This is a big deal. Though that it is a big deal is somewhat contradictory: Either Castro was the titular head of a movement, or he wasn’t. If he was, he mattered in that he was a function of his popular support. If he wasn’t, then he was a straight-up despot with no legitimacy.
Cuba does have relatively good health care system and such-and-such. But Castro was a murderous leader who used state violence to stymie political dissent.
It would be amazing — and unexpected — if his successor could maintain the good, and shun the bad.
“I’m outtie”?!!? I think I smell a CLUELESS reference!