30620: Desrameaux: Re: Haiti The Phoenix, a critic by Hudes Desrameaux (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: desrameaux hudes <hdesrameaux@yahoo.com>

Digging Deep into Haitian History

  Released last year in the United States, Hyppolite Pierre’s book “Haiti, 
Rising Flames From Burning Ahes”, appears not to have caught the attention of 
too many readers or critics both inside and outside Haiti.
  That is unfortunate as the author, a long-time Maryland resident, provides an 
insightful interpretation of Haitian history - past and present. This book is a 
true primer on Haitian history and can be used in any Haitian History 101 
class.
  Hyppolite could never be accused and found guilty of intellectual laziness 
inasmuch this book of 374 pages represents a serious attempt to understand all 
these events that have shaped Haiti since its birth in 1804 while 
simultaneously proposing a cure to Haiti’s political ailments.
  Not to forget the fact that the author drops throughout the book countless 
tidbits, details about Haitian history that can be of interest to both the 
casual reader and the serious academician.
  This book makes for easy reading. A collection of 25 essays, it allows the 
reader the freedom to start with any chapter and still be able to foray 
confidently in this minefield of information, facts and analysis the author 
deems important to share with the readership.
  While easy to read, it is nevertheless quite a challenge to excavate through 
this book of essays and find the “line of thought” that gives this book its 
unity and coherence.
  The author fine-tunes his analytical tools to critically look at all the 
major institutions that form the political landscape of the country: the 
judiciary, the legislative, the executive, the military, the electoral council, 
the role of culture and a slew of other important topics.
  This method reveals both the strength and the weakness of the book. Indeed, 
the author left no stones unturned to understand past and contemporary Haitian 
history, but some sections, like the chapter on the role of the media, left to 
be desired due to maybe the author’s lack of knowledge on this subject.
  Hyppolite goes through Haitian history and builds a case for historical unity 
despite all the different historical periods. Petion is seen as the first 
Haitian populist, while Christophe is portrayed as the first politician of the 
political Right. Mistrust and an aversion for concessions run deep through 
Haitian history from the beginning until today, according to the author.
  This book is not without fault.
  While the author is very thoughtful throughout the book, some comments 
betray, though, the author’s surprising lack of analytical sophistication. Here 
is one: “Haitians must start thinking in terms of perfection….to reach their 
goal of development”.
  I doubt there is such a thing as “fighting for perfection” in politics. 
Haitians, instead, must aggressively strive to achieve the realistically 
possible while minimizing the internal and external threats and maximizing the 
internal and international opportunities that the country faces.
  I could go on to identify other statements where the author seems to have 
again removed his thinking cap. Aristide didn’t ultimately fall in 2004 because 
of the French’s displeasure with the former’s restitution initiative. 
Aristide’s fall was fundamentally internal: His authoritarian practices did him 
in.
  Aristide didn’t give the Haitian masses “a very clear voice in the system”. 
The claim that “without Vodou, Haiti would not have been independent”, smacks 
more of a petit-bourgeois/folkloric view of history than anything else.
  In page 136, Hyppolite warns the reader: “There is a tendency in Haiti to 
simplify sophisticated issues”.
  I fear that the author may not have heeded this judicious warning as at times 
he gives a facile explanation of why Haiti is what it’s today. Hyppolite 
summarizes the Haitian tragedy this way: mistrust, the lack of compromise among 
the leaders and the use of violence to accede to, and stay in, power.
  He may be right in the sense that the presence of these factors in the 
Haitian body politics has indeed wrought havoc in our beloved country, but one 
should go beyond the surface of events to reveal other layers that may hold the 
key to understanding Haitian history.
  Haiti’s current predicament is rather the rotten fruit of political 
infighting among its dominant classes to see which of its various sectors would 
steal the most of the economic pie. The mistrust or the lack of compromise is 
the symptom, not the cause, of the Haitian debacle.
  Another mistake is the author’s repeated tendency to make a series of 
historical assumptions. If such event was negotiated this way instead of that 
way or if our Haitian leaders would show more, and not less, concessions, Haiti 
would have been in a much better shape. How do you know?
  Without saying it clearly, the author dangles the USA example as the perfect 
model of political and economic development: a two plus party system, an 
investigative media, a powerful civil society, a military that protects the 
economy.
  The author is right on some of the prescriptions. However, this is what Haiti 
needs the most: a truly organized popular democratic movement anchored around a 
clear ideological line of economic justice, social inclusion and political 
sovereignty and a clear goal to peacefully and collaboratively govern Haiti on 
behalf of all.