tribute paid to Che Guevara by Stan Newens, a member of parliament for Epping, at a meeting in London October 24 sponsored by the New Left Review, the Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation and the Movement for Colonial Freedom.
{The memorial meeting was chaired by Pat Jordan and the other speakers were Robin Blackburn of New Left Review and Ken Coates of the Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation.
(Santiago Diaz, a representative of the Cuban embassy was on the platform put did not speak. When he was introduced, the audience of almost 600 people, many from the colonial world, gave him an ovation that lasted ten minutes. ]
* * *
One hundred and twenty years ago Karl Marx and Frederick Engels declared in the Communist Manifesto:
"A spectre is haunting Europe -—~ the spectre of Communisn."
Today that same spectre -- the spectre of social revolution -- may not haunt Europe but it haunts the world. Above all it haunts the underdeveloped areas of the world in Southeast Asia and Latin America.
Everywhere in these poverty~ stricken lands -- from the paddy fields of Vietnam to the Andean mountains, there is a spirit of unrest, of protest, of rebellion abroad.
That spirit openly challenges the age-old acceptance of misery, starvation,
suffering and death which have always
been the lot of the majority of the popu~
lation of Latin America and India. And
Che Guevara, whose death we meet here
this evening to commemorate, was the in-
carnation of that spirit -- that spirit
of revolt.
As British socialists, as oppo-
nents of colonialism, as international
socialists, who are implacably opposed to
the poverty and suffering of the world's
peoples, it is therefore fitting that we
should meet this evening to commemorate a
man whose whole life was dedicated to the
same struggle which we have pledged our-
selves to wage.
Latin America, where he spent his
life, is a vast continent. It is a huge
expanse of land with enormous variations
of climate and geography. Throughout,
however, it is characterised by the prev-
alence of poverty.
The majority of the people are, of
course, peasants -- sharecroppers, semi-
serfs and rural labourers -- but desper-
ately poor. Those who work in the towns
are familiar with a situation not much
better: appalling housing, vile condi-
tions of work and social degradation.
And the contrast with the wealthy
minority is enormous.
I remember seeing a TV programme
several years ago in which the well-known
TV journalist Alan Whicker was reporting
on a tour of South America.
The viewers were first of all
shown the beautiful buildings and squares
of the city of Lima in Peru. Elegantly
dressed young women and smart young men
strolled casually by.
And then the scene shifted to the railway station and the camera focused on a shabbily clad peasant woman with a broad-brimmed hat and a large bundle on her back, alighting from the train.
Alan Whicker explained that she was merely one of many who were continually arriving from the countryside in search of something better.
The scene then changed once more to the city refuse dump. "This is where many of the new arrivals finish up," Alan Whicker commented as viewers saw human beings amidst the refuse. Just then a city refuse van drove into view and tipped its load. A crowd of half naked children and adults rushed to rummage in the garbage in search of something of value for use.
"Incredible as it is," said Alan Whicker, "people actually live here. And what is more they even survive."
I may not have remembered every word correctly but the gist of the programme is accurate. It illustrated in a graphic way the depths of degradation to which our fellow human beings are subjected in Latin America and it demonstrated the enormous gulf between rich and poor.
In Latin America, the problem is accentuated by the population explosion. Here the birth rate is the highest in the world and every year there are many new mouths to provide for.
This area of the world might well be regarded as the traditional home of the military dictatorship and the military coup d'état. However, whatever the coup, the same minority of the landowning and commercial classes has normally retained its privileges.
Outside of a very small part of the area, western democracy, as we know it, is quite unknown. There is in fact no democratic tradition.
And therefore, as in Tsarist Russia before 1917, as in imperial China, as in pre-1789 France and even in seventeenth-century Britain, seriously to enmbrace the cause of social change is to embrace the revolutionary method. Change by peaceful, democratic processes is normally impossible.
Furthermore, those who would achieve social revolution in Latin America face an additional obstacle, the like of which no past generation of revolutionaries ever faced -- at least, not to the same degree. They face the might of American reactionary involvement.
Those who believe in the democratic method would do well to study the case of Guyana or British Guiana, as it was formerly known. There -- when it appeared likely that the left-wing party of Cheddi Jagan would consolidate itself in power -through the CIA involvement, the longest general strike in history was financed to help install in power a government more to the liking of the United States administration.
Not that one needs to go to Latin America to learn about the totally undenocratic methods of the CIA. The restoration of the Shah of Persia and some of the past events in Vietnam itself are equally striking examples and there are many others.
The American administration is in fact the defender of the status quo. Colonialism as such may virtually have ended but it has been succeeded by a new phase of the same system which may well be described as neocolonialisn.
The colonial powers may be prepared to withdraw troops where a pro-Western or subservient national government can be installed. But the powers are prepared to use force to prevent a more independent government from achieving power.
This is of course the basis of the story of Vietnam. As a member of the British Labour movement and a member of the Parliamentary Labour party I should like to say how strongly I deplore the support given to the present U.S. administration and its policy in Vietnam and elsewhere by our Labour government.
The British government should recognise that the world struggle today is basically between the haves and the havenots. It should support the latter and not gang up with the reactionary United States administration against the social revolution which is sweeping the undeveloped areas of the world.
We must, however, recognise that at the present time the revolutionaries of Latin America have to contend not only with their own reactionaries but with America as well.
The Cuban Revolution was a great triumph in the struggle and stands out like a beacon to inspire all those who seek to end oppression and exploitation in their homelands.
What manner of a man are we talking of tonight who, after going through that experience and achieving high honour and office in one land, was prepared to go off to carry on his work elsewhere, far away -- eventually to die isolated and cut off from his friends!
This is not the occasion for me to pronounce on the correctness of Che Guevara's tactics. It is not for me to consider the validity of the policy of creating a foco -- an insurrectionary centre. I am not prepared to argue this evening whether the main battle is in the countryside or among the urban proletariat.
Here in this hall, there are many of us who would have differences on tac-— tics. I never met Che Guevara and it is very likely that I shculd have disagreed with some of his views.
This is, however, of no importance to our present purpose. Che Guevara fought a heroic and valiant struggle and in essence all of us in this room this evening are on the same side as he was.
Che Guevara may now have gone and we mourn his departure. But let us remember that there have been many other false starts -~ in Argentina, in Paraguay, in Santo Domingo, in Ecuador, in Venezuela and Peru. Many others have been vanquished; many others killed and eliminated from the scene.
But of this we can be sure: others will arise. The revolutionary spirit will be kindled anew and will become incarnate in the actions of others still to come. To them, the example of the heroism and self-sacrifice of Che Guevara will be an inspiration and a guiding force.
For the people of Latin America, of Southeast Asia and, in due course, of Africa, will rise up. Whatever faults there are in mankind, the refusal to accept permanent poverty and degradation can never be finally extinguished.
As the chairman of the Movement for Colonial Freedom, with its long record of struggle against colonialism un-~ der the chairmanship of Fenner Brockway, whom I have had the honour to succeed, I am therefore proud to pay this tribute to Che Guevara here in London this evening.
In reflecting on the setback which this death represents in the struggle for human progress, we must ever be mindful of the fact that history does not advance up a steady incline but goes forward in a series of waves. It is our task to ensure that the crest of each successive wave will be higher than the one before.
Therefore as socialists in Britain, as international socialists, we must seek to ensure that the British Labour movement will play its full part on the side of the major part of the world population to whom Che Guevara devoted his life.
We must not be turned aside from the objectives which we have before us whatever the setbacks -- the objectives of socialism, peace and international human brotherhood.
LONDON