For Castro this is a socialist democracy. This, though most of the multi-party democracy and a part of orthodox socialists questions his credentials. For the first Cuba has an autocracy as the population has no right to vote for different parties provide different programs or plans of government and the regime persecuted opponents. For the second revolution comes back to the market and creating a new oligarchy that inequality is increasing, so they proposed streamline and internationalize the process. In Cuba, the president has been agreed at meetings of party leaders and this has been endorsed by a National Assembly. This mechanism differs from the other American republics where the president is elected through massive election under universal suffrage and secret ballot.
It also is not the same as that proposed Lenin in The State and Revolution which stated that the State should leave dissolving and that leaders should be elected and revocable at grassroots assemblies. The Castro, however, defend their model, arguing that in the rest of the hemisphere’s heads of state are hereditary monarchs or presidents that comply to the dictatorship of money, that its leader has always had (during his 49 years in power) a large popular support (which does not have many leaders Democrats), that the major site of violating human rights in their island is in Guantanamo where they accuse the U.S. of torturing their prisoners, and that requires some monolithic to prevent U.S. and worms again become of their island brothel of America. For many social democrats and liberals Cuba has been doing a lot of red monarchy in which the head of state is inherited from the Castro brothers and castrated human rights and freedoms.