Churchill 6 years. Why ? The empire was defeated. Once CUba achieves that objective they can do the same.

Democracy is not the end all. It is supposed to be the means to an end, not the end. Cuba has achieved without democracy, better results than any country of similar wealth with or without democracy.

__________________
Viva Fidel

"If there ever was in the history of humanity an enemy who was truly universal, an enemy whose acts and moves trouble the entire world, threaten the entire world, attack the entire world in any way or another, that real and really universal enemy is precisely Yankee imperialism"

"North Americans don't understand... that our country is not just Cuba; our country is also humanity"

There is no end!

what end? the world is always changing and nations must change with it. Denying people the right to vote is cowardice and all about control.

They have done well but not because of lack of vote. What about when They have to replace the Castros? What then? You know when they are both dead.

Cuba will tear itself apart and you will jump on the new Revolution bandwagon.

What Cuba are they leaving the future.

__________________
Adaption is compromise. When the world met me it shuddered, groaned, it knelt at my feet. Illyria was all they needed to know.

I sell game curency here

Cuba is not a one man dictatorship. There is a party central committee a national assembly. The party will vote for the best candidate from there.

__________________
Viva Fidel

"If there ever was in the history of humanity an enemy who was truly universal, an enemy whose acts and moves trouble the entire world, threaten the entire world, attack the entire world in any way or another, that real and really universal enemy is precisely Yankee imperialism"

"North Americans don't understand... that our country is not just Cuba; our country is also humanity"

Unless it leads to a disintegration from people bickering for power like happened after Alexander the Great died.

__________________
"Have you no decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"
-Joseph Welch

I doubt it. The party have to elect the President. Fidel was elected, Raul was elected. They will have to vote and there will have to be a winner. What happens after that though is anyones guess.

__________________
Viva Fidel

"If there ever was in the history of humanity an enemy who was truly universal, an enemy whose acts and moves trouble the entire world, threaten the entire world, attack the entire world in any way or another, that real and really universal enemy is precisely Yankee imperialism"

"North Americans don't understand... that our country is not just Cuba; our country is also humanity"

Some Democracy is okay, but "democracy" isn't really all it's cracked up to be. We have too much Democracy, which is the problem. Look where it got us. Everyone thinks he's qualified to influence policy and vote for issues he has no training on.

Combine ignorant voting values with the fact that trailer park trash from Podunk Alabama have a vote equal to an intelligent, well-educated scientist is itself distasteful--something often made worse by local "Democracy" (e.g. school boards). We could do well with less "Democracy" and more meritocracy.

While a Dictatorship is obviously undesirable as it gives too much power, so also is our "WOOO DEMOCRACY" craze. That's partially Jackson and the Populist's fault. They started this silly ball rolling.

__________________

The irony, of course, is that you don't want the rest of us to have any say over policy, but everything would be peachy fruckin' keen if we just listened to you.

__________________
"Have you no decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"
-Joseph Welch

I never said you can't have any say. There would still be a democratic component, but more limited. Qualifications would be higher for both voting and office. I said we have too much democracy.

Instead, decisions regarding technical issues ought to be made by appropriate field experts, not average joe voting locally or know-nothing politicians. Many decisions are made by people who don't understand the issues or are not trained in them. That or they vote in people who aren't and then they make the decisions regarding those things. Only the relevant experts in a field have any real right to discuss policy seriously in that field. Bob McQuack from alabama doesn't. Local school boards would also be changed. No more voting for random idiots to stuff into it.

Quite frankly, if you don't meet a certain minimum intellectual criterion, you shouldn't even be allowed to vote. That and we need higher qualifications for office and many more scientific credentials in the legislature. Ideally, we should scrap the Senate and replace it with a committee of experts. Keep the House as a people's congress. The committee would be more like the House of Lords in structure.

__________________

Really? Who decides who is smart enough? and who pays for the cost in testing.

I have meet many people making very little money, without degrees, who are much smarter the Many collage grads.

More intellectual rambling, No practical logistics.

__________________
Adaption is compromise. When the world met me it shuddered, groaned, it knelt at my feet. Illyria was all they needed to know.

I sell game curency here

We could start off with a minimum criterion: being able to graduate high school and pass certain classes. If you can't graduate high school, easy as it is, you don't belong voting.

I never said any college degree would qualify you for office or that we would only allow one type of degree in either. The legislature and government require more specialized personnel for making decisions in fields that make use of those fields. Right now, we have an overabundance of lawyers and humanities majors. Largely just lawyers. We require more medical professionals, more physicists, chemists, biologists, etc. Science degrees are a good baseline because they involve a lot of the decisions societies make. They also have access to advanced reasoning training. They and logicians can think in ways others do not.

We could use more scientists and logicians in government. I would propose a panel from all the professional organizations choose candidates to run and the people vote on the approved panel of candidates.

The "senate" would be a series of committees with people from different professional disciplines working on problems regarding their area of expertise. Biologists would concentrate on issues of biology, ecologists on ecology, climatologists on climatology, lawyers on legal issues, etc.

We could also have a minimal intelligent limit. If you are sufficiently below normed average, you shouldn't vote.

__________________