#4116: On the issue of Moral Superiority, Lavalass and the Duvalierists (fwd)

[Robert Corbett <bcorbett@netcom.com>]

From:Jepiem@aol.com

What are we embarking on here? Who is going to define what morality is for a 
politician? To grant the Lavalass party and its leader a pass for "Moral 
Superiority" is like leading the pigs to the slaughter blindfolded, or 
through a tunnel like they do for the cows. There were high hopes when 
Duvalier challenged the Magloire government and the 1956 uprising toppled the 
military dictatorship and Duvalier came to power. Believe it or not Duvalier 
had a lot of sympathizers and true believers behind him when he came to 
power. Let's not get blinded by the messiah politics and believe that one man 
is going to change everything in and about Haiti. Aristide is going to have a 
lot of people around him when he gets to office. As for the Duvalierists, 
there are opportunists of every stripe on the one hand, and having been a 
government functionnary under Duvalier does not necessarily a bad person 
make. The people and the political leaders will have to remain vigilant and 
watch anyone, Duvalierist or not that gets in a position of power under any 
government. The press will have to rise to the task and make itself the 
servant of the people instead of the established government; that is if it's 
allowed to do so and considering our past and recent history, there are 
strong doubts that it will. If the change from Duvalier was a Revolution and 
not a simple uprising, this revolution has been left dormant and it must 
continue, not just by electing a messiah, but by the people choosing leaders 
based on individual qualities and keeping a watch on their activities. Again, 
given the way the last elections went, I have strong doubt that such 
discrimination was practiced in the selection. It's ok to recognize and say 
that so and so party won because it is popular, but is that really what is 
good for Haiti now? Quite a few known good people (good in the Haitian 
context) did not come near the winning total in those elections. Should one 
opt for mediocrity in the name of the so called Democracy? I grant that there 
is no way for them to get in if they aren't popular, given that in the name 
of "democracy" the elections have to be carried out, but at least I believe 
it is imperative to make sure that the elections be carried out without a 
hint of fraud. From opinions and accounts I heard during a post election 
visit to Haiti, this was hardly the case. If those opinions and accounts have 
some validity, what is the credibility of those to whom free pass to moral 
superiority ground has been granted so freely?