I was watching a show on Fidel Castro last night on the TV and how different people involved with him either love him or hate him. Just wondered who and what was the real Castro? A pathbreaking revolutionary? A stubborn idealist? A bloodsucking dictator?
Went back to my books about Castro and Guevara. They both led one of the biggest revolutions in the modern history. Then when they reached a stage where they could meet their goals, Guevara moved on to fuel other revolutions and tragically died in Bolivia later while Castro went on to rule Cuba for decades. Who was right and who was wrong in them? Had Castro too left the task of rebuilding Cuba to others, he might have been as big a hero like Guevara but then won't that be 'turning ones back'? Would they have then blamed him for not completing his work? Is he being hated by many just because he chose to stay on run his country his way in process making him a dictator. Similarily, was it not requried of Guevara to join in the contruction process too after the revolution because revolutions are not only about a regime change, they are about a change in sociol, political, economic thinking.
All said and done, one just can't wash away the impact these two have had on generations after them. The more I read about Guevara, the more I wish I was born in that era and in that place where he fired people's imaginations with his idealism.
Chidambaram, budget and unjustifiable numbers
11 years ago
No comments:
Post a Comment