23695: (reply) Esser: Re: 23684: (reply) anon.: Re: 23681: (reply) Esser: Re: 23676: (reply) anon.: Re: 23666: (reply) Esser: Re: 23661: (reply) Simidor Re: 23618... (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: D. Esser <torx@joimail.com>

You are disingenuous by misstating my quote: I wrote "Of course skin
color has it's importance in the discourse..." I did not write about
color and it's importance, a not so subtle difference.

I don't recall constantly bringing up who marries whom and which skin
color the babies have, this is very unimportant in the face of overt
oppression by the illegal puppet government. For sure the elite, for
the most part, is lighter skinned than the majority of the Haitian
population and has used their melanin deficiency to rule from the
very beginning. But in the general context of why the ruling class
rules and the majority of Haitians suffers, it has no meaning of
which complexion a certain person is. The factory and land owners as
well as the big merchants have a controlling stake in Haitian
politics because of their accumulated wealth, not because of
genetics. They also finance coups and paramilitaries to ensure that
they stay in power. This has nothing whatsoever to do with skin-color.

Did I ever state that the elite have the "countryside vote sewn up"?
No. But I did write that the ruling class of Haiti does like any
system that does not empower those living in the urban ghettoes (How
many supporters has Latortue among urban slum dwellers?). And an
anachronistic and undemocratic system such as the U.S. electoral
college as well as the U.S. system of electing senators would work to
the benefit of the antagonists of the rural population. The Haitian
merchants and industrialists comprising the upper class have nothing
but contempt for the rural population on which backs they live. When
conditions in the countryside deteriorate to the point of becoming
unbearable, these former peasants fill the urban slums and provide
very cheap labor to the factory owners, while consuming the goods
imported by the merchants. But because of the more limited access to
education and the fact that almost everywhere rural populations are
less progressive and class conscious, support for parties like Fanmi
Lavalas comes more easily from urban areas . That the peasants would
have been treated bad under Aristide, is news to me, can you give
facts? Jean-Bertrand Aristide's government embarked on, previously
nonexistent efforts, to make healthcare and education available to the
provinces, can he be faulted for that?

I have honestly no idea what you mean when you write about "[my] fear
that the power in Port au Prince was/is endangered by the peasants in
the countryside". The current illegitimate government is largely
threatened by it's own brutality and incompetence and in response
certain sectors of the city population have taken to defending their
own lives. I do fear for the well being of the majority of the people
in the countryside since their suffering shows no sign of abating and
Latortue, even so he boasts of roughly a billion US dollars in donor
money, has not taken any steps to alleviate the increasingly
untenable position peasants do suffer. And I do fear for the lives of
all pro democracy activists, since the same people that supported
Duvalier and  the first coup against Aristide are behind the current
wave of violence. And this fear is growing among human rights
observers, as daily reports of police killings emerge.
.



Anonymous wrote:

You wrote:  "of course skin color has it's (sic) importance.."

If I remember your previous posts (and Aristide's speeches:  "they hate
me
because my skin is dark like yours, my hair is kinky like yours"), it
was
you who brought /brings it up.  A lot. Especially in your assertion
that the
(light-skinned) elites have the (darkskinned) countryside votes sewn
up, and
therefore you fear that the power in Port au Prince was/is endangered
by the
peasants in the countryside.
(which explains a lot about their consistent maltreatment by govt. after
govt. in Haiti).