After Raul...

[SocialDemocrat]

I don't know much in the way of Cuban politics currently, but one of my friends is highly pro-Fidel/Cuba; so I'm getting into it a little more nowadays. Now that the world pretty much knows that Fidel won't be re-taking his former position as President of Cuba, I was wondering what your opinions were on this topic. My friend suggested that Mariela Castro should run for President after Raul is out of office, but I'm curious as to who you guys think should run or if you support Mariela as well.

[Revy]

Of course she will. Everyone knows this is a monarchy!

But "blood is thicker than water". I'm sure that's how it would be defended. The Cuban Presidency has to pass down like a royal throne, because nobody but family is trustworthy, right?

[SocialDemocrat]

I was just trying to get your opinion on who you think should at least try to run for the presidency, not your criticism of my friend.

[Dimentio]

Of course she will. Everyone knows this is a monarchy!

But "blood is thicker than water". I'm sure that's how it would be defended. The Cuban Presidency has to pass down like a royal throne, because nobody but family is trustworthy, right?

Actually, I think people could show loyalty to a bloodline in an almost "royal" way even in republics.

Just look at Canada, where it is speculated that Justin Trudeau will become Prime Minister.

[teenagebricks]

The Cuban people seem more dedicated to the Casto family than they are to socialism itself, Mariela is dedicated to socialism, at least more so than Raúl. If it has to remain a family affair in order to maintain socialism in Cuba then so be it.

[benhur]

Cubans worship the Castro family, because the latter has provided them with everything they need. Else, the people would've revolted against them, like they did against the Batista regime. The fact that they haven't in 60 years is proof that Cuba is happy with the Castro family overseeing things.

[Hiero]

Just a quick google on Mariela Castro, she is very active for gay rights and rights for people infect with HIV.

She probally is a good canditate and has been very active.

This monarchy claim is bullshit, there are many other relatives of the Castro's who have no interest in politics and never will.

Raul and Fidel have from the begining been number 1 and 2 for the revolution. It was through Raul's hard work for 50+ years for revolution that earned him the election to president.

If Mariela Castro decides to run, and it is her decision Stancel is an idiot who probally knows very little about Cuba, she would run on her commitment to revolutionary politics. I don't know much about her, but from what I have heard she doesn't seem presidentional type.


Cubans worship the Castro family, because the latter has provided them with everything they need. Else, the people would've revolted against them, like they did against the Batista regime. The fact that they haven't in 60 years is proof that Cuba is happy with the Castro family overseeing things.

That is not how it works. Please think before you post something, the Castro family doesn't oversee anythying, it is only been Raul and Fidel who have been in leadership position. Even though your comment was put in a positive light it is still based on anti-communist/anti-Castro propaganda.

[teenagebricks]

I think it would be harder for the United States to paint Mariela Castro as an evil commie dictator. Fidel was an easy target, he's a Marxist who walks around in green military fatigues, no wonder the oligarchy hates him.

[skki]

Even Capitalist democracy would be a step up from the current situation in Cuba.

There is no freedom. Dissidents are still being imprisoned to this day.

[teenagebricks]

Capitalist democracy in Cuba would be disastrous, dissidents would still be imprisoned, the only difference is they would be Casto loyalists, just like Saddam Hussein supporters in Iraq. Capitalist democracy? There is no such thing.

[Revy]

Maybe my rhetoric is too loud and obnoxious. To clarify, I would not oppose Mariela Castro being President of Cuba. I don't think she should be denied the opportunity just because of something she didn't choose.

Look, I am just eager to hear some actual evidence that Cuba is on a socialist path. No slogans, just some facts. I don't want to know about healthcare, local/ parliamentary democracy, education, or anything like that. Those are reforms. I'd like to know what control workers have in the economy.

[Chapter 24]

Even Capitalist democracy would be a step up from the current situation in Cuba.

So... you basically are saying that if one of the multiple attempts coordinated by the U.S. government over the past 50 years to sabotage the Cuban government (i.e., Bay of Pigs) had proven successful, then whatever puppet state was propped up would have been more progressive than a state supported by the Cuban workers and peasants themselves? Because from this sentence alone one could imply that you are defending imperialism as a progressive measure for Cuba.
Tell me, skki, do you think a revolution is at all possible under the weight of an imperialist nation occupying it?


There is no freedom. Dissidents are still being imprisoned to this day.

And tell me how you know this? Do you have a source for this besides some rag paper in Miami that only wishes to discredit the gains made through the revolution?

[skki]

So... you basically are saying that if one of the multiple attempts coordinated by the U.S. government over the past 50 years to sabotage the Cuban government (i.e., Bay of Pigs) had proven successful, then whatever puppet state was propped up would have been more progressive than a state supported by the Cuban workers and peasants themselves? Because from this sentence alone one could imply that you are defending imperialism as a progressive measure for Cuba.
Tell me, skki, do you think a revolution is at all possible under the weight of an imperialist nation occupying it?



And tell me how you know this? Do you have a source for this besides some rag paper in Miami that only wishes to discredit the gains made through the revolution?

The American state is, for the large part, supported by the American workers. The Nazi state was supported by German workers. Does that make either of them just?

And I said Capitalist democracy, not Capitalist dictatorship or Capitalist puppet state. Capitalist democracy like we have in Europe and the USA. Where we are opressed, but are at least allowed to say so. Cuba is the last real remnant of Stalinism in the world, and will need to be abolished and repudiated before Socialism can move forward.

I never said the preferred Capitalist democracy would be propped up by imperialism did I? I didn't said anything about the Bay of Pigs either.

http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250291996?open&of=ENG-316
http://marcmasferrer.typepad.com/uncommon_sense/2009/04/cuban-political-prisoner-released-from-jail.html
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=12289

[SocialDemocrat]

Cuba is the last real remnant of Stalinism in the world

Stalinism?? From what I already know about Cuba, it is nothing like the Soviet Union under Stalin. Stalin committed Genocide against the Ukrainian people by forcefully and systematically starving them, has Fidel ever came close to committing atrocities at this kind of level? I think not.

Anyway, you people still aren't answering my question. Only one person really has said something related to trying to answer my question, and I thank him for that. Please, can someone just tell me who they will/would support to run/be elected as President of Cuba after Raul??

[The Author]

Cuba is the last real remnant of Stalinism in the world, and will need to be abolished and repudiated before Socialism can move forward.

Of course. Eastern Europe and the U.S.S.R. were "Stalinist remnants" that needed to be abolished and repudiated before Socialism could move forward. Or, that's what many of the opportunists, fake "leftists," armchairs, and traitorous elements said two decades ago. Have we moved any bit forward? Hmm... it seems we've moved far backwards instead- to the current pathetic, laughable condition the world working class movement is in today.

You'd think one would have learned their lesson by seeing such a tragedy, but no.

Oh, what makes Cuba "the last real remnant of Stalinism"? What of North Korea, or for that matter China, Laos, and Vietnam? Are they "Stalinist remnants" in your view as well?

[bailey_187]

Even Capitalist democracy would be a step up from the current situation in Cuba.

There is no freedom. Dissidents are still being imprisoned to this day.

yeah, how's that working in Jamaica and Haiti?

[skki]

Of course. Eastern Europe and the U.S.S.R. were "Stalinist remnants" that needed to be abolished and repudiated before Socialism could move forward. Or, that's what many of the opportunists, fake "leftists," armchairs, and traitorous elements said two decades ago. Have we moved any bit forward? Hmm... it seems we've moved far backwards instead- to the current pathetic, laughable condition the world working class movement is in today.

You'd think one would have learned their lesson by seeing such a tragedy, but no.

Oh, what makes Cuba "the last real remnant of Stalinism"? What of North Korea, or for that matter China, Laos, and Vietnam? Are they "Stalinist remnants" in your view as well?

The vital point here is that I don't consider the USSR Socialist. To me it's pretty clear that it was a State-Capitalist regime, effectively running an enourmous business in the form of the Soviet Empire. Even to the extent of competing in Capitalist markets. The problem is everyone else considered the Totalitarian USSR dictatorship to be Socialist, thus they opposed Socialism as a whole. The collapse of the USSR has given way to a new tide of lenience towards Socialism. As you can see in two polls on the front page of this section that show large sections of the American public now consider Socialism superior to Capitalism. Figures like this were impossible during the cold war. The western anti-communist propoganda machine is down, so we can now make efforts to re-educate people as to what Socialism really means. So I don't think Socialism has suffered a setback. Soviet State-Capitalism on the other hand, has died a beautiful death (with the exception of Cuba).

North Korea are in a class of their own, but I did forget about them. Down with them too I guess. China and Vietnam are quasi-Capitalist now. And nobody cares about the politics of Laos.

[Communist]

My friend suggested that Mariela Castro should run for President after Raul is out of office, but I'm curious as to who you guys think should run or if you support Mariela as well.

Mariela Castro would be a great choice.

[SocialDemocrat]

THANK YOU!! Finally, someone comes out and directly answers my question.

[mykittyhasaboner]

I'm almost at a loss for words how inaccurate these claims are. This post is also skewing off topic into an age old repetitive argument. Perhaps this should be split into a new thread?

The vital point here is that I don't consider the USSR Socialist. To me it's pretty clear that it was a State-Capitalist regime, effectively running an enourmous business in the form of the Soviet Empire.
Would you care to elaborate? All you've said here is "I think this, I think that"; and that's not really substantial. I would like to see how you rationalize your claim about how capitalism existed in the Soviet Union without massive amounts of private property.





Even to the extent of competing in Capitalist markets.The CCCP was isolated from the rest of the world for quite a long time, and didn't participate in the world market for even longer. Your claim is dubious.



The problem is everyone else considered the Totalitarian USSR dictatorship to be Socialist, thus they opposed Socialism as a whole. The collapse of the USSR has given way to a new tide of lenience towards Socialism. As you can see in two polls on the front page of this section that show large sections of the American public now consider Socialism superior to Capitalism. Figures like this were impossible during the cold war. Perhaps there's more "lenience" towards "socialism" in the US now that they don't punish people for being communists; but what does the collapse mean for the workers of Russia or any other ex-socialist republic? It means a decrease in over all living standards and economic security. For example look at Russia now, where inflation is atrocious and the wealth gap between Moscow and the rest of Russia is larger than it ever was. I'm sure they love neo-nazi gangs running around beating up and killing immigrants and leftists too.



The western anti-communist propoganda machine is down, so we can now make efforts to re-educate people as to what Socialism really means. You've got to be fucking kidding right? The western propaganda machine is stronger than ever thanks to the fall of the socialist camp.


So I don't think Socialism has suffered a setback. Soviet State-Capitalism on the other hand, has died a beautiful death (with the exception of Cuba).Right, so the dissolution of the Soviet Union and resurgence of a capitalist oligarchy has given socialism so much more influence and acceptance. :rolleyes:

[Hoxhaist]

If Mariela is committed to a strong and vibrant Marxism-Leninism then she will be wonderful!! even though that means Cuba is becoming dynastic like NK

[Communist]

If Mariela is committed to a strong and vibrant Marxism-Leninism then she will be wonderful!! even though that means Cuba is becoming dynastic like NK

From what I understand, Mariela follows the same ideology as Fidel and Raul.

[Hoxhaist]

from Wikipedia:
Mariela Castro Espín (born 1962 in Havana (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havana), Cuba (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba)) is the director of the Cuban National Center for Sex Education (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_National_Center_for_Sex_Education) in Havana (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havana) and an activist for LGBT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT) rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_social_movements) in Cuba (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba).
She is the daughter of Cuban president Raúl Castro Ruz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%C3%BAl_Castro) and Vilma Espín Guillois (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vilma_Esp%C3%ADn), and the niece of former president Fidel Castro Ruz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro).
Her group campaigns for effective AIDS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS) prevention as well as recognition and acceptance of homosexuality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality), bisexuality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexuality), transvestism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transvestism), and transsexualism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transsexualism) human rights. In 2005 she proposed a project to allow transgendered people to receive sex reassignment surgery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_reassignment_surgery) and change their legal gender. The measure became law in June 2008 which allows sex change surgery for Cubans without charge.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariela_Castro#cite_note-0)
Mariela Castro is president of the Cuban Multidisciplinary Centre for the Study of Sexuality, president of the National Commission for Treatment of Disturbances of Gender Identity, member of the Direct Action Group for Preventing, Confronting, and Combatting AIDS, and an executive member of the World Association for Sexual Health. She is also the director of the journal Sexología y Sociedad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexolog%C3%ADa_y_Sociedad) a magazine of Sexology edited by the own National Center for Sex Education (CENESEX).
She has published 13 scholarly articles and nine books.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariela_Castro#cite_note-1)
According to former Castro family confidante Norberto Fuentes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norberto_Fuentes), Mariela is considered the rebel in the family; "a free spirit who performed topless in one late 1980s production". She also reportedly favored perestroika (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perestroika) in the 1980s. Mariela is now married to an Italian and has two children with him, plus a young girl from a previous union with a chilean.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariela_Castro#cite_note-2)

[Hoxhaist]

that support for perestroika is dangerous because of its results and she seems to lack the same commitment to ML that even the Castro brothers had, so no I dont support her; Cuba needs someone to be tougher on the US and more of a hardliner than the Castro brothers to restore Marxism-Leninism

[Communist]

THANK YOU!! Finally, someone comes out and directly answers my question.

You're welcome. Around here, it's hard to receive a direct answer, usually the responses are shrouded and cloaked in dogma, philosophies and debates. You'll learn to love that about RevLeft. I've learned more that way, myself. ::)

[skki]

I will answer these as briefly as I can.



Would you care to elaborate? All you've said here is "I think this, I think that"; and that's not really substantial. I would like to see how you rationalize your claim about how capitalism existed in the Soviet Union without massive amounts of private property.


http://www.chomsky.info/articles/1986----.htm



The CCCP was isolated from the rest of the world for quite a long time, and didn't participate in the world market for even longer. Your claim is dubious.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_trade_of_the_Soviet_Union



Perhaps there's more "lenience" towards "socialism" in the US now that they don't punish people for being communists; but what does the collapse mean for the workers of Russia or any other ex-socialist republic? It means a decrease in over all living standards and economic security. For example look at Russia now, where inflation is atrocious and the wealth gap between Moscow and the rest of Russia is larger than it ever was. I'm sure they love neo-nazi gangs running around beating up and killing immigrants and leftists too.

Just because I condemn the USSR system does not mean I support the current one.



You've got to be fucking kidding right? The western propaganda machine is stronger than ever thanks to the fall of the socialist camp. You need to (make more accurate observations, I assume)


During the cold war there were constant informercials about the "red menace", the threat of nuclear destruction from the USSR etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss0yaO6VJvU.
Find me something like this from the 21st century.



Right, so the dissolution of the Soviet Union and resurgence of a capitalist oligarchy has given socialism so much more influence and acceptance. :rolleyes:

I for one see the transformation from hatred to obscurity as a positive step. That you would insinuate Socialists have less acceptance now than when they were being arrested is pretty pathetic.

Don't reply if this is the level of quality you can come up with, Totalitarian.

[black magick hustla]

Stalinism?? From what I already know about Cuba, it is nothing like the Soviet Union under Stalin. Stalin committed Genocide against the Ukrainian people by forcefully and systematically starving them, has Fidel ever came close to committing atrocities at this kind of level? I think not.

Anyway, you people still aren't answering my question. Only one person really has said something related to trying to answer my question, and I thank him for that. Please, can someone just tell me who they will/would support to run/be elected as President of Cuba after Raul??

i think the label of stalinism is apt. the analysis that stalinism is a trend of gritty dictators who decimate their population is one coming from bourgeois analysis. stalinism is the tendency that came from the stalinization of the comintern in the 30s. some of the things it includes are strong nationalist rhetoric, support for capitalist war, voluntarism in exchange of unitary class organizations, a theory of popular frontism, and heavy personality cults, and people posting with hoxha avatars lol

[SocialDemocrat]

that support for perestroika is dangerous because of its results and she seems to lack the same commitment to ML that even the Castro brothers had, so no I dont support her; Cuba needs someone to be tougher on the US and more of a hardliner than the Castro brothers to restore Marxism-Leninism

I'm pretty sure that her support for Perestroika is solely during the 80s, as it says nothing about whether or not she currently supports it or not. However, I'm pretty sure they don't.

Anyway, please, someone besides communist-usa grow some brains and answer my question instead of straying off topic. I didn't make this thread so we can all debate over the Soviet Union and Stalinism, I made it to get your opinions on the topic of my original post.

[Fidelista Reed]

Well, I happen to be that friend, haha. And I'd like to say a few things:
1. Going to wikipedia for your arguments really doesn't show ay intelligence.
2. communist-usa, you seem pretty cool, and know what is going on in Cuba
3. Cuba is a parliament-democracy, this monarchy and oligarchy stuff really has nothing to do with this. Just answer the question if you know your stuff, or please don't answer at all.
4. Mariella Castro has poven to be an excellent politician recently. She fights for the rights of all groups, and has made Cuba the most Left-view country in our hemisphere. The people support her because she is like Fidel: she cares about them like a family, not just because she wants their votes.
5. Cuba is Communist, okay? The workers there retook the sugar factories from the the corporations who so shrewdly stole from them. They created unions, they volunteered for each other, they have made the worker the main point of their culture. If you look at their culture, it is all about hard work and determination to help others in need. The main attribute of a revolution should be the re-creation of the culture. They are once again, just to put this in your ignorant heads, Communist.

[mykittyhasaboner]

I will answer these as briefly as I can.
Aw, no fun.




http://www.chomsky.info/articles/1986----.htm
I wasn't really interested in Chomsky's opinion, nor do I give it much credibility to be honest.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_trade_of_the_Soviet_UnionOK. The Soviet Union faced isolation after the civil war, during the great depression; and didn't start much foreign trade until WW2. Even in 1985 foreign trade was only 4 percent of the Soviet GNP according to the source you provide. Why do then make claims about the Soviet Union being some competing empire amongst capitalist world markets? :confused::bored:

The Soviet Union really traded with countries like Cuba and the rest of Eastern Europe, which entails that trade is going on between planned and not market economies.





Just because I condemn the USSR system does not mean I support the current one.But you claim that the fall of the USSR has somehow given way for acceptance or success of socialism, while it has done the opposite? You carry the same position regarding Cuba, calling for the current government to be overthrown. What you fail to recognize is that in doing so, all the achievements made by the Cuban revolution will be swept away.




During the cold war there were constant informercials about the "red menace", the threat of nuclear destruction from the USSR etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss0yaO6VJvU.
Find me something like this from the 21st century. The US government doesn't have to make those videos anymore, because they have been deemed irrelevant and followers of a time that doesn't exist anymore. In fact, there are so many moronic anti-communist videos on youtube that its astounding how well weaved the hatred of "communism" is. Yet you still like to make claims about how socialists are a more relevant and accepted now. There are still many anti-communist content in the popular media as well; and its even worse now because all the right-wingers are raving on about how Obama is a communist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_QwNnFSI-U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUAYNlcZa_w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POkHs4Xwo5M&feature=PlayList&p=2EA3902DC1E61218&index=0&playnext=1

Never mind the crazy films and books published following 1991. Black Book of Communism, Hammer and Tickle, and Bloody History of Communism come to mind. All of which lack historical backing.





I for one see the transformation from hatred to obscurity as a positive step. That you would insinuate Socialists have less acceptance now than when they were being arrested is pretty pathetic.I find it pretty pathetic of you to suggest that socialists, unionists, and activists aren't being arrested or attacked anymore. Do you really think that anti-communism is somehow non-existent anymore? Because last time I checked its what dominates popular media.


Don't reply if this is the level of quality you can come up with, Totalitarian.Aren't you a charming fellow.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Anyway, please, someone besides communist-usa grow some brains and answer my question instead of straying off topic. I didn't make this thread so we can all debate over the Soviet Union and Stalinism, I made it to get your opinions on the topic of my original post.

Well, I'm not sure who will be assuming the head of the central committee after Raul is succeeded. Anything suggesting Mariela to assume the position is purely speculation, and I would be against her succeeding Raul because of her support of perestroika.

[Fidelista Reed]

I would much rather have Mariella instead of a Right-wing Capitalist assume position anyway. And anyone that has a stance near Fidel is most likely going to be a good leader.

[SocialDemocrat]

Well, I'm not sure who will be assuming the head of the central committee after Raul is succeeded. Anything suggesting Mariela to assume the position is purely speculation, and I would be against her succeeding Raul because of her support of perestroika.

As I said before, I'm pretty sure that her support for perestroika died along with the Soviet Union. She hasn't made any statements, that I know of, which insinuate that she supports enforcing perestroika policies in Cuba.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Actually, I'm glad to see Mariela say this:


In an interview with The Scotsman, she called for more open debate on economic problems. “I would like to hear more discussion. We need to experiment and to test what really works, to make the public ownership more effective, rather than simply adopting wholesale free-market reforms,” she said.

http://havanajournal.com/politics/entry/the-next-castro-in-line-mariela-castro/

[SocialDemocrat]

Yes, from what I've seen, Mariela is high on my list for who I support to run for President. I don't know many prominent Cuban politicians, but she sticks out of the crowd without even being a member of government.

[Hoxhaist]

I'm saying Mariela must be in line at least with Fidel or more hardline. She is preferable to a capitalist but she ought not engage in revision or reform

[Davie zepeda]

I really like Roque and i hate the fact Raul knocked him down to put his daughter in a better position if only Fidel was healthier. Raul is taking advantage of the situation he has no faith the people will stay with the revolution without a Castro in power.
Hopefully Fidel's old comrades will come out-
Abelardo Colomé Ibarra
Juan Almeida Bosque
Armando Hart
Dr. Rubén Remigio Ferro
Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_State_of_Cuba

[Hiero]

You're welcome. Around here, it's hard to receive a direct answer, usually the responses are shrouded and cloaked in dogma, philosophies and debates. You'll learn to love that about RevLeft. I've learned more that way, myself. ::)

Well the better posters around here tend to think that people have enough intelligence to make up their own mind, so we pefer to not to tell people how to think.

But then this thread and many others constantly prove this assumption is wrong.

[Hoxhaist]

does anyone know the names of hardliner contenders for leadership?

[teenagebricks]

Esteban Lazo Hernández is in a strong position, he's been involved with PCC since the 1980s and was a close aide to Fidel, he's also one of the youngest members of the council. Purely spectulating, but it's a possibility.

[SocialDemocrat]

Well, as of now, who's going to succeed Raul isn't that widely discussed in Cuba like it is in foreign countries. No candidates have really stepped out and said they would run.

[SocialDemocrat]

Esteban Lazo Hernández is in a strong position, he's been involved with PCC since the 1980s and was a close aide to Fidel, he's also one of the youngest members of the council. Purely spectulating, but it's a possibility.

Hmmm, I don't believe I've heard of him. I'll look him up, for sure.

[SocialDemocrat]

Hopefully Fidel's old comrades will come out-
Abelardo Colomé Ibarra
Juan Almeida Bosque
Armando Hart
Dr. Rubén Remigio Ferro
Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada

Thing about these guys, they're all aging into they're 70s or 80s.

[Andropov]

Raul was democratically elected as was pointed out before.
It was not nepotism as the Bourgeoisie media and the trendy leftists like to portray it.
Who will succeed Raul?
Who ever is democratically elected when he leaves office I would assume.

[Pogue]

Raul was democratically elected as was pointed out before.
It was not nepotism as the Bourgeoisie media and the trendy leftists like to portray it.
Who will succeed Raul?
Who ever is democratically elected when he leaves office I would assume.

Could you please link to an article where it shows he was democratically elected? Was this verified by any observers?

[Andropov]

Could you please link to an article where it shows he was democratically elected? Was this verified by any observers?

I was at a talk where Noel Carillo, the Cuban Ambassador to The Free State, stated this.

[Pogue]

I was at a talk where Noel Carillo, the Cuban Ambassador to The Free State, stated this.

Did he provide any sources? Was it recognised by anyone else?

Its just, I can see a reason why the Cuban Ambassador would claim that Cuba is democratic even if thats not the case. Propoganda and what not if you follow.

Were there elections where everyone voted for a leader which were observed to be fair and free? I'd have thought that would have been milked alot more by Fidelistas, seeing as there haven't been proper general elections in Cuba for decades. Did I miss a major electoral reform under Raul?

[Pogue]

Basically what I'm saying is, you believed it just because a representative of the Cuban state said it was so? Did you not think he was maybe lying?

[Andropov]

Basically what I'm saying is, you believed it just because a representative of the Cuban state said it was so? Did you not think he was maybe lying?

No I did not think that he was lying.
Unlike you I do perceive Cuba as workers state that is progressive and I would normally take the Cuban states representatives claims on face value.
Anyway from my limited knowledge of the Cuban State, it is the Cuban Parliament which elects the President.
The Parliament is of course democratically elected by the workers.

[Jorge Miguel]

Raul is indeed a democratically elected member of the Cuban Parliament. This isn't a great secret.

He was chosen as President (I think) in 1997, also by election by the deputies of the Cuban legislature. The Cuban legislature chooses the President if I remember correctly, the position is not directly elected.

[SocialDemocrat]

Raul was democratically elected as was pointed out before.
It was not nepotism as the Bourgeoisie media and the trendy leftists like to portray it.
Who will succeed Raul?
Who ever is democratically elected when he leaves office I would assume.

What I was asking, though, was who would you support to succeed Raul. Also, by "succeed", I don't mean as in to take his place without elections.

[Hiero]

Then election system is pretty confusing in Cuba.

Fidel and now Raul were voted into President of the country by the National Assembly. The National Assembly is about 600 seats, and this assembly is voted in by lower municipal assembly. Municipial elections are voted in by the public.Also if I think that some nominations have to come from the central trade union in Cuba in the municipal and national levels.

What people in the 1st world liberal democracy fail to realise is how people can have such faith and admiration for particular political leaders over a long period of time. Remember Fidel and Raul were at the fore front of the Cuban revolutions. We tend to be very suspicious of political leaders, they usually lose favour after 4 or 8 years even amongst their suporters. So when 1st worlders often see leaders in power for long periods of time they assume there is some tampering or dictorial methods going on. Now this might be the case, take Qhaddaffi in Libya, or Mugabe in zimbabwe. I am sure there has been some forced coercion, Qhaddaffi's position is very dubious and can be considered some form of dictator position. However these people are very popular as they are considered creators of the modern, anti-colonial state and they aren't going to lose favour any time soon.

With the case of Fidel and then Rual, these are the two leaders regardless of if they hold offical position in the state or party. And if they run for election they are bound to be voted for. Following Rual will be an interesting election.

[RedSonRising]

I think if Raul's reforms end up popular within Cuba (which judging by the Cubans I have talked to, will be) then I think another person with a more progressive outlook will be elected. He is a pragmatic leader making necessary changes in Cuba, not a counterrevolutionary reverting to capitalism. His easing of restrictions on personal property matters seem to make life a bit easier without hindering the power of the unions or limiting production control of the workers. In fact, his transition from somewhat inefficient nationalized agricultural management to municipal control of agriculture has increased both efficiency and community control over resources, which to me is a move many leftists need to appreciate as a step in the right direction, not a free market add-on.

[SocialDemocrat]

Ya, I agree, the Cuban governmental system can get confusing. I somewhat contribute the fact that there aren't many outspoken, fresh-faces in the Cuban government to the way it is set up; but I definitely don't believe that it is a bad setup.

Also, I believe Raul will do/has done a great job, as you do.