« Compare And Contrast | Main | The American People Don't Want Obama's Grand Transformation »

I Won't Be Buying Anything from J. Crew This Christmas

Today we learn from Dana Loesch that J. Crew, the clothing source for people who normally want to look fashionably smart, is selling a replica Che Guevara jacket manufactured by Belstaff. The folks at both companies think Fidel Castro's assassin is such a big sales feature that they put his name front and center:

jcrewchejacket

Take a look at the copy that describes the product:

The epitome of rugged, authentic cool. Founded in 1924 Staffordshire, England, Belstaff's exceptionally designed, hard-working and waterproof outerwear is as famous amongst serious motorcyclists as it is with fashion aficionados. Their durable classics include this heavyweight waxed-cotton jacket, a perfect replica of the one so famously worn by Ernesto Che Guevara on his legendary motorcycle journey across Latin America in the 1950s.

So, J. Crew thinks a murderous thug is the "epitome of rugged, authentic cool"? That J. Crew and Belstaff are hawking what can only be described murder-chic without any fear of a backlash tells us these companies are callous, ignorant, or both. That the product has sold out tells us how ignorant these companies' customers are.

Dana snarks "Do you think they sell a Replica Hitler's Mustache® to accessorize and complete the look?"

Yes, that would certainly complete the murder-chic look. Unfortunately, though, unlike Hitler whose actions have been well documented and taught to school children, Guevara and his crimes against humanity have gone under the radar, allowing his supporters to redefine him as a revolutionary and counter-culture hero of the poor. For example in 1999, Time Magazine included Che Guevara in its list of "Heroes and Icons":

By the time Ernesto Guevara, known to us as Che, was murdered in the jungles of Bolivia in October 1967, he was already a legend to my generation, not only in Latin America but also around the world.

Like so many epics, the story of the obscure Argentine doctor who abandoned his profession and his native land to pursue the emancipation of the poor of the earth began with a voyage. In 1956, along with Fidel Castro and a handful of others, he had crossed the Caribbean in the rickety yacht Granma on the mad mission of invading Cuba and overthrowing the dictator Fulgencio Batista. Landing in a hostile swamp, losing most of their contingent, the survivors fought their way to the Sierra Maestra. A bit over two years later, after a guerrilla campaign in which Guevara displayed such outrageous bravery and skill that he was named comandante, the insurgents entered Havana and launched what was to become the first and only victorious socialist revolution in the Americas. The images were thereafter invariably gigantic. Che the titan standing up to the Yanquis, the world's dominant power. Che the moral guru proclaiming that a New Man, no ego and all ferocious love for the other, had to be forcibly created out of the ruins of the old one. Che the romantic mysteriously leaving the revolution to continue, sick though he might be with asthma, the struggle against oppression and tyranny.

His execution in Vallegrande at the age of 39 only enhanced Guevara's mythical stature. That Christ-like figure laid out on a bed of death with his uncanny eyes almost about to open; those fearless last words ("Shoot, coward, you're only going to kill a man") that somebody invented or reported; the anonymous burial and the hacked-off hands, as if his killers feared him more after he was dead than when he had been alive: all of it is scalded into the mind and memory of those defiant times. He would resurrect, young people shouted in the late '60s; I can remember fervently proclaiming it in the streets of Santiago, Chile, while similar vows exploded across Latin America. !No lo vamos a olvidar! We won't let him be forgotten.

Che Guevara's crimes are just about as evil and horrendous as Hitler's. Nonetheless, he is celebrated and held up as a hero. Now his sycophants can wear a replica jacket and look murder-chic.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/37029.

Comments (23)

Should be a big seller with... (Below threshold)
Marc:

Should be a big seller with certain members of the obama admin.

What?! You would have done ... (Below threshold)
John:

What?! You would have done business with J. Crew, but now you won't because of the merchandise executive's politics and opinions?!

That a private business executive can be forced out of a private business transaction because of their politics and opinions is about as Un-American as anything I have ever seen.

(Bonus points if you can figure out who said that.)

I'm waiting for the Himmler... (Below threshold)

I'm waiting for the Himmler sweater-vest!

History has apparently mis-labeled Mao, Che, Stalin, et al, as mass-murderers. tsk tsk...they were just mis-understood enviromentalists, working to have FEWER people and thus conserving resources!

Hey...Hitler must have been an enviromentalists too (psst...he was!)

John: "What?! You would ... (Below threshold)

John: "What?! You would have done business with J. Crew, but now you won't because of the merchandise executive's politics and opinions?!"

WINNER!

It's OUR money! Get it? We get to decide whether to spend OUR money with them!

They can stay in business until the year 3999 for all we care...but WE are (still) free to spend OUR money how WE please!

John...you DO get it, don't you??

The people who'd buy a Che!... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

The people who'd buy a Che! jacket are the same one's who don't recall 'the killing fields' of Cambodia. Just ask Jane Fonda.

No loss. I wasn't in their... (Below threshold)
jim m:

No loss. I wasn't in their market segment anyway. I'm in the 'people with taste in clothes' segment.

And Dave Checkett doesn't g... (Below threshold)
John:

And Dave Checkett doesn't get to decide how and with whom he spends his own money? He is not free to spend HIS money how HE pleases?

And if Kim organized a boycott of J. Crew until they decided to quell the controversy by dropping that jacket, that wouldn't be private citizens being forced out of a private business transaction because of their politics and opinions?

Private citizens and private businesses can engage in whatever legal transactions they want. And they have to deal with the consequences, be they financial or publicity. They can ignore them or decide to avoid them by canceling the business transaction. Unless you're going to blame the Rams on Obama, you look like an oaf arguing against both free expression and capitalism.

What?! You would h... (Below threshold)
What?! You would have done business with J. Crew, but now you won't because of the merchandise executive's politics and opinions?!

That a private business executive can be forced out of a private business transaction because of their politics and opinions is about as Un-American as anything I have ever seen.

John, please tell me you're kidding. Do you really not see the difference between a man being told he isn't allowed to buy something because of his political views and my choosing to not spend my money at a company because I find some of its products offensive?

At this particular point, J... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

At this particular point, John looks to be the uncomprehending oaf.

concepts of Free Speech, Fr... (Below threshold)

concepts of Free Speech, Free Will and Free Enterprise appear lost on John.

Sad.

I thought we had stumbled on a troll with some potential. Alas.

All that he needs now is a ... (Below threshold)
DocinPA:

All that he needs now is a "Don't Be A DouChe" T-shirt from BlackFive.net and he'll be all ready to go. (I wore mine to the 9/12 March on Washington. It was a hit.)

John - Perhaps I am wrong b... (Below threshold)
jim m:

John - Perhaps I am wrong but it sounds like you are saying that it is OK for J Crew to sell whatever they like and that we should shut up about it.

So organizing or disseminating information to protest J Crew's products is somehow wrong? I don't get it. Why is it OK to protest Rush and get him removed but not protest J Crew and have them change their product line?

I take it that you are in the crowd that says it was wrong to protest against the Dixie Chicks because they have freedom of speech but we don't have the reciprocal freedom to criticize them.

Do you really not see th... (Below threshold)
John:

Do you really not see the difference between a man being told he isn't allowed to buy something because of his political views

First of all, so what? Who says he must be allowed to buy what he wants to buy? Does he have a Constitutional right to buy an NFL team, or perform any other private transaction that suits his fancy? Where are you getting that from? Political views are not a protected class.

Second of all, "told" by who? Another private player in the private business transaction? Again, so what? Who are you to second-guess Checkett's business decision?

and my choosing to not spend my money at a company because I find some of its products offensive?

In other words, you're telling the seller that he isn't allowed to sell something because of his political views. So political views shouldn't prevent you from buying something, but they should prevent you from selling something. Is that your position?

Rush is free to try to buy anything else he wants. Just as J. Crew is free to sell to anyone else they want. If the Rams don't want to sell to Rush because they don't like him, and you don't want to buy from J. Crew because you don't like them, that's called "business".

John - Perhaps I am wron... (Below threshold)
John:

John - Perhaps I am wrong

Correct... you are wrong.

So organizing or disseminating information to protest J Crew's products is somehow wrong?.

Not in the slightest.

Why is it OK to protest Rush and get him removed but not protest J Crew and have them change their product line?

Both are absolutely fine. And since you're equating those two events, then you evidently agree that there's nothing wrong with protesting Rush and getting him removed, thus countering Kim's take.

I take it that you are in the crowd that says it was wrong to protest against the Dixie Chicks because they have freedom of speech but we don't have the reciprocal freedom to criticize them..

No, I'm in the crowd that rolls its eyes at people who say it's OK to protest the Dixie Chicks to negatively impact their business, it's not OK to protest Rush to negatively impact his business, it's OK to protest J. Crew to negatively impact their business...

Protesting is one thing. Ly... (Below threshold)
914:

Protesting is one thing. Lying about is another entirely.

John - I think you have mis... (Below threshold)
jim m:

John - I think you have misperceived the trend here. People generally think that it was fine to protest the Dixie Chicks and it would be fine to do so for J Crew.

Where you are wrong is that people here generally think that the Rush thing was unfair because it was centered around a number of bogus quotes that were used to gin up opinion against him. Yes he said some other things that some may find objectionable, but CNN and the Atlantic among others have already issued retractions of their stories where they cited fake quotes that were clearly libelous.

Otherwise people would agree that it is fine to protest against Rush. Just do so honestly.

Where you are wrong is t... (Below threshold)
John:

Where you are wrong is that people here generally think that the Rush thing was unfair because it was centered around a number of bogus quotes that were used to gin up opinion against him.

I can see how you'd want to move the goalposts there because the previous strategy has become such a loser, but that is not how the objections began. I quote from this post's author's first tirade, which I linked in comment #2: "That a private citizen can be forced out of a private business transaction because of his politics and opinions is about as Un-American as anything I have ever seen."

That statement is made before any mention of bogus quotes or "ginned up" opinion. It stands on its own. Clearly Ms. Priestap does not share your view that it's fine to allow politics and opinions to influence one's private business transactions.

In any case, even your moved goalposts are on flimsy ground. Rush is indisputably and unabashedly a provocateur and offender. That you can find 2 quotes falsely attributed to him does not invalidate the myriad others that were properly attributed. Even Ms. Priestap in her earlier post states "We don't know exactly what quotes [Colts' owner Jim Irsay] was referring to", but then gets instant clarity that they must have been the falsely attributed ones rather than the correctly attributed ones.

I won't bother pursuing that argument any further here, because from what I've seen it tends to trigger nonsensical spasms in the typing fingers of many other commenters, as they put critical thinking aside and start spewing unrelated pseudo-aphorisms such as "fake but accurate" (no... it's actually "mostly accurate but accurate"). Besides, there's a mantis on another thread who has argued this much more ably than I could.

I will close with one more of your comments:

"Otherwise people would agree that it is fine to protest against Rush."

And a repeat of Kim's:

"That a private citizen can be forced out of a private business transaction because of his politics and opinions is about as Un-American as anything I have ever seen."

Those statements are deliciously at odds, and you won't even see it.

Goodnight.

They can't sell me anything... (Below threshold)
poptoy:

They can't sell me anything either. Che' what a BUM.

"" The people who'd buy a C... (Below threshold)

"" The people who'd buy a Che! jacket are the same one's who don't recall 'the killing fields' of Cambodia. Just ask Jane Fonda. ""

Those same people, including Jane Fonda, are also directly responsible for the several millions of South East Asians, including Cambodians, who were slaughtered or who perished at sea as the direct consequence of the projection on to and by their "Democratic" potty allies of the American Left's collective psychopathological cowardice.

Personally, I have never bo... (Below threshold)
epador:

Personally, I have never bought anything from J Crew, and I think rather than boycotting them we should be happy we'll have an easy way to identify the REAL core commies on sight. It will make things easier when the mop brigades have to do their work.

(MY EMAIL EXCHANGE... (Below threshold)
Dave G.:

(MY EMAIL EXCHANGE WITH J CREW)


Dear David -

Thanks for your email-this jacket was named by the manufacturer,
Belstaff, however we have changed the name.

Best,
Brittany


Original Message Follows:
------------------------
You fashion your clothing after a mass murderer and expect your
customers to be okay with it?

My family and I are done with your store forever.

David Gallagher
Jersey City, NJ

A terrible waste of good ma... (Below threshold)
Flu-Bird:

A terrible waste of good material gloriying a mass murderer BURN BEFORE WEARING

Che WAS responsible for an ... (Below threshold)
Tom:

Che WAS responsible for an extremely large amount of deaths, but let's not forget the things he is remembered fondly for: his motorcycle journey. If you don't know anything about those events, you clearly know nothing about the man. He treated many people for their various illnesses, most famously, the lepers. He stayed in their hospital and treated them as equals, unlike what the doctors did (this is just one thing). I haven't studied him in a little while, but that is the one thing I remember most. Go rent the movie The Motorcycle Diaries, which tells about all the things he wrote in his book by the same name.

Also, why do all the comments on this post sound like they come from a bunch of 70-year-old white Americans still living in a red scare? I believe YOU are the people who should be compared to Hitler. Although Che's achievements cannot erase or excuse his terrible crimes, you can't just ignore half of a person's personality and life when you decide what you think of a person.


Also, this is >>unrelated




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy