me what the people were that he punished -- that doesn't tell me why they were the wrong people!
* Ordered and/or presided over the summary executions of scores of suspected enemies, including pregnant women
The third one claims that pregnant women can never be enemies. Call me heartless, but I never understood why pregnancy was supposed to demand leniency. I suppose the theory goes that one is murdering someone who hasn't done anything wrong in the act, but really, the world's overpopulated anyway.
* Brutally murdered a teenage boy whose only crime was trying to prevent Che’s henchmen from killing his father
The fourth one over looks that in the course of protecting one's father, one might make themselves a valid target. For example, if I pointed a machine gun at you while you were pointing a gun at my unarmed father. At that point, I've earned just about any response I get.
Logic, people! It's what separates us from the chimpanzees!