Is it really a failed state when most of its problems have been caused by a major outside aggressive influence? Wouldn't a failed state be when it has failed internally without sanctions or embargoes thanks to a certain global bully to its north.

[–] huf@hexbear.net 9 points 14 hours ago

i dunno, but let's do some science! let's stop the siege and wait a decade and see how failed they are.

[–] asdasd201@lemmygrad.ml 15 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Anyone who says Cuba is a failed state is either an imperialist mouthpiece or a person who believes the lies of the said mouthpiece.

[–] Lowleekun@hexbear.net 6 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I have only libs as friends (have been a lib not so long ago) and literally none of them would say Cuba is a failed state or deny they are besieged. That is only viable if your are deranged or american lib (corporate needs you to find the difference).

[–] asdasd201@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 11 hours ago

I live in a comprador semi-periphery which gave the reins to the Pindostan, so it still applies.

[–] BearerOfPickles@hexbear.net 11 points 16 hours ago

Besieged state. Easy. Next question

[–] fushuan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 15 hours ago

Not a failed state, if it had failed it would be a failed country. It's clear that if it's failing it's because of external influences, but regardless, don't reduce it's sovereignty into a "state", it's a proper country.

[–] StoneyPicton@lemmy.ca -1 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

First and foremost, besieged nation. Like The Soviet Union, besieged by corruption. The Middle East, besieged by greed for oil money. Saddest the former beacon, the United States of America, by religious dogmas. None of any examples you could mention will be different. They're all driven by people of similar character, made by their genes and life experiences. How can we change our evolution and society to reduce the impact of these negative influences.