It’s symbolic only. Much of the anti-Cuba sentiment in the US is personal, based on resentment of the actions of the Castro regime itself, not International Communism.
Castro is a Pavlov’s bell. Without him, the embarguistas will have no coherent organizing point.
Yeah, one way to look at it, is that once the two old brothers heave off, in the short term you’d be left with a politbureau of aging career apparatchiks and a few up-and-coming younger versions thereof, most or all of whom nobody but hard-core Cubawonks will have ever heard of in the US, and of whom many in the USA (outside of the SW 8th St. crowd) would be able to say to themselves, OK now what did these guys ever do to us?
A friend of mine in college was studying the Soviet Union, and even got to travel there a few years before it fell. I remember him telling me once that Communism could work (maybe not his exact word) in a country as long as the original revolutionary leader was alive. I think his point was that, despite all its claims to the contrary, there is a cult of personality to it. Castro was there; he saw what conditions were like before the revolution, he took the risks, got people to believe in and follow him. When he takes actions that are supposed to be for the good of everyone, there’s a certain credibility to it. As soon as the leadership passes to some bureaucratic functionary who just failed his way up the chain of command, the buy-in amongst the citizens starts to go away.
Communism has failed, or at least drastically morphed, pretty much everywhere it’s been tried, except Cuba (where Castro’s still alive and his brother is in power) and North Korea (which has kept the personality cult going).
By G-d, that makes me want to wear sandals to a Cuban restaurant frequented by Canadians, belch, chew with my mouth open and spit tobacco juice on the floor! 
Even among Cuban-Americans today, the only age group that still supports the embargo are the over-70’s. For the younger ones, increasingly a majority, it’s just a quirky thing the *abuelos *talk about over dominoes while reminiscing about their boyhood mansions and servants back under Bautista, but not something to be taken all that seriously by those for whom the US is home.
For a long time, the way to win an election in Florida was to be more strident about denouncing Castro than the other guy. Now, that seems to have become a negative. The *viejos *are dying off and not contributing to campaigns as much, while the commercial interests favoring normalization and willing to pay the politicians to get it are politically stronger than ever.
:dubious: How old is Senator Marco Bellumfrigidum Rubio?
You think he’s sincere with that ritualistic posturing? He’s a pol. He’s simply chosen the wrong constituency to pander to, out of habit and party tradition, not adequately realizing the world has evolved since 1962. A large number of his party fellows have stuck themselves in the same trap.
I took Elvis’ point to be about the demographic, as polled, not to mean each and every individual in that age group. The cut-off I’ve seen is at age 65, not 70, but close enough. More than 50% of Cuban-Americans over age 65 still support the embargo. A majority in cohorts under that age do not support it.
Don’t forget to talk really loudly, and only in English. You want to tick off all the stereotype boxes.
Thanks! Just speak English loudly enough and add an “O” randomly to the ends of words. Check.
What was Cuba like before Castro took over? I admittedly know little about the history of the island, but wasn’t Batista a dictator? I would have little sympathy for those who hate Castro if they were living large under the reign of a dictator and are only mad because a different dictator overthrew their cash cow. Its not like Cuba was a democracy and Castro turned it Communist and all of the people who fled were noble freedom fighters.
Pretty much. Batista would take their money and Castro wouldn’t.
WHERE lS EL BEACHO?
EL CHEESEBURGERO, POR FAVOR!
I believe I have got the hang of it!
(John Mace, pleace do NOT say that in Puerto Rico. Or go ahead and do, it oughta be interesting…)
About Batista times: Yeah, things pre-Castro apparently were not as great as some claim even if not as horrible, either, as some others allege. And neither are all the old anti-Castro hardliners old-family oligarchs longing for their manors and servants. Many were in fact at the time up-and-coming new middle class types that even supported the Revolution initially, and then got the shaft once it gained power – for them the sense of betrayal was even more intense, and by now carry 50 years of biterness.
From what I’ve read and mostly from conversation with Cuban friends, pre-Castro Cuba had an alternancy of time-and-region-typical “strongman” rule with intervals of nominally-constitutional governments (but pay no attention to the man behind the curtain… lots of “intervention” by US political and economic interests). And the not-unusual scenario of establishing a constitutional regime and then when it failed to democratically elect the “right” candidate, down it goes.
Batista had climbed to top dog since shortly before WW2, first as string-pulling boss and later as formal head of the state. Though nowhere near the sort of full-out psycho regime like Trujillo’s or Duvalier’s next door, you’d better know who was in charge and you had better know your place, zip your lip and behave. If you did, you could prosper, it was an active free market in the major cities with lots of cultural and social ebullience and money to be made – but there was a lot of graft and corruption protecting the established order and interests, with the US East Coast mafias putting in a lot of influence in the resort and casino industry in this period, using it heavily for their moneylaundering operations.
Though at the beginning of his career he had been more of a populist, it seems once entrenched Batista became more oligarchical, more violently repressive and more blatantly corrupt: all that helped drive people into opposition and made a radical movement to “clean house” from top to bottom look more attractive. And I must speculate that his added repressiveness may have had another effect: suppressing most effectively those who *could *have been a moderate alternative.
Cuba’s development index was well ahead of almost if not everyone in the region, which may be damning with faint praise in the Caribbean immediately after WW2 but hey, sensible despots make capital investments and run a business-friendly economy. Part of the problem was in fact that Cuba may have been the “wealthiest” Caribbean country in GNP terms but the masses did not feel that trickling down. Much of the industry and land was under absentee ownership so profits would leave town or stay in the hands of a limited group and the expansion of the middle class was not happening fast enough to effectively relieve the social pressure.
Yo soy un Americano spectacularrrr.
Yo necesito el fireworko spectacularrr.
No moleste el gato spectacularrrr.
Leave my cat alone, you crazy Hispanic!
Shoulda made it a state when we had the chance, but no! TR and the Monroe Doctrine got in the way. Another thing the Republicans fucked up. 
How do you say Banana Daiquiri in Cuban?