Obviously you're in a socialist community here, and everyone agrees that the endgoal is worker internationalism and the abolition of states and borders.

Yes, and I consider myself a socialist leaning more on the anarchist side of things. I do have the same endgoal, though.

However, living in 2026, there are currently people subjected to the atrocities of the capitalist empires, who have fortunately managed to generate worker states which work for them and vice versa.

Yes, although I fundamentally disagree with the centralization of power in any form, though you cover why that's necessary in your next point.

You cannot possibly argue that in the current geopolitics, Cubans are better without a state than with it

In $CURRENTYEAR, absolutely, but they are also a state who has actively struggled and are currently struggling with external attempts at sabotage, mainly by the US. It's hard to imagine a better, short term alternative in our current global capitalist society, though.

and it's also hard to argue that Cuban patriotism is a force for good.

Can you please define patriotism in the specific way you're using it here? I define patriotism as a kind of blind pride in an idea of a state (and importantly, not always the specific current execution of those ideas) that often overrides logic like a religious belief if/when that country becomes a global power (see: US patriotism, Israeli patriotism, WWII-era German and Japanese patriotism). So given my definition and examples, you can see why I'm heasitent to endorse patriotism, even when a country is not yet powerful. It's that "yet" that is of massive importance in that previous sentence.

I am also not convinced that patriotism is why doctors treat people in any specific country over just caring for others in general regardless of a profit motive, since not everyone is driven solely by profit, otherwise, schoolteachers wouldn't exist in the US, for example. Seems like a bit of a leap of logic to me.