I am simply explaining the situation. No one is making excuses. The situation is not ideal in Cuba, the same as everywhere around the world, but it is much less severe than you represent.
Raul is now retired. He had served as the head of the Party, which is a position elected from within the Party, and as the president, which is elected by the National Assembly, itself elected popularly. All of his political power was through such formal positions, which others were free to seek as his replacement.
Also, union participation is nearly universal. As such, an unpopular government is obviously unlikely to remain in power except by capitulating to worker demands. Moreover, workers wield more power, relative to the state, than mostly everywhere in the world, including the states that style themselves as the most free. Thus, even high-ranking offices carry limited power in practice.
The Castros rule Cuba in the same sense that the Windsors rule the UK. The role is effectively only ceremonial, with a minimum of formal powers.
So they do have formal power above the average citizen?
Why make excuses for it at all. Accept the L and push for better.
I am simply explaining the situation. No one is making excuses. The situation is not ideal in Cuba, the same as everywhere around the world, but it is much less severe than you represent.
Raul is now retired. He had served as the head of the Party, which is a position elected from within the Party, and as the president, which is elected by the National Assembly, itself elected popularly. All of his political power was through such formal positions, which others were free to seek as his replacement.
Also, union participation is nearly universal. As such, an unpopular government is obviously unlikely to remain in power except by capitulating to worker demands. Moreover, workers wield more power, relative to the state, than mostly everywhere in the world, including the states that style themselves as the most free. Thus, even high-ranking offices carry limited power in practice.