The Paradox of Integrity

I never learned about Ernesto "Che" Guevara in school. Not even in college. People wear t-shirts with this universally recognized picture on it, but I had no idea what his image symbolized. The name was familiar to me, but I had no idea why.

Then the Motorcycle Diaries came out. It is the story of Ernesto's journey through South America on a motorcycle with his best friend. He chronicled the kind people he met along the way and the oppressive poverty that shackled so many in the countryside. Being from a well-educated family and in the midst of medical school, Ernesto encountered images that were hidden from him in high society of Buenos Aires, Argentina. It shocked him and it changed him forever.

The movie was moving and inspiring. I could totally relate. In South America, particularly Peru, I saw the poverty about which Ernesto complained. Old Cairo, right in the center of Egypt's capital, has a huge cemetery in which people live. A visit to an orphanage in northern Thailand was enough to make me want to adopt children. Cambodia is populated by survivors of horrific atrocities and you cannot visit without seeing the amputee survivors of landmines in the killing fields (Angelina Jolie's humanitarian work was sparked by her trip to Cambodia). You cannot see such things without feeling an overwhelming sense of helplessness and frustration that humanity allows such conditions to exist.

So what to do about it?

Ernesto took a second trip and ultimately landed in Mexico, where he met Cuban revolutionaries who were planning a revolt against Fulgencio Batista, the country's corrupt dictator. Joining forces with the Cubans, Ernesto became politically energized. Books on political philosophy were important tools in shaping the man who would become known as "Che", with Karl Marx and Mao XeDung the favored authors.

Led by a young lawyer Fidel Castro, Castro's brother and Che, the insurgency against Batista gained momentum in the countryside and, after brutal struggles, prevailed in the cities. By the time of victory, Che was an avowed Communist and had grand plans to remake Cuba into a Communist state modeled after China. The victorious revolutionaries murdered Batista's supporters, demanded business owners work for the state and stole private property to be used for the "public good." The man who was inspired to action by the injustices he saw, became a tyrant who inflicted great injustices on Cuba.

How did a man who had great empathy for the suffering he witnessed on his first trip through South America lose that empathy upon arrival in Cuba and callously inflict suffering in the name of the greater good? How did he become the tyrant he had once vowed to fight?

Che was consumed by what I would call the paradox of integrity.

Integrity means the "steadfast adherence to a strict moral or ethical code." In other words, it means that you accept one moral code as the correct code and you unwaiveringly cling to that code. Integrity is a good thing in the life of an individual. Principles, morals, values or whatever you like to call them help you cope with life's challenges and act as a guide through the many mazes we must navigate in this complex world.

At a certain point, however, integrity can become the most destructive part of the individual. Those who are absolutely, steadfastly convinced of the correctness of their code often violate their codes in the cause of preserving it. That is the story of history. That is the story of our current political landscape. Che believed he was helping humanity by liberating Cuba, and became a tyrant in doing so. Bush claims that the U.S. is at war to bring democracy to Iraq, but condones torture and denial of due process as tools to that end. Is it the necessary end that once you believe something so deeply, you must impose it on everyone else?

If a group of people voluntarily agrees to live on a commune and share everything equally, why would a supporter of capitalism and democracy have any objection? A religious person who shares her views is not problematic until she insists that everyone else follow along.

The Republicans have been my target for scorn lately, but admittedly I share many of their values. Democrats too. Libertarians too. Christians too. Muslims too. Buddhists too. Che Guevara too. There are lots of people out there who have profound wisdom, but is any one group the monopolist of the Right answer? I rip at the Republicans because they aren't practicing what they preach, i.e. because they are not perfect. So then, who is perfect? Democrats aren't. Libertarians aren't. Christians aren't. Muslims aren't. Buddhists aren't. Che Guevara wasn't.

I have been a participant in and spectator of several intellectual discussions in the blogosphere recently, everyone earnestly trying to define the Right answer. But is there one Right answer? Perhaps it is the existence of so many competing philosophies that keeps us from self-destructing. There is the extreme fringe on the right and left, but most people fall in the middle. It is the extremes that scare the population away from the edges. Some are Republicans because they don't want communism in America, and others are Democrats because people like Bush and Robertson want to make America a theocracy.

The more I read and the more I observe, I conclude that this philosophical tug-of-war is exactly what makes society healthy. It is balance, the Ying and Yang, about which Buddhism speaks. It is the challenge between God and Satan that makes the Bible so powerful (story of Job). One need only look to places and times where the people were convinced they had the Right answer -- violence, bloodshed and misery -- to see how disastrous it is when we lose balance. Because once you think you are Right, the ends justify the means and humanity, morality and law is thrown out the window. I hope we never find the Right answer. A see-saw is no fun when there is weight on only one side.

Whether you love or hate Che, he is a potent symbol, not of Communism, but of the best and worst we are all capable of being in our quest for perfection.


* For more about Che Guevara, you should read "Che" by Jon Anderson.