Mao is not the only Communist dictator given gentle treatment in the New York Times this Sunday. Today’s ’Editorial Observer’ by Adam Cohen is, predictably – and foolishly – enough, a call for an end to the US embargo, but this passage is worth a second look:

“Cubans view Castro’s revolution, which deposed the American-backed dictator, Fulgencio Batista, as less about Marxism than about finally winning self-determination.”

Quite how anyone knows what those Cubans unable to escape communism are thinking is a mystery: freely expressed opinion is not a notable characteristic of Cuba under Castro. It is, however, true that the Cuban revolution was not initially explicitly Marxist. That it rapidly became so owed nothing to any American embargo (which didn’t yet exist) and everything to Castro’s search for a system that would offer him the philosophical ‘justification’ he needed to eliminate all potential opposition to his rule.

Communism provided Castro with the answer – and it still does. For Cubans, true self-determination remains elusive, and it will continue to be so until Castro’s regime finally collapses. The embargo can hasten that day. It should be kept in place.