Tim Anderson is just so right and all the evidence supports his proposition.

He certainly has explained why Cuba is flooded annually with western refugees trying to escape, in leaky boats, dictatorial USA and why there is such a huge population of former Americans in Cuba.

I don't much care for the septics myself, but to say that the US is not a democracy while Cuba is is risible. Just because some people are elected doesn't make a democracy - consider Zimbabwe, for example. This blindness to reality is unhelpful, and only serves to diminish the standing of reasonable critics of the US.

The US constitution gives the President, as head of the executive government, certain powers - including the power to wage war. They are the rules by which that nation works. The fact that the President is elected by an electoral college does not mean it is undemocratic. After all our Prime Minister becomes head of executive government by a similar process; in the Australian case the parlimentary caucus is in effect the electoral college.

PS. For those unfamiliar with the term - septic tank = yank. Not only is it rhyming slang but also .....

For those dismissing this article, I would like to hear some actual refutations of the points and comparisons presented in the article, rather than just 'this is garbage' and so on.

For example:

'Cuban citizens have the constitutional right to employment, food, free education, free health care, housing (including family inheritance), political participation, freedom of expression, personal property and freedom of religion.'

Is any of this untrue? If so, please explain how.

'In Cuba, the media (television, radio, magazines, newspapers) are all run by public bodies or community organisations. No private individual or investment group can capture or dominate public debate in Cuba. Nor is there mind numbing, commercial advertising.'

What about that one?

...and so on. Please feel free to choose your own points from within the article to dispute. But at least dispute something.

Oh, and does anyone else suspect Robert2007 and John from Melbourne of being the same person, or am I just paranoid?

Interesting to read the extreme viewpoints - I tend to think Castro is one of the most enigmatic historical figures there's ever been. I suspect he's neither the utmost villain he is portrayed as, nor the shining light supporters of socialism would have us believe.

He's the perfect focal point for the age old "does the end justify the means?" debate.

Castro did many bad things in the name of his ideals - his ideal was for an egalitarian society, where the division of rich and poor was not as pronounced as it is in the wider world.
This is a noble goal, however the real world made him get his hands dirty - how dirty is really the debate here. On the one hand we have the US who are making him out to be a fiend, and on the other, the socialists.

He wasn't a friend to free speech. He cracked down on the media, and he used various unsavoury methods to maintain his hold on power.
The thing is, the world's superpower was doing it's utmost to topple him, and prevent him from achieving his vision - while I wouldn't be so naive as to believe all his problems could be chalked up to the US, the politically motivated sanctions and blockades did as much to harm the Cubans as Castro did. They certainly didn't have any effect on Castro, if that was the goal of them, and I'd argue they weren't warranted.

"Some ideas are so ridiculous that only an intellectual could believe them."

(attributed to Orwell)

When asked what he thought of democracy, Ghandi said it was a good idea. Still is. Anyone care to point to a 'real' one? The US style of government is a great ideal but only 40% of the population votes. Despite their self-adoration there is much wrong with the way the US is run.

Same goes for dictatorships. Pervez Musharraf gets re-elected - with the blessing of the US - while Chavez gets 60% of the popular vote, despite being portrayed as a dictator. Castro gets bad coverage for whatever he does, despite the points raised by this article. There are few absolutes.

All in all I'd prefer my government to be honest. The Chinese for instance make no apologies, despite their horrific record. At least you know the animal you're dealing with.