Talk:Cuba: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 06:57, 11 October 2004

Latest revision as of 19:15, 15 August 2025

Line 1:

{{Talk header}}

''An event mentioned in this article is an [[Template:October 10 selected anniversaries|October 10 selected anniversary]].''

{{Round in circles|search=no}}

----

{{Not a forum}}

October 11, 2004 (from [e-mail])

{{American English}}

{{Article history

|action1=GAN

| action1date=3 February 2007

| action1result=not listed

| action1oldid=105193320

| currentstatus=FGAN

| topic=geography

|otd1date=2004-10-10|otd1oldid=6487069

|otd2date=2005-10-10|otd2oldid=25162774

}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|collapsed=yes|vital=yes|1=

{{WikiProject Latin America|importance=Top}}

{{WikiProject Cuba|importance=Top}}

{{WikiProject Caribbean|importance=Top}}

{{WikiProject Countries}}

{{WikiProject Islands}}

{{WikiProject Socialism|importance=Top}}

{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Top}}

}}

{{Press|year=2006|section=May 2006

| title=Dueling edits dog Wikipedia's Cuba entry

| org=The Seattle Times <!--Author is Pablo Bachelet-->

| date=May 5, 2006

| url=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002973183_wiki05.html

}}

{{Skip to bottom}}

{{banner holder |collapsed=yes |text=Other: old GA nominee; On this day ([[Special:permalink/25162774|2005]]); press notices; [[American English]] |1=

}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config

| archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}}

| maxarchivesize = 100K

| counter = 23

| minthreadsleft = 3

| algo = old(90d)

| archive = Talk:Cuba/Archive %(counter)d

}}

{{section sizes}}

{{annual readership}}

__TOC__

I've replaced the 3rd, 4th and 5th paragraphs, I've placed the old ones below. Whoever wrote this reactionary, lying piece didn't bother to leave a note to explain to others why s/he did this.

== Human Rights section in need of review; who wrote this? ==

"For several decades, Cuba received a large Soviet subsidy, whereby Cuba provided the Soviet Union with sugar and the Soviets provided Cuba with oil. Part of this oil was consumed by Cuba, the remainder was sold in the world market for a profit of several billion dollars. In return for this subsidy from the Soviet Union, Cuba supported communist insurgencies throughout Central America (Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Chile) and Africa (Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia). In Angola alone, Cuba had over 50,000 tropps. The [[collapse of the Soviet Union]] in [[1991]] dealt Cuba a giant economic blow and when the Soviets stopped their $6 billion per year subsidy, the Cuban communist government called for "a special period." Despite being denied access to development aid from the IMF and World Bank (Cuba is in arrears to its Paris Club debtors to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars), Cuba's economy has not collapsed, although its per-capita income is still lower than it was in 1959. Cuba's economy today is roughly split into three parts: Agriculture and mining (tobacco, sugar, nickel, citrus), Tourism and remittances from Cuban-Americans in the United States.

=== <s>Torture and weird sources</s> ===

"In 1994 the Clinton Administration enacted the Helms-Burton law. This law was enacted after the Cuban government shot down two private U.S. planes in International Waters. The Helms Burton law, states, among other things that any foreign company that acquires property in Cuba that used to belong to a U.S. company will be subject to litigation.

<s>First of all, simply writing "The Cuban government has been accused of numerous human rights abuses including torture, arbitrary imprisonment, unfair trials, and extrajudicial executions" is not sufficient without mention of proper sources, for example NGO's or some recognized polity. I could accuse Norway of torture right now, so? What is this source supposed to be? http://www.cidh.org/countryrep/Cuba67sp/indice.htm It is dated 1967? Surely something more recent should be found, otherwise the section might aswell be moved to "history of Cuba" Torture? Extrajudicial executions? I can't find any mention of these in recent reports. Not even the US state department claims the Cuban government practices torture or extrajudicial execution. Here is the recent report by human rights watch https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2021/country-chapters/cuba#3159b0 It does not mention torture, sexual abuse of inmates or extrajudicial executions. Those parts should be removed or changed to include what time this accusation was made.

'''Needs update'''

"Currently, every country in the world is free to trade with Cuba. The country's major trading partners include Spain, France, Italy, Great Britain and Japan. The economic embargo only applies to U.S. tourism. U.S. agriculture companies are free to trade with Cuba provided that Cuba pays in hard currency. All medical and humanitarian supplies are freely allowed to flow into Cuba. American tourists who wish to visit Cuba mainly travel through Mexico or Canada. Cuba's tourism industry has been severely damaged since September 11th. As a "rogue state" that has consistently harbored terrorists (IRA, Colombian terrorists, African revolutionaries) many visitors have been fearful to visit the island. Moreover, the Castro government recently arrested and imprisoned 75 independent journalists, artists and writers. In 2002, the government killed a group of individuals attempting to escape the island."

''Cuba had the second-highest number of imprisoned journalists of any nation in 2008 (China had the highest) according to various sources, including the Committee to Protect Journalists and Human Rights Watch''

Here it is mentioned that the statistic stems from 2008, which is good. But this statistic is kind of useless other then mentioning a previous condition. It missrepresents Cuba for the average reader. Cuba did not even make the list of this 2018 ranking for imprisoned journalists: https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2018/12/13/where-the-most-journalists-are-imprisoned-worldwide-infographic/?sh=1b693b336332

--"--------------------------

The situation of journalists in Cuba is still under scrutany, but for different reasons. For example HRC writes: Cuba has the “most restricted climate for the press in the Americas” according to a 2019 Committee to Protect Journalists report.

'''WP:POV?'''

The section does not balance out the negatives with the positives, such as information about Cubans access to healthcare, free abortions and school etc. Accusations from 70 years ago are being represented as if they are currently being made (torture and executions)

'''recomendations'''

Reasonable people disagree over whether a policy of paying production-based prices for sugar is a form of subsidy. No doubt both the EU and the US agressively subsidize agriculture, ESPECIALLY sugar; but the Comecon arrangement accomplishes the same thing. Regardless, this debate has no place in this article and so I have removed the following sentence: "This fair exchange is often erroneously described as a 'subsidy'."

1. Remove claims of torture and extrajudicial executions from the first sentence

2. Mention were all accusations come from and source it

3. Remove the part about sexual abuse of inmates

4. Update section to represent current conditions.

5. Extend the section about the media with more information and remove the part about imprisonment of journalists.

-- <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Herooow|Herooow]] ([[User talk:Herooow#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Herooow|contribs]])</s> 18 March 2022 (UTC)</span>

------

== Semi-protected edit request on May 20, 2025 ==

Sunday 12 September 2004: I've rewritten parts of the Cuba article, to remove inaccuracies and hostile bias - from [e-mail]

In the infobox, I am suggesting that [[First Secretary of the Communist Party of Cuba|First Secretary]] be mentioned before [[President of Cuba|President]], as the First Secretary of the Communist Party of Cuba is the most powerful position in the country. [[User:PersonMan922|PersonMan922]] ([[User talk:PersonMan922|talk]]) 01:00, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

------

== Semi-protected edit request on 30 June 2025 ==

[[User:Efghij|Efghij]], why did you remove the links to [[List of Cubans]] and [[List of places in Cuba]]? Wondering simply, [[User:Infrogmation|Infrogmation]] 23:29 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Cuba|answered=yes}}

Sorry, accidently deleted them while applying the template. [[User:Efghij|Efghij]]

The Heritage Foundation is hardly a neutral source on a socialist state, and has been known to lie on these topics, so I do not think it should be used as a source. [[User:Cwsaafiwb|Cwsaafiwb]] ([[User talk:Cwsaafiwb|talk]]) 18:08, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

:[[File:X mark.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done for now''': please establish a [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for this alteration '''[[Wikipedia:Edit requests#Planning a request|before]]''' using the {{Tlx|Edit semi-protected}} template.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[WP:CC-BY-SA|(CC)]]&nbsp;[[User:Tbhotch|<span style="color:#4B0082;">Tb</span><span style="color:#6082B6;">hotch</span>]]^{[[User talk:Tbhotch|<span style="color:#555555;">™</span>]]} 18:24, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

== Note population decline in lede? ==

----

I moved [[Gregorio Fuentes]] from Writer (which he wasn't) to Other Figures. [[User:adiazpaz|adiazpaz]]

Hi, I would like to suggest that Cuba's recent decline in population, amounting to a 13% loss since 2012, be noted in the last paragraph of the lead section. I take as an example for this addition the lead for Japan, which notes the country's declining population ''([Japan] is undergoing [[Aging of Japan|a severe population decline]] and has the highest proportion of elderly citizens of any country in the world.)'' As of 2025, Cuba's emigration-induced decline is far steeper than Japan's birth rate-driven decline. I've provided an example of how this could look below, although the actual verbiage is something I just mocked up while writing this little section.

----

Someone has recently changed the name of certain US actions actions against Cuba from "embargo" to "blockade". In one sense this is a correct change because both countries use this term (or ''bloqueo'' in Spanish). There was of course a blockade during the time of the Missile Crisis in the 1960s, but over an extended period of time this has really been an embargo, and "blockade" is a misnomer. In a blockade of a country, all traffic is prevented from enterring or leaving it. '''All''' ships from third countries are blocked by military force from doing business with the blockaded country. Cuba does continue to trade with other countries.

[...] rationed food meets only a fraction of daily nutritional needs for many Cubans, leading to health issues. '''High emigration has led to severe population decline in the last decade, ''with the Cuba losing 13% of its population since 2012''.''' Ongoing since 1960, the [[United States embargo against Cuba]] stands as one of the longest-running trade and economic measures in bilateral relations in history [...]

The question becomes, "Do we use the incorrect term supported by both parties to the dispute, or do we use the term that more correctly describes the factual situation?" [[User:Eclecticology|<font size=+1>&#9774;</font> Eclecticology]] 01:49, 2003 Aug 11 (UTC)

----

Or use both and explain? [[User:Robneild|Robneild]] 20:01, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

----

Meriam Webster's definition of "blockade" includes this "broadly : a restrictive measure designed to obstruct the commerce and communications of an unfriendly nation". Those who insist on the narrow definition of blockade often do so because of their political viewpoint.

I haven't added anything, but think this is a very significant phenomenon in understanding current Cuba, and one that has gotten good coverage in news and the academy. Looking forward to hearing from other editors on this subject! [[User:Theodore Christopher|Theodore Christopher]] ([[User talk:Theodore Christopher|talk]]) 17:49, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Further, the more precise term "economic blockade" is often used.

: From what I have read the decline is due to low birth rates, high emigration, and an ageing population. [[User:Burrobert|Burrobert]] ([[User talk:Burrobert|talk]]) 06:09, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

[[User:Beardo|Beardo]] 03:13, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

:In this context since both American and Cuban official sources misuse the term blockade your argument that it is because of a political viewpoint has no basis in fact. Some of us just like to use the language correctly. Your quotation is fine, but it does not reflect what's happening. The Americans forbid their citizens from trading with Cuba; that's an '''embargo'''. They are not AFAIK maintaining a naval presence outside Havana harbour to obstruct the shipping of other nations; if they did that would be a '''blockade'''. [[User:Eclecticology|<font size=+1>&#9774;</font> Eclecticology]] 10:25, 2004 Feb 29 (UTC)

----

It is not a "blockade" but a Trade and Financial Embargo.

[[User:Orbis Tertius|Orbis Tertius]] 04:25, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

==question==

I would like to know more about the lives of cubans. After so many years in socialism how is the economic distribution? was ever there a [[gini coefficient]] measured? Do all cubans with 26+ went to college? Can anyone give that answer (thats the kind of thiong you don´t google) --[[User:Avsa|Zero00]] 14:46, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

----

Why is the motto here different than in Spanish? [[User:80.221.104.156|80.221.104.156]] 12:15, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

----

The real figures of how many (percentage) of Cuban young people visit college might be found in the statistics of UNESCO.

It must be said that state sponsored "massivity" has dramatically dropped the "quality" of collegs and highschools in Cuba. In "my times" (I did highschool in Havana 1981-1984) there was an abysmal difference between elite or vocational education for a few and "normal/plain" school standards for the masses. I was lucky enough to study in a vocational highschool nearby Havana (called "V. I. Lenin"). When I started university studies in 1984, many students comming from "mass" highschools did not pass the first semester, and the others had to catch up for all the knowledge they did not bring from highschool...

Situation has even worsened in the last decade, unfortunately even so in primary education. The economic emergency of the 90's led to a dramatic shortage of teachers (many left the school to become e.g. self-entepreneurs, or simply left the country). The "solution" by the regime was to train masses of teachers (highschool graduates, bringing already heavy gaps in their knowledge, were "formed" to teachers in crash courses with a duration of less than 1 year). You can imagine the quality of these teachers. Another "solution" has been the use of video teaching. For each topic, e.g. maths, and each grade, e.g. the 4th grade, videos have been produced by the Ministery of Education and distributed among the schools. Children are suposed to learn the stuff at watching the videos. This measure aims at reducing the negative impact of being teached by misserably formed young teachers. But if I remember right, Cuban boys and girls are quite vital. And classes contain normaly more than 30 of those animated children. Can you imagine they learn anything at all? I can't. Even though, Cuban propaganda machinery tells the video approach is the best thing in universe. You are free to believe it or not. For me, I am happy I visited school in a "better era" and had real teachers I still remember today with admiration and love.

A final sad note: the vocational highschool "V. I. Lenin" in which I studied in the early 80's does not exist anymore...

==execution of "dissidents" vs. "reactionaries" vs. "opponents of the revolution" ==

These terms are not identical and have slightly different implications. Since it's a very serious allegation, it's important to get the term right. I suggest we look at what kind of people were executed before we make further edits, preferably from sources that are not partisan. [[User:Pir|pir]] 12:11, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

:I have no idea who was executed for what immediately after Castro came to power; I reverted on the assumption that the original author who used "dissidents" had a better idea than either the Old Bolshie who maintained that "dissidence" is by definition impossible (immediately) after a revolution, and that Pir's well-meaning attempt at reconciliation ''could be'' (I don't know if is ''is'') technically wrong, as "dissident" does not ''necessarily'' equate to "opponent of the revolution". (And shouldn't it be capitalized "Revolution" here, as we're referring to a particular Revolution, in this case Castro's?) Again, my intent was simply to revert to a previous author who presumably had a better idea what he meant to write. I have no dog in this fight, and will accept whatever the consensus opinion agrees on, as I have no inclination to research the matter. [[User:Orthogonal|-- orthogonal]] 12:23, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

::By the way, what does mean "Old Bolshie"? [[User:Drbug|[[User:Drbug| D'''r''' B'''u'''g]][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit&section=new &nbsp;]]] 19:47, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

:::[[Old Bolshevik]] -- but I was being funny (or trying to) by using it in that sense ''as well as'' in a less precise American way that mostly just means (ideologically) (Soviet) Communist. No offense intended; I try to have a bit of fun, especially on Talk pages. But in seriousness, I think saying dissidence is ''inherently impossible'', and that all opponents of a Revolution are, ''by definition'' "reactionaries", has a quaint and doctrine air about it. [[User:Orthogonal|-- orthogonal]] 03:55, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

::::Ah! Thanks for the explanation! I agree of course that not all opponents of a revolution are reactionaries. Reactionaries are those who wish/attempt to recover situation that was before the revolution. [[User:Drbug|[[User:Drbug| D'''r''' B'''u'''g]][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit&section=new &nbsp;]]] 07:39, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

::As far as I understand, dissident is one who opposes to the established regime. In the transitional time there couldn't be dissidence, but only competitive opinions on further development. [[User:Drbug|[[User:Drbug| D'''r''' B'''u'''g]][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit&section=new &nbsp;]]] 15:15, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

:::Man, you are a Marxist! Thesis, ''then'' antithesis, and only ''then'' synthesis. Once Castro came to power, he ''was'' the power, and his opponents were dissidents. But in all seriousness, you sound like the very model of the "New Soviet Man", and I think that adds a useful diversity to Wikipedia. Glad to meet ya. [[User:Orthogonal|-- orthogonal]] 16:24, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

::::Many thanks for your kind words and brilliant compliments. As for the "dissident" word, read Merriam Webster or [[dissident]]. I'm right, you are not, it's that simple :-). [[User:Drbug|[[User:Drbug| D'''r''' B'''u'''g]][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit&section=new &nbsp;]]] 19:47, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

: It's a bit difficult to find neutral information via a quick google search. [http://www.adam-matthew-publications.co.uk/collect/p426.htm This] site sells UK Foreign Office microfilms. One description states: "''In the six months since the revolution began, the execution of over 500 Batista supporters led the world’s media to describe the state of the country as a ‘bloodbath’ and sparked worldwide concern over the real intentions of Castro’s pro-communist government''". [http://members.fortunecity.com/stalinmao/cuba/raol/raol.html This] communist pro-Castro website states "''In the wake of the revolution, Raœl [Castro] began to punish Batista supporters. After he became head of the Armed Forces he directed the execution of nearly 100 officers and soldiers of the Batista Army and ordered them buried in a mass grave near Santiago de Cuba.''" A staunchly anti-Castro website reports the execution of 72 prisoners by firing squad but doesn't state why they had been imprisoned [http://www.aguadadepasajeros.bravepages.com/english/january59.htm]. This anti-Castro site [http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12467] might describe the same incident: "''Raúl Castro directed a mass execution of over 70 captured soldiers by bulldozing a trench, standing the condemned men in front of it, and mowing them down with machine guns''". Right-wing US site interview with apparently anti-Castroist: "''...in January 1959, Raúl personally supervised the execution of over one hundred police and military officials and Batistiano soldiers.''"

:While there are reports of purges of dissidents including revolutionaries that criticised Castro's regime, I couldn't find reports that these dissidents were executed. This superficial google search suggests that only Batista supports opposing the revolution were executed.[[User:Pir|pir]] 13:16, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

::I still suppose that purges of dissidents started much later than "relations with the US rapidly deteriorated". Therefore I remove mention of dissidents from this sentence at all. I hope, there's no problems with this? [[User:Drbug|[[User:Drbug| D'''r''' B'''u'''g]][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit&section=new &nbsp;]]] 15:15, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

:::Look, Castro (according to the facts pir has unearthed (bad pun unintended)) had his own salsa-flavored, [[Mariachi Band]] accompanied [[Katyn Forest]], but without any convenient [[Nazi]]s to blame it on. What do we call this, "removal of the remnants of hostile classes"? If we don't call the victims "dissidents", what do we call them? "Revanchists"? "Chernosotennyj"? "Bonapartists"? "Oboronchestvo"? "Trotsky-fascist hyenas"? Cuba's own "White-Guard"? "Bukharinites?"

::::We should conform the NPOV policy. Disputable allegations and implicating wording violate this policy. So they shouldn't be used, ok? [[User:Drbug|[[User:Drbug| D'''r''' B'''u'''g]][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit&section=new &nbsp;]]] 19:47, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

== Anti-communist bias ==

I have reread the article and it became evident to me that is contains strong anti-communist/anti-Castro bias. We should somehow try to make this article NPOV... [[User:Drbug|[[User:Drbug| D'''r''' B'''u'''g]][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit&section=new &nbsp;]]] 15:21, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

:Which is it, anti-communist or anti-Castro? [[User:Orthogonal|-- orthogonal]] 16:25, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

::The problem is that I don't know exact numbers and facts too much, but my bull shit detector is ringing off the wall. For example, in the History section, pictures of flourishing Cuba before the revolution and emphasizing problems of communist Cuba look extemely non-NPOV. Use of wording like '''a small group of less than 100 "rebeldes"''' triggers the alarm too. In the Economy section there is evident nonsense that remittance from exiles amounts to third of the Cuban economy (at least wording imply this). '''All''' three paragraphs about Cuban economy describe how much US help to Cuba. All Cuban achievements and positive sides are omitted. This article evidently deserves huge refactoring... [[User:Drbug|[[User:Drbug| D'''r''' B'''u'''g]][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit&section=new &nbsp;]]] 20:09, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

:::I've checked the article's history and found that all bias is introduced by '''single''' anonymous user: 66.176.126.243. And all words that trigger alarm, are written by him. Therefore, I will try to accurately revert '''his''' changes only. It will allow the comunity to continue with clear article. [[User:Drbug|[[User:Drbug| D'''r''' B'''u'''g]][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit&section=new &nbsp;]]] 20:30, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

== Removal of 66.176.126.243's changes. ==

I have removed all the contibutions of 66.176.126.243. All these contributions are disputable at the best. Considering that there was long consensus on the article before his edits, I suppose it's a right thing to remove his bias and to continue NPOV consensus editing.

It's interesting that details of meaning of one single word led to discusion and investigation during which serious fault was found - and, hopefully, eliminated!

[[User:Drbug|[[User:Drbug| D'''r''' B'''u'''g]][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit&section=new &nbsp;]]] 20:56, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

== Anti-communist bias ?!?!?! ==

Please, is there anybody who wants to write the truth out there? I can't.

"subsumed these other groups quickly and violently" is not right!

"When Castro started to execute political opponents", sure?

"Castro claimed he was always a communist", please show me documents!

"Historically, it has always been advanced. For example, in terms of "quality of life indicators" such as percentage of the population in the middle class, per capita income, infant mortality, life expectancy and literacy, to name a few, Cuba consistently ranked 3rd in the hemisphere throughout the 1940's and 1950's. Only the U.S. and Canada had higher statistics, according to World Bank and IMF Factbooks. In 1958, the year before the Cuban Revolution, Cuba had a higher literacy rate than Italy and Spain.",

and the Gini Index before 1957 was not the same as now (Every boys sleeps under a roof in Cuba, but maybe in Guantanamo NO)

If you have these data, link the official documents, I want see, I want believe you.

:While the changes this user made might be a bit hasty, in general I support them. If any seeks to revert the article, please discuss here first. --[[User:LegCircus|LegCircus]] 16:22, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)

== There seems to be some bias and hostility erupting in here. ==

It's just my opinion but the +++ marked notes claiming that particular authors of the article are writing on a bias side. The admended article that claims to be from Encarta also strikes me of right-wing bias, especially the last few paragraphs making statements of "dictatorship". I don't object to the use of the word "dictatorship" in the article when used to illustrate the views particular groups and governments that label Cuba as such, but it's should be used as a definative term of the type of government. I'm not saying that Cuba isn't a dictatorship, I'm just saying that it's very biased language to use when their are many who feel otherwise. The govenment should be referred to as a "parliamentary republic" when not describing biased opinions. [[User:Tommyrot]]

I agree. This article is in a bad state. As to referring to the Cuban dictatorship as a "parliamentary republic", that is about as unbiased as referring to a orange as a onion. It may not be a one man dictatorship, but it is certainly no democracy. [[User:Fred Bauder|Fred Bauder]] 13:48, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

How about "Communist State"? It's what the CIA world factbook defines as the Cuba government type, and the wikipedia entry for Communist State seems to be accurate from my knowledge.

:That article is troubled but that label is accepable. I do have a question though, as I have never closely followed events in Cuba. In both the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China, power was and is closely held by a small number of men in the politburo. Is this true in Cuba or is the actual government more broadly based? Not just on paper but in terms of decision making? [[User:Fred Bauder|Fred Bauder]] 15:32, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

:: People, I've just added a small section on religion. Concerning politics: I'm not sure "Communist state" is a form of government. The official name is "Republic of Cuba". What type of republic is not specified, though "Socialist republic" might be appopriate. I don't think any communist country defines itself as communist; usually it's either "People's Republic" or "Socialist Republic" or something of that sort.

::Fred, power in Cuba lies mostly in the hands of the Council of Ministers (about a dozen people headed by the bearded guy) as well as the armed forces (about a dozen generals headed by his brother). The speaker of parliament is influential but the parliament itself mainly serves to approve decisions already made. I know next to nothing about Soviet Union or China, so I can't compare, but Cuba is by no means democratic and state control (and the threat of repression) is omnipresent (not that Western countries are all shining examples of democracy...). Having said that, its political elites are (as far as I can tell) not overly corrupt (though the police is) and a class society (compared with other places) does not really exist as such; the biggest disparities in income are something like 6:1, and slightly larger for purchasing power. Also, the revolution WAS in all likelihood supported by a majority of the population.

[[User:Kashasu|kashasu]]

== Trade with US ==

"In late 2003, and early 2004, both tourism levels and nickel prices increased, as has the Cuban trade with the USA. One other factor in the "recovery" of the Cuban economy is the remittances of Cuban-Americans (which constitute one-third of the Cuban Economy). Cuba currently trades with almost every nation in the world except the US."

One sentence says Cuba trades with US the next one says it doesnt. Does it?