Wow! Much correction is needed to convert this article to NPOV. El Jigüe 1/29/06
Indeed! And I shall begin the work. WGee 00:29, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
It is not correct to refer to the legal system as a "branch" (as in America), because the courts are completely subordinate to the dictator-for-life, Castro. -- Uncle Ed 16:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, Bruce. I was confusing Calvin (from the comics) and Castro for a moment. I was obliquely referring to Castro's imputed intent to remain in power in Cuba forever. The assertion that he intends to hold power for the rest of his life comes from a U.S. government source (on the page). -- Uncle Ed 17:36, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
How about President and Prime Minister for Life? lol
Well, the header for the legal system is just "Judiciary" now in the article, so it's no longer referred to as a "branch", so this dispute is resolved, right? Jack Waugh 20:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Is the entirety of this article in dispute, or only certain sections? It is quite a large article - perhaps the tag at the top should just be put over the sections that are disputed. -- DavidShankBone 15:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Would it not be more accurate to say at the start of the article that "Cuba has had a Communist political system since the 1959 revolution", rather than "Cuba has always been a communist state"? The latter statement cannot be true as the political system before 1959 was radically different than the current one? If you accept that should those words be amended? Freedom1968 ( talk) 11:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Noe that I moved the election material the elections page where it should be. Ultramarine 16:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
We must have something more substantial than the archetypal weasel words "critics say...", a random quote based on original research and a source slapped onto the page from some website or another which isn't attributed. Clarifying nothing.-- Zleitzen 15:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
216.178.51.235 added these comments on 15:03, 1 December 2006, which I am moving here, to be clearer. -- Beardo 23:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I accidentally added my discussion to the description page. my thoughts are: (this is NOT part of the summary, but a question: the summary sounds biased as I wonder why it is important to note that the civil constitution forces people to support socialism, when it seems the u.s. forces people to support democracy or be considered a traitor...what about the u.s. treatment of "communist" individuals during the cold war? so the cold war is over, but look at those who disagree with the white house, i.e., Valerie Plames' career ruination? what are the u.s. laws about what constitutes a treason? and how may the civil rights be affected...and, ahem, look at the treatment of muslims/muslim clerics/guantanamo--no TRIALs, no charges, and no habeous corpus for those detained...the u.s. wages a war to "defend democracy" and yet the defense of socialism is any different?! (user: christine g, 12/1/06)m
This page is a real discredit to Wikipedia. I came here to find out about the Cuban electroal system not to read a pile of inaccurate anti-Cuban propaganda (e.g. Fidel Castro is head of the Armed forces - not true). I won't bother to make corrections, I think the page is lost. If you want to read about the system try here instead [3] Db 12/23/06 - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.129.255 ( talk • contribs) on 21 December 2006
Any of the freedoms accorded to citizens can be exercised against the provisions of the constitution and laws, nor against the existence and objectives of the socialist state, nor against the decision of the Cuban people to build socialism and communism. violation of this principle are punishable. Teemu's latest edit refers to Raul Castro's complaints about the Cuban economy, corruption and the poor infrastructure, back in December. It was accompanied by the announcement of a process of national debate. Raul is quoted here to have said "In this Revolution we are tired of excuses" etc. [5] This is reminiscent of the Rectification period of the late 80s and I believe Fidel Castro has been saying similar things over the last 10 years or so, therefore I don't believe the statement is especially significant. I'm not sure which translation Teemu heard - the wording of his addition seems a little off the mark to me.-- Zleitzen 03:39, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
17. (SOUNDBITE) (Spanish) CUBAN INTERIM LEADER, RAUL CASTRO, SAYING:
"How can we have food if the majority of the producers - that is 65 percent of the production - aren't being paid? It has been months now and even though it is hard there is no remedy left than to face these problems and
to see if we have finished resolving them."
HAVANA, CUBA (FILE - DECEMBER 22, 2006) (TV CUBANA - ACCESS ALL)
23. (SOUNDBITE) (Spanish) CUBAN INTERIM LEADER, RAUL CASTRO, SAYING: "I believe that we are already tired of the justifications in this revolution, one just has to analyze how the things are and tell them how they
are - to tell the truth."
I believe this article needs to be updated as Fidel Castro (due to his current health) is unable to run the country)and the person in charge is his brother Raul Castro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.161.9.241 ( talk) 19:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
The article does need updating now that Fidel Castro has resigned, especially the Executive Branch section which names him as president. 121.91.122.78 ( talk) 11:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)Broon
Hi people in Cuban and Venezuelan governments. Why don't you tell Mr. Fidel Castro to annex Cuba into Venezuela before he retires. You could integrate your National Assemblies and judicial systems and other institutions, form a grass-root democracy, where small communities decide and work for themselves and your economies and natural resources, including the Cuban oil reserves could be used to fund the building of a strong 21th century socialist community. Teemu Ruskeepää ( talk) 10:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Corruption in Cuba is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Corruption_in_Cuba. So far it's just me (the nominator) and the article's creator. More input would be appreciated. Cosmic Latte ( talk) 11:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC). http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pol%C3%ADtica_de_Cuba
The government section of the "Outline of Cuba" needs to be checked, corrected, and completed -- especially the subsections for the government branches.
When the country outlines were created, temporary data (that matched most of the countries but not all) was used to speed up the process. Those countries for which the temporary data does not match must be replaced with the correct information.
Please check that this country's outline is not in error.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact The Transhumanist .
Thank you.
Which argument do you present to state Cuba as an authoritarian country? The 2008 Democracy Index of The Economist! An english capitalist newspaper. What did you expect they said? You should be more serious and objective. That Index presents Sweden, Norway, Netherlands, Denmark and Luxembourg as greatest democracies while they are ¡Constitutional Monarchies! Please... It would be said too that Cuba is the only country in the world with a sustainable development according to World Wide Fund for Nature and this is result of the politics.-- 186.48.239.245 ( talk) 07:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)Martin.uy
Miguel Diaz-Canel was named Cuba's new president [1] Xin Jing ( talk) 19:40, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm very new to and inexperienced with editing, and am unable to find anything on this subject in this page history – is it possible this has never been suggested? Scholars broadly agree that it is a totalitarian state, and it is listed as one by the non-partisan GlobalSecurity.org among many others. [1] Freedom House gives it a 14/100 for freedom, the same as the People's Republic of China, and it's at the very bottom of both their Press Freedom Index the [[Freedom_of_the_Press_(report)|Freedom of the Press report from Reporters Without Borders. It quite clearly meets every common definition of totalitarianism: North-Korean levels of censorship; one party with one "candidate" per office; secret police; political prisons with forced 12-hour-per-day labor; show trials and summary executions; torture; cult of personality; state control of all media; and on and on. I definitely propose that it be so described, and thus included in the Wikipedia list of totalitarian states. I look forward to the input of other editors! Tambourine60 ( talk) 17:42, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Freedom House is a biased source. I read their full 2020 report on Cuba and they twisted the facts to a degree which I didn't even believe was possible (at least on the part about the election process, which is the only one I already knew enough on the topic to realize they were misinterpreting how it works to a degree that i think it was itentional). We shouldn't use them as a source. Sorry for my bad english. 2.235.241.64 ( talk) 17:37, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
As you can see, Freedom House is funded mainly by the US government. 2.235.241.64 ( talk) 14:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
References
Most of this article relies on publications issued by the NGOs which are deeply connected to the US government, to prove to readers how "authoritarian" the Cuban government is. Loaded language is often used, like "authoritarian regime", or "political scientists agree...(which ones?); which absolutely reads as POV. There needs to be a NPOV overhaul on this article, and many of its references need to be updated, as articles from 2006 are being interpreted as facts in the year 2021. As such I have marked this article with the Political POV tag Skiyabu1 ( talk) 06:32, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Pleasa read wp:soap. Slatersteven ( talk) 19:33, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Does anybody know how the Candidacy Commissions are chosen? Or, if that's not public knowledge, can that fact be confirmed? 73.192.118.226 ( talk) 22:20, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
why remove information on how their elections work and replace it with "they are not democratic"? they have their own form of democracy separate from liberal democracy as you know it. why add unneeded bias to an already biased article? also, why remove information on their election laws? political campaigns being illegal seems like something people should know right away 2601:441:4000:BF40:8953:3E59:DD72:7CD ( talk) 12:13, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wow! Much correction is needed to convert this article to NPOV. El Jigüe 1/29/06
Indeed! And I shall begin the work. WGee 00:29, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
It is not correct to refer to the legal system as a "branch" (as in America), because the courts are completely subordinate to the dictator-for-life, Castro. -- Uncle Ed 16:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, Bruce. I was confusing Calvin (from the comics) and Castro for a moment. I was obliquely referring to Castro's imputed intent to remain in power in Cuba forever. The assertion that he intends to hold power for the rest of his life comes from a U.S. government source (on the page). -- Uncle Ed 17:36, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
How about President and Prime Minister for Life? lol
Well, the header for the legal system is just "Judiciary" now in the article, so it's no longer referred to as a "branch", so this dispute is resolved, right? Jack Waugh 20:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Is the entirety of this article in dispute, or only certain sections? It is quite a large article - perhaps the tag at the top should just be put over the sections that are disputed. -- DavidShankBone 15:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Would it not be more accurate to say at the start of the article that "Cuba has had a Communist political system since the 1959 revolution", rather than "Cuba has always been a communist state"? The latter statement cannot be true as the political system before 1959 was radically different than the current one? If you accept that should those words be amended? Freedom1968 ( talk) 11:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Noe that I moved the election material the elections page where it should be. Ultramarine 16:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
We must have something more substantial than the archetypal weasel words "critics say...", a random quote based on original research and a source slapped onto the page from some website or another which isn't attributed. Clarifying nothing.-- Zleitzen 15:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
216.178.51.235 added these comments on 15:03, 1 December 2006, which I am moving here, to be clearer. -- Beardo 23:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I accidentally added my discussion to the description page. my thoughts are: (this is NOT part of the summary, but a question: the summary sounds biased as I wonder why it is important to note that the civil constitution forces people to support socialism, when it seems the u.s. forces people to support democracy or be considered a traitor...what about the u.s. treatment of "communist" individuals during the cold war? so the cold war is over, but look at those who disagree with the white house, i.e., Valerie Plames' career ruination? what are the u.s. laws about what constitutes a treason? and how may the civil rights be affected...and, ahem, look at the treatment of muslims/muslim clerics/guantanamo--no TRIALs, no charges, and no habeous corpus for those detained...the u.s. wages a war to "defend democracy" and yet the defense of socialism is any different?! (user: christine g, 12/1/06)m
This page is a real discredit to Wikipedia. I came here to find out about the Cuban electroal system not to read a pile of inaccurate anti-Cuban propaganda (e.g. Fidel Castro is head of the Armed forces - not true). I won't bother to make corrections, I think the page is lost. If you want to read about the system try here instead [3] Db 12/23/06 - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.129.255 ( talk • contribs) on 21 December 2006
Any of the freedoms accorded to citizens can be exercised against the provisions of the constitution and laws, nor against the existence and objectives of the socialist state, nor against the decision of the Cuban people to build socialism and communism. violation of this principle are punishable. Teemu's latest edit refers to Raul Castro's complaints about the Cuban economy, corruption and the poor infrastructure, back in December. It was accompanied by the announcement of a process of national debate. Raul is quoted here to have said "In this Revolution we are tired of excuses" etc. [5] This is reminiscent of the Rectification period of the late 80s and I believe Fidel Castro has been saying similar things over the last 10 years or so, therefore I don't believe the statement is especially significant. I'm not sure which translation Teemu heard - the wording of his addition seems a little off the mark to me.-- Zleitzen 03:39, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
17. (SOUNDBITE) (Spanish) CUBAN INTERIM LEADER, RAUL CASTRO, SAYING:
"How can we have food if the majority of the producers - that is 65 percent of the production - aren't being paid? It has been months now and even though it is hard there is no remedy left than to face these problems and
to see if we have finished resolving them."
HAVANA, CUBA (FILE - DECEMBER 22, 2006) (TV CUBANA - ACCESS ALL)
23. (SOUNDBITE) (Spanish) CUBAN INTERIM LEADER, RAUL CASTRO, SAYING: "I believe that we are already tired of the justifications in this revolution, one just has to analyze how the things are and tell them how they
are - to tell the truth."
I believe this article needs to be updated as Fidel Castro (due to his current health) is unable to run the country)and the person in charge is his brother Raul Castro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.161.9.241 ( talk) 19:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
The article does need updating now that Fidel Castro has resigned, especially the Executive Branch section which names him as president. 121.91.122.78 ( talk) 11:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)Broon
Hi people in Cuban and Venezuelan governments. Why don't you tell Mr. Fidel Castro to annex Cuba into Venezuela before he retires. You could integrate your National Assemblies and judicial systems and other institutions, form a grass-root democracy, where small communities decide and work for themselves and your economies and natural resources, including the Cuban oil reserves could be used to fund the building of a strong 21th century socialist community. Teemu Ruskeepää ( talk) 10:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Corruption in Cuba is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Corruption_in_Cuba. So far it's just me (the nominator) and the article's creator. More input would be appreciated. Cosmic Latte ( talk) 11:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC). http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pol%C3%ADtica_de_Cuba
The government section of the "Outline of Cuba" needs to be checked, corrected, and completed -- especially the subsections for the government branches.
When the country outlines were created, temporary data (that matched most of the countries but not all) was used to speed up the process. Those countries for which the temporary data does not match must be replaced with the correct information.
Please check that this country's outline is not in error.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact The Transhumanist .
Thank you.
Which argument do you present to state Cuba as an authoritarian country? The 2008 Democracy Index of The Economist! An english capitalist newspaper. What did you expect they said? You should be more serious and objective. That Index presents Sweden, Norway, Netherlands, Denmark and Luxembourg as greatest democracies while they are ¡Constitutional Monarchies! Please... It would be said too that Cuba is the only country in the world with a sustainable development according to World Wide Fund for Nature and this is result of the politics.-- 186.48.239.245 ( talk) 07:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)Martin.uy
Miguel Diaz-Canel was named Cuba's new president [1] Xin Jing ( talk) 19:40, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm very new to and inexperienced with editing, and am unable to find anything on this subject in this page history – is it possible this has never been suggested? Scholars broadly agree that it is a totalitarian state, and it is listed as one by the non-partisan GlobalSecurity.org among many others. [1] Freedom House gives it a 14/100 for freedom, the same as the People's Republic of China, and it's at the very bottom of both their Press Freedom Index the [[Freedom_of_the_Press_(report)|Freedom of the Press report from Reporters Without Borders. It quite clearly meets every common definition of totalitarianism: North-Korean levels of censorship; one party with one "candidate" per office; secret police; political prisons with forced 12-hour-per-day labor; show trials and summary executions; torture; cult of personality; state control of all media; and on and on. I definitely propose that it be so described, and thus included in the Wikipedia list of totalitarian states. I look forward to the input of other editors! Tambourine60 ( talk) 17:42, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Freedom House is a biased source. I read their full 2020 report on Cuba and they twisted the facts to a degree which I didn't even believe was possible (at least on the part about the election process, which is the only one I already knew enough on the topic to realize they were misinterpreting how it works to a degree that i think it was itentional). We shouldn't use them as a source. Sorry for my bad english. 2.235.241.64 ( talk) 17:37, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
As you can see, Freedom House is funded mainly by the US government. 2.235.241.64 ( talk) 14:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
References
Most of this article relies on publications issued by the NGOs which are deeply connected to the US government, to prove to readers how "authoritarian" the Cuban government is. Loaded language is often used, like "authoritarian regime", or "political scientists agree...(which ones?); which absolutely reads as POV. There needs to be a NPOV overhaul on this article, and many of its references need to be updated, as articles from 2006 are being interpreted as facts in the year 2021. As such I have marked this article with the Political POV tag Skiyabu1 ( talk) 06:32, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Pleasa read wp:soap. Slatersteven ( talk) 19:33, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Does anybody know how the Candidacy Commissions are chosen? Or, if that's not public knowledge, can that fact be confirmed? 73.192.118.226 ( talk) 22:20, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
why remove information on how their elections work and replace it with "they are not democratic"? they have their own form of democracy separate from liberal democracy as you know it. why add unneeded bias to an already biased article? also, why remove information on their election laws? political campaigns being illegal seems like something people should know right away 2601:441:4000:BF40:8953:3E59:DD72:7CD ( talk) 12:13, 6 July 2022 (UTC)