>I think that there *was* good reason back at the end of the 1950s to hope
>that Castro would be different and better than the rest of
>really-existing-socialism (though he has turned out not to be).
Compared to what, Brad? Cuba may not be as democratic as you'd like, but considering that they've been the targets of unrelenting U.S. hostility for almost 40 years, it's really not much of a surprise. And the development record is pretty hard to match? What other small, poor country in Latin America or the Caribbean has done anywhere near as well in feeding, educating, and providing health care for its people? Why is the implied standard of comparison Miami or Stockholm and not Port au Prince?
Doug