5352: Re: 5327 A Real Discussion (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: caineve@idt.net

This sounds like a call from a person who is tired of what is going on in Ayiti 
and is trying desperately to find a means to palliate things. 

Well taken! But electing a body composed of representatives from the 9 
departments and the diaspora is just an ideal. If adopted, it would be far from 
bringing solutions to the current situation. For this to be successful, the 12 
delegates would have to have a good sense of collective action intended for 
collective well-being. This is not the case. As much as one hears another (from 
Ayiti and abroad) stands on behalf of the Ayitian rights, talking of the 
people’s freedom, discoursing their brain out for the cause of the Ayitian 
people, they are the less reliable ones to resolve the current situation.

Don’t forget that a good number of them that are politically prominent today 
are from the diaspora and are quite involved in creating this mess. What would 
make another one manifested with a different idea other than the thirst for 
power and status gain? Remember, many of them left Ayiti to better themselves 
so they can go back to Ayiti with the intention to equate the bourgeois (in 
life style) and to feel superior to those with whom they grew up with (maybe in 
a quasi/slum somewhere). 

Just take a look at some of them going back. They are out there for their own 
sake with the intention of getting rich. I don’t know how they would get rich. 
They have done nothing constructive to impact the collectivity. Yes! Some of 
them do get rich all right at the people’s expense at the same time some of 
them get to hear from the zenglendos until they go bankrupt. The locals resent 
the diaspora for their demeaning attitude toward them when they are back in 
Ayiti. I said all this to make the point that the diaspora is not a credible 
pool from which to draw delegates to resolve Ayiti’s problem. 

Regarding the locals: they are survivors. Survivors are driven mainly by 
instinct. Whatever conflicting situations they find themselves in, their 
instinct subdues their reason to give them a very myopic view of life in 
collectivity. What counts for them is today. Tomorrow is absent in their 
vocabularies. Sacrificing today for a better tomorrow makes no sense. They 
can’t think too far from the way they are dealing with a current situation. 
Their aim is an immediate satisfaction. This is their state of mind and the 
current political situation is a pure reflection of such.

Unfortunately, it has become the collective mentality in Ayiti. They don’t know 
how to concede. They don’t know that a concession today equates a greater win 
tomorrow. They rather win very little today for a greater loss tomorrow, as 
long as they win. With such a mentality, I doubt that the local delegates could 
arrive at some forms of compromise. What you are observing in the country on 
the political scene is reproducing inside many families today and it was not 
like that before.

I agree with the point that Ayiti does not need a presidential election now. 
I’ve been saying this for the longest, but on a long term basis at least for a 
generation until the people’s mentality is reshaped/remodeled. However, our 
beliefs in democracy make it impossible. Democracy has one meaning for Ayitians 
and the proponents of democracy in Ayiti: it means having elections. Most of us 
seem to forget that the essence of democracy is nothing but a decision process 
on conflicting matters. 

It has nothing to do with electing representatives. Having an entire 
collectivity deciding on collective issues with unanimous consent could be a 
very complex and costly matter. It would be impossible to achieve when one 
individual has to deal with all other individuals separately and ultimately 
collectively. The cost of such a process would plunge the collectivity into 
chaos. Consequently, representatives to simplify the complexity of making 
collective decision become a necessity. 

With this understanding Ayiti needs no elections. The national body to make 
collective decisions can be hand picked without elections. Believe it, they can 
be serious individuals as one would wish and they can accomplish magnificent 
things in the country. The fight over the elections is a means to buy time just 
for status purpose. There should not be any negotiation. Anyone in absolute 
authority should go about doing things swiftly and coercively. This is Preval’s 
current position. He should maintain his position firmly provided that he makes 
the right decisions to help the country moving, but not in the name of 
democracy at least for a generation.


Ayiti has lived, lives and will live
Mozeb





---------------------------------------------
This message was sent through IDT.
http://www.idt.net/