a45: Re: 9991: Re: 9984 Poincy and Dictatorship (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: "[iso-8859-1] Jean Poincy" <caineve@yahoo.fr>

First I would like to remind Mihoko and Florestal that
If it were not for a strong authoritarian government
for which Asia is reputed, Japan, Korea and others
would not know their economic success. If Ayiti ought
to take lessons from such countries, then why not
their form of authoritarian government, their
collective character and wise macro-economic approach
toward industrial production?

When speaking of security, I am afraid that Florestal
understands it as being something else. That something
else, if I am allowed to speculate, is a national
defense which implies the military. The essence of
security is the assurance of one's well being, that of
the collectivity, being achieved through a justice
system and the strict observance of the law. 

The essence of security/collective security is nothing
else but justice and the enforcement of the laws. 
Florestal failed to see that justice and laws embody
collective security. 

In his reply to Mihoko, Florestal said:

"...education should be the foremost priority of any
government in Haiti in shaping the future of the
country, not security. I am not suggesting that
security is not a priority. It is, but the security
problem takes relatively little time to solve in
comparison to make the majority of Haitians a skilled
labor force. Its solutions are in building an adequate
justice and law enforcement system lacking sorely in
Haiti now, caused primarily by the vacuum created when
no adequate substitute quickly replace the military."

There is a contradiction in his statement due to his
misunderstanding of the concept. While saying that
education and not security is the priority, he claims
that Ayiti's "solutions are in building an adequate
justice and law enforcement system." His reasoning
makes a justice and law enforcement system a priority.
Simple syllogism tells us that security is the
priority since it is a function of justice and law
enforcement. 

When looking at the Ayitian reality, one must wonder
what Ayiti Florestal is talking about. Due to lack of
security, almost everyone is afraid to engage in some
kind of business. If they do, that's because they have
to survive, but they do it with anxiety. Ayitians have
a 6PM curfew imposed on them, not by the government,
but their repressive neighbors. They no longer have a
social nightlife because they are too scared. Schools
are closed more than they remain open in some academic
years due to insecurity; sending  kids to school
scares parents. 

I don't quite get Florestal's rationale. Ayitians are
not living. Ayiti is an Empire of fear under a
tyrannical democracy, that of the people. The people
are traumatized, not by harms inflicted on theme by
past dictatorships, but by the tyranny of the people.
The reality is proving Florestal wrong.

Florestal said:

" Of all the dictators Haiti had, even Poincy can only
find one that he equates with success.  Second, the
cost of dictatorship outweighs its benefits while not
guaranteeing them. Dictators abused their people.
Based on historical evidence in Haiti and other parts
of the world, they seem to have no limits in
satisfying their megalomania. Dissent or challenge to
their omnipotence is punished by death."

What should we expect, if one understands an iron fist
government as what Florestal describes. I would not
argue much with anyone on that account, if I
understood an iron fist government as Florestal
understands it. Mine is all different and the
injustice one could do to my idea is to reduce what I
am defending to the barbaric aspect of some mediocre
forms of government.

Thomas Madiou is quite a storyteller and one must read
his volumes as just stories. If looking for
meaningful, critical analysis of Ayitian history, one
must turn away from him. At any rate what one must
understand about that period and Madiou did not
explain in economic terms is that Ayiti was an economy
of plantation before, during the war for independence
and after independence. 

Hence, to be economically successful plantation was to
be done on a large scale. A territory in ruin could
not afford freedom as expected. Christophe himself at
the arrival of Leclerc put Capayitian on fire. He had
to rebuild it. People had to work hard to erect
wonders of the world that are standing still. Yes!
that had to be done with the blood of the people. In
Christophe's works Ayitians are taking pride.
Minimizing his achievement is a serious mistake. 

Florestal said:

"Many Haitians died fighting for him to reign over the
southern part of Haiti that was under a
constitutionally established president, Petion.
Anecdotal evidence suggested how he killed half of the
people he assigned to carry his biggest canon, “Manman
Pimba,” to the citadel when the two combined were not
making progress in carrying it during the construction
of the fortress."

Would Madiou really say that? I doubt it. Again if
there is no analysis made, one will never grasp the
intricate aspect of Ayitian history. Let's straight
the facts out, then one can perform an analysis. 

First, the establishment of Petion as president was
unconstitutional. The 1805 constitution made
Christophe the heir of the government in the event
that Dessalines was no longer there. 

Second, the bogus 1806 constitution Petion and his
clique engineered to establish a republican government
was in violation of the former and was a classic
coup-d'Etat.

Third, Christophe understood the plot against him and
split to form his kingdom. There was a lasting civil
war between Christophe in the North and Petion in the
west including the south.

Fourth, upon his return Rigaud broke the southern
portion away from the western portion to form the
southern republic due to Petion's mismanagement. Ayiti
was then divided in three. These are simple facts,
please don't distort them keep them straight. 

Florestal said:
 
"Poincy claims that Haitians do not deserve it."

This is not my claim. This is different from being
unfit for democracy. When someone is unfit, s/he can
become fit. When one does not deserve something
whether fit or unfit they are not to have it. 

To understand my point, one needs to go beyond the
ordinary interpretation of some political terms. 

1) In Ayiti we have a direct democracy. That's a
dangerous path for any nation to take when the people
lack political maturity.

2) The essence of democracy is not direct
participation of the majority, but plurality and
tolerance.

3) When you have a nation that lacks political
maturity it goes without saying that plurality and
tolerance are foreign to most.

Then it's impossible to have 1 if 3 is there. This is
the scenario Ayiti finds itself in today. By having 3
it becomes unfit to have 1. It will destroy itself, if
1 is introduced while it has 3. 

However, it can become fit, by improving 3. It is a
long process and can't be done simultaneously with 1
being introduced. That's a serious political mistake
that can bring the people under when forcing 1 without
improving or erasing 3.

Only a strong hand can transform 3 in minds being
shaped to hate each other. If it is being done with a
soft hand, the society will loose its opportunity to
progress. We are witnessing that in Ayiti today.

Florestal said:

"The problem with democracy in Haiti is not democracy
itself, but rather the lack of education in the
majority of Haitians. You do not need to institute a
dictatorship to educate the people."

Education that Florestal is talking about has nothing
to do with not having democracy. Democracy is nothing
but a decision making process involving different
groups with different agenda on conflicting matters
affecting their community. Each party does not need to
know 1+1=2 or be able to read his/her name to
determine what decision will be in his/her advantage
and when to compromise. Sheer survival instinct will
guide all parties to make the right collective
decision. Simple solutions for simple problems.
Identify the missing variable and look for it.

Florestal said:

"Even though there is a claim that Christophe
instituted an education system in the northern part of
the country he controlled that was characterized by
some historians as successful, there is no evidence
that it had a lasting effect on the country. There is
no evidence today to suggest that descendants of
people from the north tend to be more educated than
those from the South."

This analysis is erroneous. It should include the
events after Christophe's death that could affect
everything. This is to do to refine the analysis.

Florestal said:

"It seems to me that considerable progress could have
been made in Haiti if the elites and the majority
could find a formula for cooperation." 

No collective issues can be resolved with too many
people having a say in it. Involving all is talking of
unanimity or near unanimity. If unanimity can bring
perfect   solution, it is seldom achieved. 

Florestal said:

"Strong evidence suggests that the root of this
inability to find common interests originates in the
colonial past. The splitting of the country between
North and South under Christophe and Petion
underscores how old this problem is."

If one finds common interests in any society among
different groups, the society is ill and near
extinction. 

Florestal said:

"When the elites and the majority joined forces in the
past, the country experienced success. Some examples
of that coalition are during the Independence
War and under the reign of Jean-Pierre Boyer, and to a
lesser extent under Paul Eugene Magloire, as
Chamberlain’s obituary showed."

What successes is Florestal talking about? I am
willing to accept the fight for independence as
success, with reserve. What is the success with
JPBoyer who dig the hole deeper, and Magloire who
stops short the GRAND WORK of Estime. Tell me more
about them

Florestal said:

"To justify enduring the negative cost of
dictatorship, Poincy repeatedly asserted how
undeserving Haitians are of democracy. In previous
posts, he argued that Haitians lack character. In most
recent ones, they lack creativity. 

Yes! Ayitians as I know them today lack of political
character and creativity. I stand firm by my
statements and can prove them time and time again.
Again I do not allow compassion veils my objectivity
just to receive a pat in the back from all.

Florestal said:

"It seems to me there is a kind of progressive
approach in his characterization of Haitians.
Considering that he advocates a form of government
that denies human rights to Haitians, I can’t help
wonder what is next that Poincy will think of that he
can characterize Haitians with on a mailing list full
of them."

I have a burgeoning imagination in regards to Ayiti's
political and economic quagmire. Just keep on checking
:-).


Ayiti has lived, lives and will live
Mozeb




___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Courrier : http://courrier.yahoo.fr