Here's what Cliff said:
- The diplomat was correct: Castro was extremely popular with the majority of Cubans. He was regarded as the father of his country -- like George Washington.
- More accurately, he's like Franklin Roosevelt who was elected four times here in the U.S.
- Who can say how many times Roosevelt would have been re-elected had he not died, but had come to power as Castro did at 33 years of age?
- Moreover, (as noted above) the U.S. electoral system doesn't work so well. Most people don't even vote. Campaigns are interminable and extremely costly and wasteful. And (as indicated by the recent U.S. election) their results often don't even reflect the will of the majority of voters.
- Cuba's conclusion: there's got to be a better way.
- Cuba's way (like that of Great Britain -- and of the U.S. for that matter) is not to elect the head of state directly, but to have electors make the choice.
- So elected members of parliament appoint Cuba's president.
- And (as my diplomat-friend indicated), they (election cycle after election cycle) chose their equivalent of Franklin Roosevelt.
My own conclusion is that Fidel Castro was one of the greatest figures of the 20th century. He was an insightful (atheist) theologian of liberation. As a true Communist, he was more Christian than many popes. He was more democratic than most USians can begin to understand.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
4
4
2
