Castro has been in power for almost 50 years.

[cigsandcoffee]

I read that earlier yesterday, and just can't get it out of my head. Forty-seven years with the same leader. It would be like America still being under Truman.

I think that this is automatically a bad thing, without even getting in to his pros and cons. I'd be interested to see what the consensus is, and think the results should speak well enough without people getting in to one of those predictable pro/anti Cuba under Castro threads, where one side rails about literacy rates and benevolent Cuban doctors spanning the globe, and the other harps on the rounding up of dissidents or homosexuals. I'd say everyone knows that one by heart.

[mike_c]

1. fidel has been one of the great leaders that history will remember....

Run this poll in Cuba and see how much respect it gets.

[cigsandcoffee]

3. Still, for almost 50 years?

He's like a King.

[deaniac21]

24. Especially if it's public.

:spray:

[tuvor]

2. What do Cubans think?

Hell, I live so far away from that tiny island, I haven't got a clue, and even if I did, my opinion would probably not be much different from "What do Cubans think?"

[davidinalameda]

4. it's not really a dictatorship?

:rofl:

[cigsandcoffee]

5. Well, I tried to put something in there for everyone.

I absolutely think it's a dictatorship, but some may honestly disagree.

[davidinalameda]

23. that's sad that some may disagree

no wonder some of us are referred to as moonbats

[QuestionAll...]

6. compared to whom?

language is getting fuzzier and fuzzier. I consider bush more of a dictator than I do Castro.

[Fountain79]

8. How many dissenting articles are there about Castro...

in a Cuban newspaper? How many open dissenters are allowed to walk freely?

[Bucky]

12. Question: when did the Cuban Supreme Court last overrule a Castro law?

My guess is never.

[Judi Lynn]

18. Poor thing. Cuban laws are created by the Cuban National Assembly.

Fidel Castro does not create laws.

Don't you ever read or think?

[dipsydoodle]

20. Pollicle

Poor thing is a quaint expression which sometimes says everything.

'case you didn't know Pollicle is what T.S. Eliot's grandaughter said when she meant "poor little - dog" just as Jellicle was "dear little -cat". I tend to use the expression pollicle thing when meaning what you expressed. :)

[Zynx]

32. Do you believe the National Assembly is independent of Castro?

HA!

[readmoreoften]

7. Yeah, and why isn't he in our crosshairs anymore.

We're fighting socialists like Saddam Hussein halfway around the world, and we're worried about ol' Kim Jong, but Cuba's been living beside us all along, in relative peace, with pros and cons throughout.

[Selatius]

11. Saddam Hussein was more of a nationalist than a socialist

If you were in his way, he didn't give a damn if you were a bona fide socialist or not. You were dead to him regardless of your ideas. He merely adopted the trimmings of socialism to make himself more appealing to the people, and when he got what he wanted, he ditched the facade.

[readmoreoften]

13. Good point.

I still don't understand why the PNAC, who is so up in arms about communism and Chavez, isn't making a big deal about Castro. He's hardly even an "enemy" anymore.

[Selatius]

14. He isn't in the way of their plans.

PNAC has plans on securing the "American Empire" at least for the next century by "cleaning up" parts of the world that are vital underpinnings of the Empire. Castro is in no such part of the world, but Saddam was.

[readmoreoften]

15. Makes sense.

It just shows how they can't even stick to their own rhetoric.

[dolo amber]

33. I wish I could find it...

A cartoon on the counter of a record shop where I used to work. First frame was Kennedy at a podium, saying something about "and we WILL rid the world of the Communist threat to the south...". Next frame, Johnson, same text. Next frame, Nixon, then Ford, then Carter, then Reagan...

I'm just saying, that might have something to do with why Castro's not so high on the list anymore. After nearly 50 years it hardly seems like much of a "Communist threat", y'know? ;)

[leesa]

9. He has done good things for his country. It was a cesspool of gambling

and crime prior to the take-over. He was harsh but the constant pressure from the Cuban Americans and the US government may have forced that situation. He should really be setting up the next phase of government, whatever that will be, or the US will just roll right over Cuba and turn it into their toilet again.

[killbotfactory]

10. Castro is an odd bird

He still holds popular support in Cuba. However, power corrupts, and he has had power for a long time.

I think Cuba is better than the propaganda would infer, but not as free as an US citizen would like (except for the free healthcare and education). And maybe the US being at war with them and supporting terroist factions in Cuba for 40 years might have something to do with that.

[David__77]

16. Better than many "democratic" leaders.

"Democracy" is largely a fraud. At least there are important social rights in Cuba. It's not my ideal system, but who I am, as an American, to talk to anyone about such things?

[Vidar]

21. Well said.

[cigsandcoffee]

26. Democracy is a fraud?

Tell that to Joe Lieberman. He may be on the short end of it very soon - Catsro has no such concerns.

[Yupster]

17. Castro took power the same month

that I was born and I'm no youngster.

I don't like this president for life stuff. Regardless of the man, you need new leadership every once in a while, at least to turn over the rocks of the last guy's mistakes.

[rman]

19. "Communism is not democracy" is like saying "capitalism is not

democracy".

There are elections in Cuba, but in Cuba the position of president is not an electable position - nor does it come with any real power; it's like the position of Queen in countries like the UK and the Netherlands - these are merly figureheads.

[cigsandcoffee]

22. Castro is only a figurehead?

I was under the impression he wielded power there.

[rman]

30. He "wields power" in the National Assembly, as elected representative

of his district, together with many other elected representatives. But his being "president" entails something completely different than being president in the US does.

[RagingInMiami]

25. Castro is more than a figurehead

Much more.

[rman]

29. Perhaps, but Castro is not "president" in the same sense that Bush is

"president" (and i'm not referring to stolen elections).
Same title, different meaning.

[ButterflyBlood]

35. The "elections" in Cuba don't mean shit

One party elections where the Communist Party runs unopposed hardly means anything. There were elections in the Soviet Union too, and in Iraq under Saddam, and in China, North Korea and all sorts of other regimes.

As for him being a figurehead, perhaps theoretically, but this often isn't the case. After all, Qaddafi officially holds no position of power in Libya, but no one disputes he's the true guy running the whole show. And the Shah was theoretically a constitutional monarch too.

[cigsandcoffee]

27. I think the results of this poll are sad.

I doubt there's a single poster on this forum who would tolerate autocratic rule in America (or wherever they live) for almost 50 years. But more than half of the responders excuse that system when it isn't them living under it.

I hear talk about Bush supplanting democracy and doing away with elections so that he may be a dictator, and yet when presented with an actual real-life-in-your-face dictator, a large percentage of people are forgiving and even accepting of him. This just amazes me.

Sad stuff, IMO.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. Lee Yuan Kew was in power for 31 years. His party for 47.

Although it has the trappings of democracy, it is a de-facto one party state.

The fledgling nation had to become self-sufficient, and faced problems including mass unemployment, housing shortages and lack of land and natural resources such as petroleum. During Lee Kuan Yew's term as prime minister from 1959 to 1990, his administration immediately curbed unemployment, raised the standard of living and implemented a large-scale public housing programme. The country economic infrastructure was developed, the threat of racial tension was eliminated and an independent national defence system was created. Singapore evolved from a developing nation to first world status towards the end of the 20th century.

with a Westminster system of a unicameral parliamentary government representing different constituencies of Singapore. The bulk of the executive powers rests in the hands of the Cabinet of Singapore, which consists of ministers led by the Prime Minister of Singapore. The office of the President of Singapore was, historically, a ceremonial one as head of state, but the Constitution of Singapore was amended in 1991 to create the position of a popularly elected President and also to grant the President veto powers in a few key decisions such as the use of the national reserves and the appointment of key judiciary positions.<9> The legislative branch of government is the Parliament. Parliamentary elections in Singapore are plurality-based for group representation constituencies since the Parliamentary Elections Act was modified in 1991. <10>

Singaporean politics have been dominated by the People's Action Party (PAP) since the country's independence in 1965.<11> Foreign political analysts and several opposition parties including the Workers' Party of Singapore and the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) have argued that Singapore is a de facto one-party state. Many consider the form of government in Singapore to be closer to authoritarianism such as illiberal democracy or procedural democracy rather than true democracy. Reporters Without Borders ranked Singapore 140th out of 167 countries in its 2005 Worldwide Press Freedom Index. It has also been alleged that the PAP employs censorship, gerrymandering by the Elections Department and the filing of civil suits against the opposition for libel or slander to impede their success. Several former and present members of the opposition, including Francis Seow, J.B. Jeyaretnam and Chee Soon Juan perceive the Singaporean courts as favourable towards the government and the PAP due to a lack of separation of powers. <12> Although no PAP member has ever lost a defamation case in court, there are three cases in which opposition leader Chiam See Tong sued PAP members for defamation and successfully obtained an out-of-court settlement. <13>

Singapore has what its government considers to be a highly successful and transparent market economy. The PAP's policies contain some aspects of socialism. The Housing Development Board oversees a large-scale public housing programme and education in Singapore is a rigorous compulsory public education system, and the dominance of government-controlled companies in the local economy. Although dominant in its activities, the government has a clean, corruption-free image. Singapore has consistently been rated as the least-corrupt country in Asia and amongst the top ten cleanest from corruption in the world by Transparency International.<14>

Although Singapore's laws are inherited from British and British Indian laws, including many elements of English common law, the PAP has also consistently rejected liberal democratic values, which it typifies as Western and states that there should not be a 'one-size-fits-all' solution to a democracy. Laws restricting the freedom of speech are justified by claims that they are intended to prohibit speech that may breed ill will or cause disharmony within Singapore's multiracial, multi-religious society. For example, in September 2005, three bloggers were convicted of sedition for posting racist remarks targeting minorities.<15> Some offences can lead to heavy fines or caning and there are laws which allow capital punishment in Singapore for first-degree murder and drug trafficking. Amnesty International has criticised Singapore for having "possibly the highest execution rate in the world" per capita.<16> The Singapore government argued that there is no international consensus on the appropriateness of the death penalty and that Singapore has the sovereign right to determine its own judicial system and impose capital punishment for the most serious crimes. <17> However, more recently the PAP has relaxed some of its socially conservative policies.

[Nye Bevan]

31. One thing I have noticed about polls on DU

is that they allow people to make unbelievably stupid statements under the cover of anonymity.

Like that Cuba is not a dictatorship. And (a few days ago) that Hezbollah should be allowed to keep its weapons. (See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1746229)

I hope that responses such as these are from trolls trying to make DU look bad-- but it's hard to tell because these people never post in the thread, they only vote in the poll.

[ButterflyBlood]

36. As someone who made the other mentioned poll, I agree

It's one thing to say Castro isn't as bad as he is often made out to be, but to say with a straight face Cuba isn't a dictatorship is just as silly as saying Saddam had WMDs.

34. other

While I don't know that much about how the Cuban people feel about Castro, I think he has stood up against the monster of the United States trying to determine who should run Cuba. And for that, I think he has great strength. He may have a warped idea about what is right for Cuban people, but he at least cares. He has a very good mind and I think he is different than other totalitarian leaders that people mention. He really uses his mind.