Without free and open elections a government leader is not legitimate.

[Adrahil]

36. That argument, however, fails at a basic level.

Substituting the judgement of a group of people with the judgement of one man is autocracy, no matter how you slice it.

If Castro was concerned, he could of authored a Constitution that protected the rights of oppressed peoples and placed a high bar for removing those protections. And then placed himself in the hands of the people.

And While I think you could argue that Castro saw himself, and many others saw him, as a champion of the poor, let us not forget the thousands of poor who risked (and sometimes suffered) death in order to LEAVE Cuba and come to the USA. Certainly, THOSE people did not see themselves as better off under the rule of a government in which they had no say.

I simply do not understand the American Left's love affair with autocrat who imprisoned political dissidents. Is it true that people are fine with autocracy, so long as they think it's the RIGHT autocrat? That's disturbing to me.