Shoot, Coward, you are Only Going to Kill a Man

Last words of the original Angry White Boy, Che Guevara. I’m quoting this guy because like Osama Bin Laden, Che was the “face” of a movement that was killed by opposing forces as an attempt to end that movement, or at least in the eyes of the ignorant masses (thus ending it for real if the movement is largely comprised of said ignorant masses).

Che was repping communism, his version of which has long since been corrupted by the T-shirt industry. Mr. Bin Laden was repping Jihad, which has yet to be made frivolous and anachronistic by history. In other words, communism is Myspace and Jihad is Facebook. You follow?

Also like Che, Osama was neither the creator, nor the omnipotent ruler of his respective movement. A movement is greater than the sum of its parts (the individuals that it is composed of). They were both just rich boys who used their privilege to enter a seat of power.

It’s funny. When I had already written my preliminary version of this post, I googled “Guevara Bin Laden” to see if I was beaten to the punch with this comparison. Of course I was. This article from the Miami Herald compared the graveless burial of Guevara with that of Bin Laden and spoke of the difficulty of disposing of the corpses of enemy leaders in general without spawning conspiracy theories that they actually survived.  And here’s a BBC news article that wonders if history might remember Bin Laden as Guevara was remembered by today’s suburban youth.

The mainstream news media speaks about killing Bin Laden like the war in Afghanistan is now over, Al Qaeda has been dismantled and we can now all go for ice-cream. The truth is that Bin Laden was not a master strategist. He was part of a huge network and he paid people to help him make decisions. The Jihad movement has not so much lost their greatest mind so much as just their mascot. Al Qaeda will live on… with one more martyr to avenge.

Anyway, in good foresight I’ve gone ahead and edited a photo of Bin Laden with plenty of contrast for maximum T-shirt exploitability. Get ready to see your kids wearing this image in 20 years:



Filed under Uncategorized

10 responses to “Shoot, Coward, you are Only Going to Kill a Man

  1. I would cut down on your use of bold. I would also put links at the end and have them open in a new window. Why send people away from your blog? I actually doubt if Al Qaeda will be as powerful without it’s figurehead now. I think you under estimate the power of a leader. I was amazed at the change brought about here in the UK by Margaret Thatcher and glad when she as gone. I think a lot of people were glad Hitler was out of the way too. I think it’s unwise to dance on the grave of Bin Laden though; that could spark a reaction and someone, somewhere, could come forward to replace him.

    • @Mike Oh it’s on, hater. Haterize my blog once and I’ll look the other way. Haterize my blog twice and you have opened the can of worms for good and broken the little safety seal so that you’ve got to put the thing in the fridge so it doesn’t go off.

      You said: “I actually doubt if Al Qaeda will be as powerful without it’s figurehead now.” Yes, without it is figurehead. Either you put an unnecessary apostrophe out of ignorance or that is a sentence fragment, bro.

      “I’m sure people were glad Hitler was out of the way, too.” This common logical fallacy is called ‘insinuate that the other person loves Hitler’. (I swear, this mustache I’m rocking was inspired by Charlie Chaplain!) Yes people were glad when Hitler was gone, but your analogy is a fail because Osama Bin Laden did not invent his own ideology, he was actually following the religious ideals that he had been taught his whole life. I also do not recall saying that people should not be glad he’s dead, as opposed to neutral or in mourning… I just happen to believe that the man had nothing particularly new to offer terrorism and that Al Qaeda will be fine without him. Germany would have lost the war with or without the death of Hitler, which was more of a perk than anything. Meanwhile, the US has decided that it quite likes Afghanistan and has decided to settle down for good.

      My point was that leaders come and go, but as long as there is a need for a movement, there will be one… no matter what the consequences are. Although I do not agree with the strategies or the goals of Al Qaeda, I do know that without some method of resistance towards the robbery and bullying perpetrated by the western world, the Middle East would cease to be the only non-white area of the planet that that doesn’t belong to the “Third World Majority”.

      BTW Maynard: Your blog is lame and you love Hitler. Get off of Farmville already and actually produce something that society can use.

  2. Mariana C S Rogedo

    Very interesting article you wrote. You bring a very good point. I would even add that Obama said in his speech that God bless U.S.
    “Let us remember that we can do these things not just because of wealth or power, but because of who we are: one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. May God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.” I’m not american, and in my opinion that speech is kind of hypocrite. They do that because of wealth and power.

    • It is crazy that the American people don’t see a parallel. In their minds, the USA is bombing civilians and enforcing cultural mores because this reflects the will of the true God. Somehow, they do not see that the bombings (which I pluralized because it was more than one building bombed on 911) carried out by the other side are done both for these same religious reasons, and as a response to years of robbery and oppression.

  3. Not hating on you or the post, but I do agree that the use of bold is sometimes distracting…
    However, I do agree with your main points and I love your little t-shirt design. I also think that citing sources throughout the post is a good idea; it reflects journalistic responsiblity and that you’re checking your facts. You’re also providing your readers with further information and education. Maybe I’m just saying this because I worship at the altar of the BBC, but I don’t think so.
    I’ve said this before, but I do love your usage of sarcasm/snark and cultural references. I think the comparison is worth thinking about, though, in part because Che Guavara is often misunderstood by those suburban kids who think they’re badass wearing a t-shirt with his picture on it. How can journalists and historians try to correct these fallacies?

  4. Pingback: Social Media – powerful media! | marianajourn65

  5. Okay, outta the gate? Effin’ hilarious!!! I love it, love it, love it!!
    USA is bombing civilians and enforcing cultural mores because this reflects the will of the true God.
    To quote CSN,

    Too many people have died in the name of Christ for anyone to heed the callSo many people have died in the name of Christ I can’t believe it all!

    Your blog is lame and you love Hitler. Get off of Farmville already and actually produce something that society can use.
    Do you happen to know if this was read?

    • @Gregory I think it was read and ignored because of the interaction between the nature of curiosity and internet beef. If curiosity is stronger than the perception of effort expended to satisfy said curiosity, then said curiosity will be satisfied. As internet beef is auction-like in its “keep escalating until somebody gives up” playing rules. If I had been what Mike Maynard had considered a threat to his internet rep, he would have escalated things another step to rebut my arguments and probably build up some more nifty straw Hitlers. However, as his readership is likely to look on the likes of me with disdain, or not at all for that matter (paradigm difference=perception of “wrong” use of social media). Thus, a cold war has been avoided once again today by my lack of perceived cred… but this is cred as filtered through the worldview of Mr. Maynard so I’m not too worried.

  6. Che Guevara desktop gadget

    Think they’ll make one of Bin Laden? BTW, I wanna T-shirt!

  7. One final thought – The use of the <strong> (<b>) tag didn’t seem in error to me. It seemed as though you wanted to to declare these points, and if such was the case, this was the correct way to do so. Then again, I’m no expert, as I write a blog that is constantly being criticiszed by someone obviously my superior. 😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s