unfreeradical

It seems that the kind of discussion OP wants would be well aligned with the spirit of !actualsocialism101@lemmy.dbzer0.com. However, the community unfortunately seems to be inactive.

Truman oversaw the establishment of the postwar order, through which vanquished and depleted nations became loci for investment of capital, and for containment of China and the Soviet Union.

I naturally agree with the basic premise that the issue is oil not drugs.

I question that deficit spending is either threatening or threatened within the US. Further, I find it a tenuous case that US companies are not eager to restore the control of Venezuelan oil that they maintained preceding nationalization, such eagerness being more than sufficient to account for the motives of US action against Venezuela.

Impunity and nonaccountability for presidents is deeply embedded in the framework of American society. Unless they target corporations and the wealthy, they are securely protected despite their evildoing.

The reactionary entrenchment in the government, and the oppression of the native population, are directly consequences, and as such, inseparable from, Israel's nature as a settler-colonial ethnostate.

Israel was established by ethnic cleansing called the Nakba, on a premise of Jewish supremacy. Palestinians were displaced, murdered, and encaged. There is no possibility of such an entity developing along a path that is liberatory or egalitarian.

There is no possibility, either, of an entity that starves children also authentically originating from a premise of self defense.

I am simply explaining the situation. No one is making excuses. The situation is not ideal in Cuba, the same as everywhere around the world, but it is much less severe than you represent.

Raul is now retired. He had served as the head of the Party, which is a position elected from within the Party, and as the president, which is elected by the National Assembly, itself elected popularly. All of his political power was through such formal positions, which others were free to seek as his replacement.

Also, union participation is nearly universal. As such, an unpopular government is obviously unlikely to remain in power except by capitulating to worker demands. Moreover, workers wield more power, relative to the state, than mostly everywhere in the world, including the states that style themselves as the most free. Thus, even high-ranking offices carry limited power in practice.

The Castros rule Cuba in the same sense that the Windsors rule the UK. The role is effectively only ceremonial, with a minimum of formal powers.

The government and revolution are both immensely popular among Cubans.

The government monitors and represses subversive activities, but so does every other state.

Union participation is nearly universal, and laws are passed by a national popular assembly.

The Family Code was recently revised, through a process of nationwide contribution and referendum, which serves as an example of functional democracy.

All was achieved despite constant colonial bombardment by the US. Cubans correctly identify as their enemy the US government, not the government of Cuba.

I understand Stirner's conception of the "spook" as a mental construct not directly representing material reality.

As a social structure, the state certainly is part of material reality. State ideology, such as nationalism and authority, might more readily be considered a spook.

For my part, the preferred term is "ideology".

I'm fine, but I appreciate your genuine concern.

It seems like a misguided policy, and not particularly consistent with the "Code of Conduct".

Much of the value of the federated design is lost without the threat of defederation to incentivize good behavior and to isolate bad behavior.

I'm sorry you were forced to experience confusion.

I wish you well on your recovery.