Pages

Sunday, January 31, 2010

Child Trafficking Rings Kidnapping Haitian Kids from Hospitals

I found this article on Change.org that I thought you would be interested in.

http://humantrafficking.change.org/blog/view/child_trafficking_rings_kidnapping_haitian_kids_from_hospitals  

Child Trafficking Rings Kidnapping Haitian Kids from Hospitals

PUBLISHED JANUARY 26, 2010 @ 01:00PM PT

UNICEF has confirmed that at least 15 Haitian children have vanished from areas hospitals in the days since the earthquake, and they suspect those children -- and more -- are falling victim to child trafficking rings.

In the aftermath of the earthquake, thousands of children are separated from their families, with many not knowing whether their parents and guardians are still alive. And while humanitarian organizations can confirm children who go missing from hospitals and group homes, huge numbers of children remain on the streets, unaccounted for, just waiting to be picked up by traffickers.

A number of child protection organizations have come together to ask would-be parents not to apply to adopt Haitian children. Since the earthquake, the number of adoption applications for Haitian children has soared from 10 per month to 150 in a three day period. One U.S. adoption agency claimed it has already received over 1000 applications for children from Haiti. Child advocacy groups are concerned, however, that a bump in adoptions of Haitian children will only encourage child traffickers to abduct children and pass them off as orphans, hoping to make a tidy profit from their sale. While Western families trying to adopt Haitian children likely mean well, they may encourage child trafficking within the country. If you are considering adopting a Haitian child, please consider donating instead to a child protection organization working in Haiti.

But the children disappearing from hospitals may be on the road to a more sinister fate than life in the U.S. in a loving and stable home. Before the earthquake, Haitian children under 15 made up 45 percentof the population. With such a large number of poor youth, may children found themselves victims of sexual exploitation, forced domestic servitude, and forced labor. And as the chaos subsides and international aid moves out, the number of children victimized by traffickers will only increase. If the Haitian economy is too broken to support demand for maids or commercial sex, the children will likely be shipped to the Dominican Republic or other nearby countries, including the U.S.

Haiti is not a unique situation; human trafficking usually increases after natural disasters. In 2004, in the wake of the massive tsunami which struck Asia, thousands of children were left vulnerable. Human trafficking in that region saw a significant upswing. And the next major natural disaster will be the same. But for now, you can help the children of Haiti by supporting the organizations linked to above and not requesting to adopt a Haitian child right now.


Bob Belenky
80 Lyme Road, apt 105
Hanover, NH 03755-1229
603 678-4155 or 802 428-4141
                   ***
http://haitirenaissiance.blogspot.com/

Re: Great opportunity to engage youth in rebuilding Haiti

Well, you and I are not really very far apart in this.  It is difficult terrain we are treading and one in which either glowing success or humiliating disaster as well as unproductive dependency may be the outcomes despite our intentions to the contrary.  The negative outcomes have historically been seen far more often than the positives.  You know this as well as I.  

In any case, I, too, work with people I know well over time and on a micro scale.  But I also work with larger organizations I also know - less well, to be sure - in an effort to put what we are doing in a macro context.  

Surely we must work work on both fronts.  That is all I am arguing for.

PIH is an interesting example but not an easy one to follow.  From the start Farmer's idealism was combined with brilliant applied anthropology as well as medicine.  He made an early effort to become an integral part of the community. He lived in Cange, married there and was able to assemble considerable financial and medical power behind him.  He also not only knew the community but also knew the history of Haiti and its terrible relationship with imperial America and Europe.  His book, "The Uses of Haiti' remains one of the best on the subject.

Unfortunately, PIH, while it has extended its scope to Port-au-Prince during the crisis, remains focused on the Central Plateau and has little if any presence in the south, including Leogane and Jacmel where I have been involved.  The sad fact is that there remains no national public health initiative in Haiti that can mitigate disaster.  Haiti remains dependent on tiny, uncoordinated, random, discrete, idiosyncratic, scattered efforts, largely by foreigners often with the effect of weakening or destroying all that is Haitian, a situation much resented by the Haitians.  These efforts frequently have an unspoken self-serving agenda whether religious, economic, sexually exploitative, or merely self-advertising.  You are as well aware of this as I am.  Haitians are even more so.  There is much that we must hold in our minds when we enter a country such as Haiti.  It is not easy.

Anyway, there is little to argue about but much to discuss here.  Let's keep talking.

All the best,

Bob

PS  Check out my brand new Haiti blog:  http://haitirenaissiance.blogspot.com/


On Jan 31, 2010, at 10:26 AM, Lars Hasselblad Torres wrote:

Hi Bob,

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. Clearly groups like PIH have have grown from small community-based non-profits to major "first responders" and the focus of long term recovery efforts for a place like Haiti. And to me they suggest the power of small groups to effect significant change. Paul Farmer bucked all public health and economic convention for more than 10 years before Partners became sexy thanks in no small part to Tracy Kidder's book.

Anyway, I don't think we're going to come to anything like an "agreement" on one approach over the other. But to dismiss direct citizen-to-citizen efforts as pinprick and feel good is, I think, a shortfall and unfortunate.

Certainly I'm not unaware of the massive needs and large-scale efforts (I support the US Southern Command too in this, likely again where we differ). I am not unaware of the long term needs (, the structural political and economic deficits that have led to this situation (indeed one can see them play out far beyond our Western hemisphere). I am also not unfamiliar with the failure of Big Aid and the predatory secondary market in empty aid services. And I don't afford myself the luxury that I have anything to do with any lofty goals such as "rebuilding Haiti" or providing "long term relief."

I have nothing against any of the organizations you've cited Bob; I simply choose to focus my energy, and encourage others to do so as well, toward individuals that I know, whom I trust, and whom I have a long-term interest in supporting. The School of Lafond is one such small dot on the map. My promise is not to change the future of Haiti, and its not to solve any of the difficult challenges that lie ahead for the country. My promise is simply to respond to what a Haitian friend has indicated as their immediate need, and to work with him and his colleagues and community members over the next several years to support a thriving place for the children to live and learn, however they define it.

Foolish? Indeed, perhaps. And I can take responsibility for that. If you haven't, I still encourage you to read the background on the Lafond School at http://peacetiles.mixedmedia.us/?p=572

All the best,

lars

On 1/30/10 9:10 PM, "Robert Belenky" <robertbelenky@mac.com> wrote:

And a hearty hi to you, Lars and Regina,

This is an important issue you raise, Lars, and one that could well become part of the curriculum of whatever it is that we are about to start.

My take on it is a little different than yours, Lars.  Let me try to state the conclusions from my experiences as  briefly as I can now.  We can go into it more thoroughly during the course of the next several years.

If the problem one is dealing with is massive, pinprick solutions here and there will not accomplish much allowing a good feeling to wash over the donors.  Something like three million people have been directly affected by the earthquake.  Supplies are needed immediately.  Efforts need to be coordinate or there is duplication and people inevitably tripping over one another.  There needs to be a nationwide plan both for the emergency and for the long term, chronic disaster that has been Haiti's lot, overpopulation, loss of agriculture and industry, a lack of clean water, degradation of the environment, all wrapped up in the word "imperialism."

Haiti has long suffered from, among many other things, a government that can run or finance a nationwide effort.  That leaves the field to the NGOs.  Sadly, many of these are predatory or incompetent with the result that they do far more good than harm, knowing nothing about the country, the culture or having a real interest in pulling the country together beyond the requirements of the moment and often fail even at that.  I am sure you would agree.

But there are other NGOs, those that have been part of the scene for many years.  Some are a blend of local and international, some are entirely local.  They know the people, the culture and every detail of their community.  I have listed a few of such organizations in the email I circulated.  These include, Partners in Health, Fonkoze, the Lambi Foundation, Beyond Borders, the Haitian Ministries, CODEHA, NEGES, and Plan.  They are large enough to function not merely on a national or regional epidemiological level but on a precise, community level as well.  They might, hopefully, end by strengthening the weak government rather than undermining it further.

It is good for us to bring some supplies to Haiti when we go but let us not fool them or ourselves that we can bring about the solutions they wish for nor can we allow people to suppose that we will take responsibility for an entire community.  That is an easy assumption for very poor people to make when they see the ease with which we can secure money and supplies.  And it leads to severe disappointment and interpersonal disaster all around.

But what we can - and in my view should - do is build relationships, partnerships with people and institutions, schools, churches, community groups, sharing what we know, helping where we can, allowing Haitians to help us as well, as over time we grow together.  This is where projects like your tiles can play a crucial role.

So ... my preferred formula is to donate as much money as we can and necessary things as well to sufficiently large, maximally indigenous, organizations and at the same time to form close, relationships on a tiny, community level where solidarity is the goal.

I am rambling and it is getting late.  Let us consider this exchange the start of a dialogue.

Thank you for coming last night and for opening an important discussion.

Warmly,


Bob





On Jan 30, 2010, at 5:59 PM, Lars Hasselblad Torres wrote:

Hi Bob and Regina,

Its an effort started by a group called Architecture for Humanity. One of their architects built the youth center in Denilton, South Africa where a permanent Peace Tiles mural was installed in 2006. Their director, Cameron Sinclair is a great guy; he's in Davos right now. They've done good work for many years.

Also, I'll try to restate what I tried to squeeze in as I had to leave the other night: we don't need big groups to channel assistance these days. I believe powerfully in people organizing, and top down aid isn't the only way for young people to raise, and channel, resources – including financial – these days. I'd be happy to be part of something, but a) the school needs a clear sense purpose and b) youth need direct input in the process from my perspective. I am passionate about one things: the older kids get, the more agency they need. They don't need top-down planning on their behalf. They need the opportunity explore, connect, and impact. A school-wide effort would need planning, and classroom connection. We cant, in my opinion, lay lack of connection to a place like Haiti at the feet of student groups like the Student Council. We need to craft the conditions in which they can make those connections themselves. I very much agree with the parent who said that smart boards and maps aren't going to do it. It begins with some of those like Bob can tell. And many others.

If there's an opportunity to support such an effort, I'd be happy to.

Right now, my efforts are entirely focused on rebuilding a school outside of Petit Goave. While creating art is one part of what I do, it is only a piece of a larger ambition to create lasting bonds between communities, and connections to issues. More here: http://peacetiles.mixedmedia.us/?p=572

Hope this helps. Best,

lars


On 1/30/10 2:03 PM, "Robert Belenky" <robertbelenky@mac.com <x-msg://168/robertbelenky@mac.com> > wrote:

Yes, it does look interesting.  I just learned of the organization this morning myself.  If I have a moment, I will try to find out more about it.  But, you know, this is a very fluid scene we are talking about and the need out there is huge in any direction one chooses to look.  All it takes is deciding what it might make sense to do and going ahead and doing it.  I have enjoyed being a lone ranger in this mode for many years.  But hooking up with a solid, like-minded organization helps one avoid comment mistakes and blind alleys.

Bob


  
On Jan 30, 2010, at 12:21 PM, Regina Quinn wrote:

Lars, this looks really interesting! Do you know much about the organization? I'm cc'ing Bob to see if he has any info.
 
Regina
 


 
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Lars Hasselblad Torres <lhtorres@mit.edu <x-msg://168/lhtorres@mit.edu> > wrote:
http://studentsrebuild.org <http://studentsrebuild.org/>  <http://studentsrebuild.org/>  



Bob Belenky
80 Lyme Road, apt 105
Hanover, NH 03755-1229
603 678-4155 or 802 428-4141
                   ***
Haitian Earthquake Relief:  http://web.mac.com/robertbelenky/The_Book_of_Bob/Earthquake%21.html





Bob Belenky
80 Lyme Road, apt 105
Hanover, NH 03755-1229
603 678-4155 or 802 428-4141
                   ***
Haitian Earthquake Relief:  http://web.mac.com/robertbelenky/The_Book_of_Bob/Earthquake%21.html





Bob Belenky
80 Lyme Road, apt 105
Hanover, NH 03755-1229
603 678-4155 or 802 428-4141
                   ***
http://haitirenaissiance.blogspot.com/

The History of Haiti, Part I

The Haitian Revolution of 1791-1803

An Historical Essay in Four Parts by Bob Corbett


Overview of First Essay

The shortest account which one typically hears of the Haitian Revolution is that the slaves rose up In 1791 and by 1803 had driven the whites out of Saint-Domingue, (the colonial name of Haiti) declaring the independent Republic of Haiti. It's certainly true that this happened. But, the Revolution was much more complex. Actually there were several revolutions going on simultaneously, all deeply influenced by the French Revolution which commenced In Paris in 1789. In this first of four essays on The Haitian Revolution, I will do two things:
  1. Analyze the antecedents of the revolution and clarify some of the complex and shifting positions of the various interest groups which participated in it.
  2. Follow the earliest days of three revolutionary movements:
    1. The planters' move toward independence.
    2. The people of color's revolution for full citizenship.
    3. The slave uprising of 1791.

Prelude to the Revolution:  1760 to 1789

The colony of Saint-Domingue, geographically roughly the same land mass that is today Haiti, was the richest colony in the West Indies and probably the richest colony in the history of the world. Driven by slave labor and enabled by fertile soil and ideal climate, Saint-Domingue produced sugar, coffee, cocoa, indigo, tobacco, cotton, sisal as well as some fruits and vegetables for the motherland, France.
When the French Revolution broke out in 1789, there were four distinct sets of interest groups in Saint-Domingue, with distinct sets of interests and even some important distinctions within these many categories:
  • The whites
  • The free people of color
  • The black slaves
  • The maroons
The Whites
There were approximately 20,000 whites, mainly French, in Saint-Domingue. They were divided into two main groups:
The Planters
These were wealthy whites who owned plantations and many slaves. Since their wealth and position rested entirely on the slave economy they were united in support of slavery. They were, by 1770, extremely disenchanted with France. Their complaint was almost identical with the complaints that led the North American British to rebel against King George in 1776 and declare their independence. That is, the metropole (France), imposed strict laws on the colony prohibiting any trading with any partner except France. Further, the colonists had no formal representation with the French government.
Virtually all the planters violated the laws of France and carried on an illegal trade especially with the fledgling nation, the United States of America. Most of the planters leaned strongly toward independence for Saint-Domingue along the same lines as the U.S., that is, a slave nation governed by white males.
It is important to note at the outset that this group was revolutionary, independence-minded and defiant of the laws of France.
Petit Blancs
The second group of whites were less powerful than the planters. They were artisans, shop keepers, merchants, teachers and various middle and underclass whites. They often had a few slaves, but were not wealthy like the planters.
They tended to be less independence-minded and more loyal to France.
However, they were committed to slavery and were especially anti-black, seeing free persons of color as serious economic and social competitors.
The Free Persons of Color
There were approximately 30,000 free persons of color in 1789. About half of them were mulattoes, children of white Frenchmen and slave women. These mulattoes were often freed by their father-masters in some sort of paternal guilt or concern. These mulatto children were usually feared by the slaves since the masters often displayed unpredictable behavior toward them, at times recognizing them as their children and demanding special treatment, at other times wishing to deny their existence. Thus the slaves wanted nothing to do with the mulattoes if possible.
The other half of the free persons of color were black slaves who had purchased their own freedom or been given freedom by their masters for various reasons.
The free people of color were often quite wealthy, certainly usually more wealthy than the petit blancs (thus accounting for the distinct hatred of the free persons of color on the part of the petit blancs), and often even more wealthy than the planters.
The free persons of color could own plantations and owned a large portion of the slaves. They often treated their slaves poorly and almost always wanted to draw distinct lines between themselves and the slaves. Free people of color were usually strongly pro-slavery.
There were special laws which limited the behavior of the free people of color and they did not have rights as citizens of France. Like the planters, they tended to lean toward independence and to wish for a free Saint-Domingue which would be a slave nation in which they could be free and independent citizens. As a class they certainly regarded the slaves as much more their enemies than they did the whites.
Culturally the free people of color strove to be more white than the whites. They denied everything about their African and black roots. They dressed as French and European as the law would allow, they were well educated in the French manner, spoke French and denigrated the Creole language of the slaves. They were scrupulous Catholics and denounced the Voodoo religion of Africa. While the whites treated them badly and scorned their color, they nonetheless strove to imitate every thing white, seeing this a way of separating themselves from the status of the slaves whom they despised.
The Black Slaves
There were some 500,000 slaves on the eve of the French Revolution. This means the slaves outnumbered the free people by about 10-1. In general the slave system in Saint-Domingue was especially cruel. In the pecking order of slavery one of the most frightening threats to recalcitrant slaves in the rest of the Americas was to threaten to sell them to Saint- Domingue. Nonetheless, there was an important division among the slaves which will account for some divided behavior of the slaves in the early years of the revolution.
Domestic Slaves
About 100,000 of the slaves were domestics who worked as cooks, personal servants and various artisans around the plantation manor, or in the towns. These slaves were generally better treated than the common field hands and tended to identify more fully with their white and mulatto masters. As a class they were longer in coming into the anti-slave revolution, and often, in the early years, remained loyal to their owners.
Field Hands
The 400,000 field hands were the slaves who had the harshest and most hopeless lives. They worked from sun up to sun down in the difficult climate of Saint-Domingue. They were inadequately fed, with virtually no medical care, not allowed to learn to read or write and in general were treated much worse than the work animals on the plantation. Despite French philosophical positions which admitted the human status of slaves (something which the Spanish, United States and British systems did NOT do at this time), the French slave owners found it much easier to replace slaves by purchasing new ones than in worrying much to preserve the lives of existing slaves.
The Maroons
There was a large group of run-away slaves who retreated deep into the mountains of Saint-Domingue. They lived in small villages where they did subsistence farming and kept alive African ways, developing African architecture, social relations, religion and customs. They were bitterly anti-slavery, but alone, were not willing to fight the fight for freedom. They did supplement their subsistence farming with occasional raids on local plantations, and maintained defense systems to resist planter forays to capture and re-enslave them.
It is hard to estimate their numbers, but most scholars believe there were tens of thousands of them prior to the Revolution of 1791. Actually two of the leading generals of the early slave revolution were maroons.
Pre-Revolutionary Moments and Complex Alliances
The French Revolution of 1789 In France was the spark which lit The Haitian Revolution of 1791. But, prior to that spark there was a great deal of dissatisfaction with the Metropolitan France and that dissatisfaction created some very strange alliances and movements.
The Independence Movement
France enforced a system called the "exclusif" on Saint-Domingue. This required that Saint-Domingue sold 100% of her exports to France alone, and purchased 100% of her imports from France alone. The French merchants and crown set the prices for both imports and exports, and the prices were extraordinarily favorable to France and in no way competitive with world markets. It was virtually the same system as that which England had forced on its North American colonies and which finally sparked the independence movement in these colonies.
Like the North Americans, the Saint-Dominguans did not abide strictly by the law. A contraband trade grew up with the British in Jamaica and especially with British North America, and after its successful revolution, the United States. The Americans wanted molasses from Saint- Domingue for their burgeoning rum distilleries, and Saint-Domingue imported huge quantities of low quality dried fish to feed to the slaves.
Nonetheless, the planters (both white and free people of color) chafed under the oppression of France's exclusif. There was a growing independence movement, and in this movement the white planters were united with the free people of color. It was a curious alliance, since the whites continued to oppress the free people of color in their social life, but formed a coalition with them on the political and economic front.
The petit blancs remained mainly outside this coalition, primarily because they were not willing to form any sort of alliance with any people of color, free or not. The petit blancs were avowed racists and were especially offended and threaten by the elevated economic status of most of the free people of color.
It is important to note that this independence movement did not include the slaves in any way whatsoever. Those who were a party to the movement were avowed slave owners and their vision of a free Saint-Domingue was like the United States, a slave owning nation.
Slave Rebellions
Simultaneously there were constant slave rebellions. The slaves never willing submitted to their status and never quit fighting it. The slave owners, both white and people of color, feared the slaves and knew that the incredible concentration of slaves (the slaves outnumbered the free people 10-1) required exceptional control. This, in part, accounts for the special harshness and cruelty of slavery in Saint-Domingue. The owners tried to keep slaves of the same tribes apart; they forbade any meetings of slaves at all; they tied slaves rigorously to their own plantations, brutally punished the slightest manifestation of non-cooperation and employed huge teams of harsh overseers.
Nonetheless the slaves fought back in whatever way they could. One of the few weapons the masters could not control were poisons, which grew wild In Saint-Domingue, the knowledge of which the slaves brought with them from Africa. The history of slavery In Saint-Domingue, like that of slavery everywhere, is a history of constant rebellion and resistance. One of the most famous and successful revolutions prior to 1791 was the Mackandal rebellion of 1759. The slave Mackandal, a houngan knowledgeable of poisons, organized a widespread plot to poison the masters, their water supplies and animals. The movement spread great terror among the slave owners and killed hundreds before the secret of Mackandal was tortured from a slave. The rebellion was crushed and Mackandal brutally put to death. But, it reflects the constant fear in which the slave owners lived, and explains the brutality of their system of control.
The slave rebellions were without allies among either the whites or free people of color. They were not even fully united among themselves, and the domestic slaves especially tended to be more loyal to their masters.
The maroons, in the meantime, were in contact with rebellious slaves, but they had few firm alliances. Nonetheless, their hatred of slavery, their fear of being re-enslaved and their desire to be free and safe in their own country, made them ready allies were a serious slave revolution to begin.
The Earliest Period of the Revolution:  1789-1791
The Revolution in France, 1789 ...
It is necessary to remind the readers briefly of what was going on in France at this time. Prior to the storming of the Bastille on July 14, 1789, France was ruled by a king. King Louis XVI and his queen Marie Antoinette were only two in a long line of greedy monarchs who cared little about their people. Nonetheless, a movement for a general concept of human rights, universal citizenship and participation in government had developed among the intellectuals and was taking root among the common people. This movement finally broke into full revolution in 1789 and ordinary citizens, for the first time in France's history, had the rights of citizenship.
People in France were divided into two camps, the red cockades, those in favor of the revolution and the white cockades, those loyal to the system of monarchy. (This had to do with the color of the hats they wore.) This whole social upheaval had a necessary impact on Saint-Domingue, and people had to begin to choose up sides.
In France the tendency was to be a revolutionary or a monarchist, and to remain fairly strongly within that camp. In Saint-Domingue, however, things were much more fluid. Not only were all the issues which plagued France being played out, but the additional issues of the independence movement, the movement toward rights for free people of color and the question of slavery. This caused Saint-Dominguans to shift from the side of the revolution to the side of monarchy and vice versa with blinding suddenness, and makes following the line-up of whose on whose side very difficult. It always depends on when in the revolution you are speaking.
The Free Persons of Color
The revolution progressed quickly in France, and on August 26, 1789 the newly convened Estates General (a general parliament of the people) passed the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen. This declaration immediately raised the question of slavery.
The Aimis des Noirs (Friend of the Blacks).
In 1787 an anti-slavery society was founded in France. it was modeled after the anti-slavery society of England and influenced by Thomas Clarkson. They also had strong contacts with American abolitionists. They wanted the gradual elimination of slavery, yet they wanted the retention of France's prosperous West Indian colonies. After the declaration of rights, they were forced to make important decisions on where they stood. Rather than address the question of slavery, they decided to follow their gradualist position and to address the question of free persons of color.
There was a strong case to make for this group. The slaves were properly and thus the question of their humanity could be put on the back burner. Human Rights were something for white French males, not for blacks or property-less French men or any women. However, the free persons of color were a different matter all together. Not only were they not prop- erty, but were themselves property owners and tax payers. The Amis des Noirs decided that this would be the place to begin their battle, not with the question of the abolition of slavery itself.
On March 28, 1790 the General Assembly in Paris passed an ambiguous piece of legislation. While the various colonies were given a relatively free hand in local government, an amendment required that "all the proprietors... ought to be active citizens. The amendment was both too much and not enough. It seemed to possibly exclude the petit blancs, thus increasing their anger against the free persons of color, and, on the other hand, it seemed to argue for citizenship for free persons of color who were property owners -- which was most of them.
Back in Saint-Domingue there were two separate issues, each demanding different and contradictory alliances. It was these conflicting demands on peoples' loyalties which caused much of the shifting about in these early years. On the one hand the petit blancs and the white planters formed an uneasy union against the French bureaucrats. The issue was independence and local control. The bureaucrats were seen as strongly pro-French. Thus the battle lines were draw on the basis of loyalty to the new revolution in France. All the whites of Saint-Domingue began to sport the red cockade of the revolution, and the French bureaucrats were painted with the white cockade of French monarchy.
However, this was an uneasy alliance. The white planters were not revolutionaries in the French sense at all. Nor did they want full rights for the petit blancs. It was a doomed alliance and didn't last long.
On the other hard, the natural allies of the white planter's were the free people of color. Both were from the wealthy class, both supported independence and slavery and neither wanted to change the traditional control of society by wealthy propertied people. The change would have been to allow the wealthy free persons of color their share in power, wealth and social prestige in this union. This was extremely difficult for the white planters to do until it was too late.
Some saw this necessity, but couldn't convince the others. One white planter argued: 'Win over the gens de couleur class to your cause. They surely could not ask for more than conforming their interests with yours, and of employing themselves with the zeal for common security. It is therefore only a question of being just to them and of treating them better and better." But, of course, this advice went unheeded and the coalitions all broke down in due course.
The immediate result of the General Assembly meeting was for Saint-Domingue to bring the white population to the brink of a three-sided civil war. The petit blancs formed a Colonial Assembly at St. Marc for home rule. The white planters saw this was totally against their interests, thus they withdrew and formed their own assembly at Cape Francois (today Cape Haitien). At the same time this split between the two colonial white groups gave strength to the French government officials who had lost effective control of the colony. Each of the three forces were poised to strike against the other. Yet, in the crazy contradictions of this whole situation, the petit blancs and white planters each carried on their own private war of terror against the free people of color.
Rich Saint-Domingue mulatto, Vincent Oge had been in Paris during the debates of March, 1790. He had tried to be seated as a delegate from Saint- Domingue and was rebuffed. He and other Saint-Dominguan men of color had tried to get the General Assembly to specify that the provision for citizenship included the free persons of color. Having failed in all of that, Oge resolved to return to Saint-Domingue and one way or the other, by power of persuasion or power of arms, to force the issue of citizenship for free persons of color.
Oge visited the famous anti-slavery advocate Thomas Clarkson in England, then went to the United States to meet with leading abolitionists and to purchase arms and munitions. He returned to Saint-Domingue and began to pursue his cause. Upon seeing that there was no hope to persuade the whites to allow their citizenship, Oge formed a military band with Jean-Baptist Chavannes. They set up headquarters in Grand Riviere, just east of Cape Francois and prepared to march on the stronghold of the colonists. It is important to note that Oge consciously rejected the help of black slaves. He wanted no part of any alliance with the slaves, and regarded them in the same way the whites did -- a property.
The Deaths of Oge and Chavannes
In early November Oge and Chavannes' forces were badly beaten, many of their tiny band of 300 captured while Oge and Chavannes escaped into Santo Domingo, the Spanish part of the island. The Spanish happily arrested the two and turned them over to the whites in Cape Francois. On March 9, 1791 the captured soldiers were hanged and Oge and Chavannes tortured to death in the public square, being put on the rack and their bodies split apart. The whites intended to send a strong message to any people of color who would dare to fight back.
Thus ended the first mini-war in the Haitian Revolution. It had nothing to do with freeing the slaves and didn't involve the slaves in any way at all. Yet the divisions among slave owners, the divisions among the whites, the divisions among colonial French and metropolitan French, the divisions among whites and free persons of color, all set the stage to make possible a more successful slave rebellion than had previously been possible.
The Slave Rebellion of August 21, 1791
Typically historians date the beginnings of the Haitian Revolution with the uprising of the slaves on the night of August 21st. While I've given reasons above to suspect that the revolution was already under way, the entry of the slaves into the struggle is certainly an historic event. And the event is so colorful that not even Hollywood would have to improve upon history.
Boukman and the Voodoo Service
For several years the slaves had been deserting their plantations with increasing frequency. The numbers of maroons had swollen dramatically and all that was needed was some spark to ignite the pent up frustration, hatred and impulse toward independence.
This event was a Petwo Voodoo service. On the evening of August 14th Dutty Boukman, a houngan and practitioner of the Petwo Voodoo cult, held a service at Bois Caiman. A woman at the service was possessed by Ogoun, the Voodoo warrior spirit. She sacrificed a black pig, and speaking the voice of the spirit, named those who were to lead the slaves and maroons to revolt and seek a stark justice from their white oppressors. (Ironically, it was the whites and not the people of color who were the targets of the revolution, even though the people of color were often very harsh slave owners.)
The woman named Boukman, Jean-Francois, Biassou and Jeannot as the leaders of the uprising. It was some time later before Toussaint, Henry Christophe, Jean-Jacques Dessalines and Andre Rigaud took their places as the leading generals who brought The Haitian Revolution to its final triumph.
Word spread rapidly of this historic and prophetic religious service and the maroons and slaves readied themselves for a major assault on the whites. This uprising which would not ever be turned back, began on the evening of August 21st. The whole northern plain surrounding Cape Francois was in flames. Plantation owners were murdered, their women raped and killed, children slaughtered and their bodies mounted on poles to lead the slaves. It was an incredibly savage outburst, yet it still fell short of the treatment the slaves had received, and would still continue to receive, from the white planters.
The once rich colony was in smoldering ruins. More than a thousand whites had been killed. Slaves and maroons across the land were hurrying to the banner of the revolution. The masses of northern slaves laid siege to Cape Francois itself.
In the south and west the rebellion took on a different flavor. In Mirebalais there was a union of people of color and slaves, and they were menacing the whole region. A contingent of white soldiers marched out of Port-au-Prince, but were soundly defeated. Then the revolutionaries marched on Port-au-Prince. However, the free people of color did not want to defeat the whites, they wanted to join them. And, more importantly, they didn't want to see the slaves succeed and push for emancipation. Consequently, they offered a deal to the whites and joined forces with them, turning treacherously on their black comrades in arms.
This was a signal to the whites in Cape Francois of how to handle their difficult and deteriorating situation. On September 20, 1791 the Colonial Assembly recognized the Paris decree of May, and they even took it a step further. They recognized the citizenship of all free people of color, regardless of their property and birth status. Thus the battle lines were drawn with all the free people, regardless of color, on the one side, and the black slaves and maroons on the other.
Meanwhile, in France word of the uprising caused the General Assembly to re-think its position. The Assembly thought it had gone too far with the May Decree and had endangered the colonial status of Saint-Domingue. Consequently on September 23rd the May Decree was revoked. Then the Assembly named three commissioners to go to Saint-Domingue with 18,000 soldiers and restore order, slavery and French control.
When the commissioners arrived In December, 1791, their position was considerably weaker than the General Assembly had suggested. Instead of 18,000 troops they had 6,000. In the meantime the whites in the south and west had attempted to revoke the rights of free people of color, and broken the alliance. Not only did the free people of color break with the whites and set up their own struggle centered in Croix-des-Bouquets, but many whites, particularly the planters, joined them. Thus thus south and west were divided into three factions, and the whites in Port-au-Prince were in a most weakened position.
In Cape Francois the Colonial Assembly did not move against the free people of color, but the slaves intensified their struggle and the whites were virtual prisoners in the town of Cape Francois. Most of the northern plain was in ruins.
Back in France it became apparent that the First Civil Commission with its 6,000 troops could not bring peace back to Saint-Domingue. When the authorities in France debated the issue it was clear to them that the problem was to bring unity between the free people of color and the whites against the rebelling slaves. Thus once again Paris reversed itself and with the historic and landmark Decree of April, 4, 1792, the free people of color were finally given full citizenship with the whites.
The Assembly in Paris prepared a Second Civil Commission to go to Saint- Domingue and enforce the April 4th decree. This commission contained Felicite Leger Sonthonax, a man who was to figure importantly in the future of The Haitian Revolution.


This is the first in a four part series of articles on the Haitian Revolution written by Bob Corbett.
Go to Part 2
Go to Part 3
Go to Part 4

Saturday, January 30, 2010

A strategy for being helpful


If the problem is one of dealing with is on a catastrophic scale , pinprick solutions here and there will not accomplish much beyond allowing a good feeling to wash over the donors.  As you know, something like three million people have been directly affected by the recent earthquake.  Supplies are needed immediately.  Efforts need to be coordinated or there is bound to be duplication and omissions with people inevitably tripping over one another.  

There needs instead to be a nationwide planned effort both for the emergency and for the long term, chronic disaster that has been Haiti's lot including overpopulation, loss of agriculture and industry, a lack of clean water, degradation of the environment, and all of it wrapped up in the word "imperialism."

Haiti has long suffered from, among many other things, a government that cannot run or finance anything resembling a nationwide effort.  That leaves the field to NGOs.  Sadly, many of these are predatory or incompetent with the result that they do far more good than harm, knowing nothing about the country, the culture or having a real interest in pulling the country together beyond the requirements of the moment and they often fail even at that.  I am sure you would agree.

But there are other NGOs, those that have been part of the scene for many years.  Some are a blend of local and international, some are entirely local.  They know the people, the culture and every detail of their community.  I have listed a few of such organizations in the email I recently circulated.  These include, Partners in Health, Fonkoze, the Lambi Foundation, Beyond Borders, the Haitian Ministries, CODEHA, NEGES, and Plan.  They are large enough to function not merely on a national or regional epidemiological level but on a precise, community level as well.  They have the capacity, hopefully, to end by strengthening the weak government rather than undermining it further.

It is good for us to bring some supplies to Haiti when we visit but let us not fool the Haitians or ourselves to suppose that we can bring about the solutions they wish for nor can we allow people to imagine that we will take responsibility for correcting all the woes of their entire community.  That is an easy assumption for very poor people to make when they see the ease with which we Americans are able to secure money and supplies.  It leads to severe disappointment and interpersonal disaster all around.

But what we can - and in my view should - do is build relationships, partnerships with people and institutions, schools, churches, community groups, sharing what we know, making friends, helping where we can, allowing Haitians to help us as well, as over time we grow together.  This is where projects like your tiles can play a crucial role.

My preferred formula is to donate as much money as we can and contribute necessary things as well to large, maximally indigenous organizations while at the same time forming close relationships on a microscopic community level where solidarity is the goal.

How to Help

How to help:  Don’t go there yet - unless you have medical training and are affiliated with an appropriate organization.  Instead, make monetary contributions to a solid, close-to-the-ground organization that has a history of effectiveness and takes minimal overhead fees.  I believe that such may be found among the following (listed in no particular order):
  • Partners in Health - Paul Farmer's outfit: http://www.pih.org/home.html and http://www.karmatube.org/videos.php?id=1853livepage.apple.comlivepage.apple.com
  • Doctors Without Borders, a very well known and respected NGO: http://doctorswithoutborders.org/.  Reports have it that its offices in Haiti were destroyed by the earthquake.  But they surely continue to function at a very high level.
  • Mercy Corps which provides all sorts of emergency help including technical assistance: http://www.mercycorps.org/whoweare
  • Beyond Borders - a progressive Protestant outfit that has a strong focus on Haiti: http://www.beyondborders.net/index.php
  • The Lambi Fund - a Washington-based, well run, Haitian founded NGO: http://www.lambifund.org/
  • Fonkoze - a micro-lending, Haitian-American bank that has been extremely helpful in Haiti in both development and response to emergencies: http://www.fonkoze.org/
  • Yéle Haiti (http://www.yele.org/)  - “Yéle’s community service programs include food distribution and mobilizing emergency relief. Grammy-Award winning musician, humanitarian and Goodwill Ambassador to Haiti Wyclef Jean founded Yéle Haiti in 2005.” - website.  Questions have recently been raised, however, about Yéle’s high overhead and transparency.
  • The Haitian Ministries of the Norwich, CT Diocese, a progressive Catholic organization that has a long, honorable history of work in Haiti: http://www.haitianministries.org/
  • A joint effort:  SOA (School of the America’s) Watch is joining other Latin America and Caribbean solidarity and human rights groups in raising funds for food and water, health and shelter relief for those affected by the earthquake and for community re-building efforts: http://www.soaw.org/
  • This came as a suggestion from a friend:  http://shelterbox.org/.  It is a British NGO that deals specifically with international disaster relief and reportedly takes NO overheard!
  • There is Madre, a marvelous women’s rights organization that is taking an active role in the relief operation in concert with Partners in Health:  https://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5095/t/3527/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=396
  • “Plan” (http://www.planusa.org/) is an international agency that supports children in poor countries.  It has had a strong presence in Haiti since 1937 and is very active in the current crisis.  Its focus is in the beautiful city of Jacmel, hard hit by the earthquake but out of the international media’s view.
  • “Mercy and Sharing,” an American organization I have only recently run across sponsors a program called, “Haiti Children” https://www.haitichildren.com/. I know nothing about it beyond what is on the web site.  But it sounds good.  They are deeply involved in earthquake relief work and have many  on-going support services for poor and abandoned children as well.  They provide volunteer opportunities. 
Two more organizations.  They are small, unique but effective and worthy of support:
  • Dr. Carolle Jean-Murat, a Haitian-American ob/gyn, has a small NGO (http://www.healththroughcommunications.org/) that supports women and children in La Vallee de Jacmel, a mountain region high above the city of Jacmel.  She is particularly interested in the work of a long-time friend of mine, Godfroy Boursiquot, “Gody,” through his youth group, CODEA.  Gody is a highly respected educator in La Vallee and in Port-au-Prince as well.  
  • Finally:  The NEGES Foundation, a Haitian-American outfit co-founded and co-led by Marie Yoleine Gateau-Esposito and James Philemy, friends I have worked closely with over the past five years. NEGES runs many impressive programs in the city of Leogane (http://www.necn.com/Boston/World/2010/01/16/Haitians-in-town-of-Leogane/1263671749.html) at the very epicenter of the earthquake (http://www.flickr.com/photos/carelp/sets/72157623093421961/show/).  Yoleine and James will use any and all contributions effectively and with transparent honesty. http://www.negesfoundation.org/.  NEGES will soon sponsor work camps in Leogane through Volunteers for Peace:  http://www.vfp.org.  That would probably be one of the best ways to visit Haiti in the near future while making a useful personal contribution, learning a tremendous amount and changing one’s life in profound but unforeseeable ways..
Note:  During the emergency, Western Union http://www.westernunion.com/ will transfer money to Haiti at no cost!  It also offers a simple link for making contributions to Mercy Corps.
* * *
A review of Haitian/US history:
Haiti's Tragic History Is Entwined with the Story of America
By Robert Parry, Consortium News
Posted on January 14, 2010, Printed on January 14, 2010
http://www.alternet.org/story/145142/
Announcing emergency help for Haiti after a devastating 7.0-magnitude earthquake, President Barack Obama noted America’s historic ties to the impoverished Caribbean nation, but few Americans understand how important Haiti’s contribution to U.S. history was.
In modern times, when Haiti does intrude on U.S. consciousness, it’s usually because of some natural disaster or a violent political upheaval, and the U.S. response is often paternalistic, if not tinged with a racist disdain for the country’s predominantly black population and its seemingly endless failure to escape cycles of crushing poverty.
However, more than two centuries ago, Haiti represented one of the most important neighbors of the new American Republic and played a central role in enabling the United States to expand westward. If not for Haiti, the course of U.S. history could have been very different, with the United States possibly never expanding much beyond the Appalachian Mountains.
In the 1700s, then-called St. Domingue and covering the western third of the island of Hispaniola, Haiti was a French colony that rivaled the American colonies as the most valuable European possession in the Western Hemisphere. Relying on a ruthless exploitation of African slaves, French plantations there produced nearly one-half the world’s coffee and sugar.
Many of the great cities of France owe their grandeur to the wealth that was extracted from Haiti and its slaves. But the human price was unspeakably high. The French had devised a fiendishly cruel slave system that imported enslaved Africans for work in the fields with accounting procedures for their amortization. They were literally worked to death.
The American colonists may have rebelled against Great Britain over issues such as representation in Parliament and arbitrary actions by King George III. But black Haitians confronted a brutal system of slavery. An infamous French method of executing a troublesome slave was to insert a gunpowder charge into his rectum and then detonate the explosive.
So, as the American colonies fought for their freedom in the 1770s and as that inspiration against tyranny spread to France in the 1780s, the repercussions would eventually reach Haiti, where the Jacobins’ cry of “liberty, equality and fraternity” resonated with special force. Slaves demanded that the concepts of freedom be applied universally.
When the brutal French plantation system continued, violent slave uprisings followed. Hundreds of white plantation owners were slain as the rebels overran the colony. A self-educated slave named Toussaint L’Ouverture emerged as the revolution’s leader, demonstrating skills on the battlefield and in the complexities of politics.
Despite the atrocities committed by both sides of the conflict, the rebels – known as the “Black Jacobins” – gained the sympathy of the American Federalist Party and particularly Alexander Hamilton, a native of the Caribbean himself. Hamilton, the first U.S. Treasury Secretary, helped L’Ouverture draft a constitution for the new nation.
Conspiracies
But events in Paris and Washington soon conspired to undo the promise of Haiti’s new freedom.
Despite Hamilton’s sympathies, some Founders, including Thomas Jefferson who owned 180 slaves and owed his political strength to agrarian interests, looked nervously at the slave rebellion in St. Domingue. “If something is not done, and soon done,” Jefferson wrote in 1797, “we shall be the murderers of our own children.”
Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, the chaos and excesses of the French Revolution led to the ascendance of Napoleon Bonaparte, a brilliant and vain military commander possessed of legendary ambition. As he expanded his power across Europe, Napoleon also dreamed of rebuilding a French empire in the Americas.
In 1801, Jefferson became the third President of the United States – and his interests at least temporarily aligned with those of Napoleon. The French dictator was determined to restore French control of St. Domingue and Jefferson was eager to see the slave rebellion crushed.
Through secret diplomatic channels, Napoleon asked Jefferson if the United States would help a French army traveling by sea to St. Domingue. Jefferson replied that “nothing will be easier than to furnish your army and fleet with everything and reduce Toussaint [L’Ouverture] to starvation.”
But Napoleon had a secret second phase of his plan that he didn’t share with Jefferson. Once the French army had subdued L’Ouverture and his rebel force, Napoleon intended to advance to the North American mainland, basing a new French empire in New Orleans and settling the vast territory west of the Mississippi River.
In May 1801, Jefferson picked up the first inklings of Napoleon’s other agenda. Alarmed at the prospect of a major European power controlling New Orleans and thus the mouth of the strategic Mississippi River, Jefferson backpedaled on his commitment to Napoleon, retreating to a posture of neutrality.
Still – terrified at the prospect of a successful republic organized by freed African slaves – Jefferson took no action to block Napoleon’s thrust into the New World.
In 1802, a French expeditionary force achieved initial success against the slave army, driving L’Ouverture’s forces back into the mountains. But, as they retreated, the ex-slaves torched the cities and the plantations, destroying the colony’s once-thriving economic infrastructure.
L’Ouverture, hoping to bring the war to an end, accepted Napoleon’s promise of a negotiated settlement that would ban future slavery in the country. As part of the agreement, L’Ouverture turned himself in.
Napoleon, however, broke his word. Jealous of L’Ouverture, who was regarded by some admirers as a general with skills rivaling Napoleon’s, the French dictator had L’Ouverture shipped in chains back to Europe where he was mistreated and died in prison.
Foiled Plans
Infuriated by the betrayal, L’Ouverture’s young generals resumed the war with a vengeance. In the months that followed, the French army – already decimated by disease – was overwhelmed by a fierce enemy fighting in familiar terrain and determined not to be put back into slavery.
Napoleon sent a second French army, but it too was destroyed. Though the famed general had conquered much of Europe, he lost 24,000 men, including some of his best troops, in St. Domingue before abandoning his campaign.
The death toll among the ex-slaves was much higher, but they had prevailed, albeit over a devastated land.
By 1803, a frustrated Napoleon – denied his foothold in the New World – agreed to sell New Orleans and the Louisiana territories to Jefferson. Ironically, the Louisiana Purchase, which opened the heart of the present United States to American settlement, had been made possible despite Jefferson’s misguided collaboration with Napoleon.
“By their long and bitter struggle for independence, St. Domingue’s blacks were instrumental in allowing the United States to more than double the size of its territory,” wrote Stanford University professor John Chester Miller in his book, The Wolf by the Ears: Thomas Jefferson and Slavery.
But, Miller observed, “the decisive contribution made by the black freedom fighters … went almost unnoticed by the Jeffersonian administration.”
The loss of L’Ouverture’s leadership dealt a severe blow to Haiti’s prospects, according to Jefferson scholar Paul Finkelman of Virginia Polytechnic Institute.
“Had Toussaint lived, it’s very likely that he would have remained in power long enough to put the nation on a firm footing, to establish an order of succession,” Finkelman told me in an interview. “The entire subsequent history of Haiti might have been different.”
Instead, the island nation continued a downward spiral.
In 1804, Jean-Jacques Dessalines, the radical slave leader who had replaced L’Ouverture, formally declared the nation’s independence and returned it to its original Indian name, Haiti. A year later, apparently fearing a return of the French and a counterrevolution, Dessalines ordered the massacre of the remaining French whites on the island.
Though the Haitian resistance had blunted Napoleon’s planned penetration of the North American mainland, Jefferson reacted to the shocking bloodshed in Haiti by imposing a stiff economic embargo on the island nation. In 1806, Dessalines himself was brutally assassinated, touching off a cycle of political violence that would haunt Haiti for the next two centuries.
Jefferson’s Blemish
For some scholars, Jefferson’s vengeful policy toward Haiti – like his personal ownership of slaves – represented an ugly blemish on his legacy as a historic advocate of freedom. Even in his final years, Jefferson remained obsessed with Haiti and its link to the issue of American slavery.
In the 1820s, the former President proposed a scheme for taking away the children born to black slaves in the United States and shipping them to Haiti. In that way, Jefferson posited that both slavery and America’s black population could be phased out. Eventually, in Jefferson’s view, Haiti would be all black and the United States white.
Jefferson’s deportation scheme never was taken very seriously and American slavery would continue for another four decades until it was ended by the Civil War. The official hostility of the United States toward Haiti extended almost as long, ending in 1862 when President Abraham Lincoln finally granted diplomatic recognition.
By then, however, Haiti’s destructive patterns of political violence and economic chaos had been long established – continuing up to the present time. Personal and political connections between Haiti’s light-skinned elite and power centers of Washington also have lasted through today.
Recent Republican administrations have been particularly hostile to the popular will of the impoverished Haitian masses. When leftist priest Jean-Bertrand Aristide was twice elected by overwhelming margins, he was ousted both times – first during the presidency of George H.W. Bush and again under President George W. Bush.
Washington’s conventional wisdom on Haiti holds that the country is a hopeless basket case that would best be governed by business-oriented technocrats who would take their marching orders from the United States.
However, the Haitian people have a different perspective. Unlike most Americans who have no idea about their historic debt to Haiti, many Haitians know this history quite well. The bitter memories of Jefferson and Napoleon still feed the distrust that Haitians of all classes feel toward the outside world.
“In Haiti, we became the first black independent country,” Aristide once told me in an interview. “We understand, as we still understand, it wasn’t easy for them – American, French and others – to accept our independence.”
© 2010 Consortium News All rights reserved.
* * *
Links
Appendix
Tuesday 19 January 2010
by: Tom F. Driver and Carl Lindskoog, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed
Dear Mr. Brooks,
In your January 15, 2010, opinion piece in The New York Times, "The Underlying Tragedy," you present what you seem to believe is a bold assessment of the situation in Haiti and what you certainly know is a provocative recommendation for Haiti's future. You also offer some advice to President Obama. In order to successfully keep his promise to the people of Haiti that they "will not be forsaken" nor "forgotten" the president, you say, has to "acknowledge a few difficult truths." What follows, however, is so shockingly ignorant of Haitian history and culture and so saturated with the language and ideology of cultural imperialism that no valuable "truths" remain. Please allow us, therefore, to present you with some more accurate truths.
First, Haiti is not a clear-cut case of the failure of international aid to achieve poverty reduction. For almost its entire existence, Haiti has been shouldered with a load of immense international debt. The Haitian people had the audacity to break their chains and declare independence in 1804, but were later forced by France to repurchase their freedom for 150 million francs, a burden that the country has had to carry throughout the 20th century.
What's more, the "aid" Haiti has received from its powerful neighbor to the North has never been the sort that would help the country reduce poverty or achieve meaningful development. In the early 20th century, the principle aid Haiti received from the United States came in the form of a brutal military occupation that lasted from 1915 to 1934. After "Papa Doc" Duvalier ascended to power, "aid" meant assistance to a ruthless (but conveniently anti-communist) dictator. The US gave Duvalier $40.4 million in his first four years in power, briefly suspended military and economic assistance to the dictator in 1963, but resumed shortly thereafter, restoring full military and economic aid to Duvalier by 1969. In the early 1970s and 1980s, when "Baby Doc" Duvalier was at the helm, the "aid" the United States and other international agencies contributed failed to reduce poverty, but did enrich foreign investors in the newly constructed assembly industry. Economic policies that the US forced upon Haiti decimated its agriculture for the benefit of American farming while driving Haiti's peasants into Port-au-Prince and other cities where they found few jobs and scarce housing. Four years after Baby Doc's departure, the Haitian people decided to help themselves by democratically electing a new leader, but the United States aided Jean-Bertrand Aristide's domestic opponents in the coup of 1991 and did so again in 2004. It is no wonder then that that such aid from the United States has failed to lift Haiti out of poverty.
Equally unconvincing is your argument about "progress-resistant cultural influences," which brings us to important truth number two: Haitian culture is not "progress-resistant" as anyone familiar with the examples you yourself provide can attest to. If Vodou or "the voodoo religion" as you put it, "spreads the message that life is capricious and planning futile," how do the majority of Haitians manage to survive on scant resources and less than two dollars a day? How do so many Haitians manage to travel abroad, find and maintain difficult jobs and send money back home if not through careful planning and a fierce defense of precious life? How do the nationwide customers of Fonkoze, the Haitian banking operation that teaches literacy and business practices to curbside marketers to whom it makes small loans, achieve such strong records of loan repayment? In fact, it might be Haitian culture itself (and even Vodou) which allows Haitians to persist. After all, the Vodou spirit Ogou (St. Jacques) is honored as a clever planner and master of skills. So was the champion of Haiti's war of independence, Gen. Toussaint L'Ouverture, a onetime slave who entered history as a military and diplomatic genius.
The third important truth we have to offer (and we hope President Obama is listening as well) is the opposite of your call for "intrusive paternalism" as the solution to Haiti's woes: Haiti does not need nor does it want the paternalism of the United States. Haiti is literally dying of cultural imperialism.
Whenever America's leaders and pundits speak of subordinate peoples, the ideology of imperialism shines through. As it does in your words, Mr. Brooks, so it has done for far too many earlier Americans. President William McKinley, for example, facing the difficult question of how he was to govern the newly-conquered Filipinos worried that:
left "to themselves they are unfit for self-government-and they would soon have anarchy and misrule ... [So] there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God's grace do the very best we could by them."
Closer to home, those who worried about an earlier form of "progress-resistant cultural influences" decided it was better to remove the children of Native-American families than to let them absorb the backwardness of their pagan and uncivilized parents and community. A common refrain by these "reformers" was, "kill the Indian, save the man." And now, Mr. Brooks, you propose to save the Haitians from themselves by replacing Haitian cultural values and institutions with "middle-class assumptions, an achievement ethos and tough, measurable demands." Imperialism, whether economic or military, is the primary reason for the conditions that so worsened the impact of the earthquake on January 12. Haitians need less imperialism, not more.
During the Vietnam War, an American officer famously stated that "it became necessary to destroy the village in order to save it." Today, Haiti is virtually destroyed. The earthquake having done the hard part, Mr. Brooks, you think "intrusive paternalism" will save it. Lacking a foundational understanding of Haitian history and culture, and bearing the familiar colors of American imperialism, you and your ilk will do vastly more harm than good.
Tom F. Driver
Paul Tillich professor emeritus of theology and culture, Union Theological Seminary
Carl Lindskoog
doctoral candidate, Department of History, The Graduate Center, City University of New York
pastedGraphic.pdfpastedGraphic_1.pdfpastedGraphic_2.pdfpastedGraphic_3.pdfpastedGraphic_4.pdfpastedGraphic_5.pdf