Well, that's reassuring in the light of the breakdown of public discourse.

Leftist columnist opines that a murderer is "admirable" when he is a leftist murdering for a leftist cause.

Darragh McManus in Ireland's Independent in a column on the "iconic" Che Guevara opines:

Yes, Che was ruthless and fanatical and sometimes murderous. But was he a murderer? No, not in the sense of a serial killer or gangland assassin. He was one of those rare people who are prepared to push past ethical constraints, even their own conscience, and bring about a greater good by doing terrible things.

Whether morally justifiable or not, there is something admirable in that -- pure principle in a world of shabby compromise. Maybe this is why Che remains such an icon, both in image and idea.

McManus previously noted this:

He disagreed with most of the tenets of democracy: properly free elections, due process, private property ownership. He was damned for ordering the execution of hundreds of Batista supporters, although many, it was alleged, were guilty of war crimes.

Che declared, chillingly: "To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary. These procedures are an archaic bourgeois detail... A revolutionary must become a cold killing machine motivated by pure hate."

In two years, between 1957 and 1959, Che was responsible for the murder of at least 180 individuals - which certainly qualifies under the rubric of "mass murder" or "serial killer."

This site seems to indicate that there is some kind of popular discontent against the memory of Che.