Caribbean Project: Haiti: The Usual Explanations

Why is Haiti a failed state?
Why is Haiti a failed state?

Haiti

Editor’s Note: I’m compiling a list of the usual explanations for Haiti’s failure along with an explanation why each doesn’t make sense.

The blows of fate which the independent empire of Haiti has suffered haven’t been much different from the experiences of other nations which have proven much more resilient.

Haiti was the victim of a cruel war of independence – Haiti wasn’t the only country that fought a costly war of independence from France.

Approximately 350,000 Algerians died in the Algerian War of Independence. Anywhere from 175,000 to 500,000 Vietnamese died in the First Indochina War – where Vietnam fought to expel the French – and 950,000 more Viet Cong died in the Vietnam War before the French and Americans gave up on trying to rule Vietnam.

While it is true that King George III officially recognized the independence of the “United States” in 1783, it is also true that Great Britain and the United States fought again in the War of 1812 and remained enemies through most of the 19th century while Haiti and France never again exchanged blows.

Haiti was the victim of slavery, white supremacy, and colonialism – Maybe so.

There’s no denying that the French brought in around 1 million slaves to Haiti, or that there was a racial caste system in colonial Saint-Domingue, or that this system thrived in Haiti for almost a century from 1697 to 1791.

At the same time, a clear majority of the slaves who revolted in the Haitian Revolution – somewhere around 333,000 – were recent arrivals who had been born in Africa. Unlike American blacks, Haitians were unaccustomed to slavery and were the first country in the Western hemisphere to succeed in shaking it off in 1791.

Slavery lasted much longer everywhere else in the Caribbean: it wasn’t abolished in the rest of the French Caribbean (Martinique, Guadeloupe, French Guiana until 1848), the British Caribbean (1834 to 1838), the Spanish Caribbean (Cuba and Puerto Rico in 1886 and 1873), or the Dutch Caribbean (1863) for several more generations.

European colonialism and white supremacy were much more enduring everywhere else in the Caribbean: the Dominican Republic, for example, solicited several nations including Spain and the United States to be recolonized; Cuba didn’t even become a quasi-independent country until 1902; Guadeloupe and Martinique remained a part of the French Empire and were later incorporated into France itself.

If anything is true, the imprint of slavery, white supremacy, and colonialism is weaker in Haiti than anywhere else in the Caribbean, while the legacy of freedom and independence is much stronger.

Haiti’s independence wasn’t recognized by foreign countries – Haiti’s independence was officially recognized by France in 1825 and other European powers around the 1820s and 1830s. The United States was the last major power to diplomatically recognize Haiti in 1862. The Vatican didn’t officially recognize the Haitian government until 1860.

In contrast, the government of Taiwan (Republic of China) still isn’t diplomatically recognized by most countries in the world even today. This is especially amusing because Haiti’s boosters like Bill Clinton have long said that Haiti has the potential to become “the Taiwan of the Caribbean.”

Lack of official diplomatic recognition hasn’t prevented Taiwan from creating the 20th largest economy in the world.

Foreign countries refused to trade with Haiti – Even though the United States refused to recognize the Haitian government until 1862, Americans were trading with Haiti before it even officially gained its independence. The same was true of the British after their negotiated withdrawal from Saint-Domingue in 1798.

The US sold Toussaint L’ouverture the guns which were used to win the Haitian Revolution. In the Early Republic, Haiti was one of America’s largest trading partners, and by the 1820s a third of the coffee consumed in the United States was imported from Haiti. While the US government prohibited trade with Haiti in 1806, the law was repealed in less than three years and was never effective.

While the sugar industry had collapsed in Haiti by the early 1820s, Haiti continued to export other commodities – coffee, cacao, cotton, and especially mahogany and logwood – and in some cases exceeded the historic peak level of production of these commodities set in colonial Saint-Domingue.

If Haiti could export so much coffee and logwood to foreign countries, why couldn’t Haitians export raw and refined sugar? The answer is that sugarcane cultivation is much more labor and capital intensive and Haitian peasants simply preferred to harvest wild coffee beans and cut timber for export.

In cotton and sugar, Haitian free labor couldn’t compete with slave labor produced commodities in the US and Cuba. In coffee, Haiti enjoyed a lot of success until overproduction in Brazil in the 1890s caused the world price of coffee to plummet. In logwood, Haiti was also successful in harvesting timber until it ran up against the natural limits imposed by deforestation.

Haiti was born at an inopportune time – The chaos in Western Europe caused by the Napoleonic Wars – such as Napoleon’s Continental Blockade – equally affected the commerce of the United States. In 1807, President Thomas Jefferson took the extraordinary step of banning all trade with Europe, which had the long term effect of stimulating domestic manufacturing in New England.

Haiti was saddled with a “double debt” by France – As we have already seen, Haiti paid off the infamous “double debt” in 1883. The cycle of debt in Haiti continued long after that, but that was due to new loans which were taken out by the Haitian government which had nothing to do with the “indemnity.”

The “double debt” was originally set at 150 million francs. It was later renegotiated down to 60 million francs in 1838 – with interest, the French government acknowledges that Haiti paid off a debt of 90 million francs.

In 1789, colonial Saint-Domingue’s exports were worth 205 million francs. By 1824, Haiti’s sugar industry was on the verge of collapse (having declined from 93 million pounds to 2.5 million pounds), and the value of independent Haiti’s exports had fallen to 22 million francs.

If independent Haiti had succeeded in rebuilding its plantation economy, it could have easily paid off the so-called “double debt,” which is why Haiti’s rulers (cognizant of colonial Saint-Domingue’s economic success) agreed to assume the debt in exchange for diplomatic recognition in the first place.

In the aftermath of the First World War, the Central Powers were saddled with a war debt by the Allies. Germany was forced to assume an enormous war debt and has spent billions of dollars alone on compensating Jews for the Holocaust. Even Bulgaria paid out 2.25 billion gold francs to the Entente.

Haiti has suffered from political instabilityHaiti’s more intelligent defenders have made the fair point that, politically speaking, Haiti wasn’t much more turbulent than France in the 19th century in the number of its constitutions, rulers, and changes in its form of government.

Taking this analogy further, one can only speculate as to why Haiti in the 19th century didn’t produce nearly as many significant figures as France in the arts, science, and technology, such as those listed in Charles Murray’s book, Human Accomplishment. Where is the Haitian version of Louis Pasteur?

Haiti’s genius hasn’t been stifled by civil strife.

Haiti has been the victim of natural disasters – In 2004, 230,000 people in Southeast Asia were killed by the 2004 Indian Ocean Earthquake and Tsunami, which was a 9.1 earthquake on the Richter Scale. As in Haiti in 2010, the rest of the world – including the usual NGOs – scrambled to the rescue.

In 2011, Japan was struck by a 9.0 earthquake, a tsunami, and the Fukushima nuclear disaster. In the Caribbean region, Costa Rica was struck by a 7.6 magnitude earthquake in 2012. Haiti’s experience with devastating earthquakes is dwarfed by Chile which is hit by much more powerful earthquakes every few years.

The 2010 earthquake that killed over 220,000 people in Haiti was only a 7.0 – a mere tremor compared to the 9.5 earthquake which struck Chile in 1960, the largest earthquake in recorded history, which only killed 1,655 people.

Haiti was the victim of American imperialism – From 1915 to 1934, the United States occupied Haiti.

It’s a mistake though to look at the American occupation of Haiti in isolation from the spread of US influence elsewhere across the region. The United States occupied Cuba and Puerto Rico after the Spanish-American War (1898) and bought the US Virgin Islands from Denmark in 1917.

Cuba was essentially an American protectorate until 1934 and an economic colony until the Cuban Revolution (1953-1959). Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands are still US territories to this day. The US engineered the creation of Panama in 1903 and occupied the Dominican Republic from 1916 to 1924.

In the early twentieth century, the US repeatedly intervened in its “banana republic,” Honduras, and Nicaragua was occupied from 1912 to 1933. The Wilson administration sent the US Army into Mexico during the Mexican Revolution. In the Pacific, the US occupied the Philippines from 1898 to 1946.

US influence has been several orders of magnitude greater in Puerto Rico than it ever was in Haiti. Over half of Puerto Ricans now live on the US mainland. In spite of this, Puerto Rico is nowhere near as bad off today as Haiti.

51 Comments

  1. You should post this over at Crossroads.

    It’s great stuff. The only controlled variable is their blackness. The conclusion is obvious.

  2. Something else to consider with respect to Haiti’s “double debt” is the early financial and diplomatic history of the United States.

    The Federalist government after 1790 began to honor the massive debts authorized by the Continental Congress, not only to domestic bondholders but also foreign governments. Debts were further increased after Alexander Hamilton’s Assumption plan led the federal government to assume the debts of the various states.

    But the most direct comparison to Haiti’s “double debt” is the Anglo-American Treaty of 1794, better known as the Jay Treaty. American courts had refused to collect pre-revolutionary debts owed to British financiers and merchants by American planters and traders. Under the terms of the treaty, the USA agreed to arbitration of these debts.

    As a result of the treaty, in 1802 the USA paid Britain £600,000. This was quite a generous settlement, as pre-revolutionary debts exceeded £5,000,000.

    You’ve also understated the extent to which the early USA was menaced by European powers. For nearly the entire period from 1792-1815, American shipping was routinely attacked by European navies as well as Mohammedan pirates. A permanent US Navy was built at some cost, and in addition to the war of 1812 with Britain the US fought an undeclared naval war with France as well as a war with the Barbary Pirates of North Africa.

    The threats were not just naval. Britain and France, acting as traditional great powers, routinely provided arms to hostile Indian nations in the hope of menacing the American frontier, and Britain illegally maintained fortification and Army bases in Vermont and the Northwest Frontier for many years (this was one of the matters resolved by the Jay Treaty). The Viceroyalty of New Spain dispatched an army in an attempt to intercept and destroy the Lewis & Clark Expedition (they failed).

    This threat from European great powers continued throughout the 19th century. Conflict over the Oregon Territory nearly led to war with Britain in 1845, and Lord Palmerston came close to declaring war during the Trent Affair. Only the rise of Germany curbed this persistent threat–the final war crisis with Britain was Britain’s Venezuelan Boundary dispute in 1894, where Britain capitulated and accepted US arbitration rather than war.

    Finally, in addition to routine external threats menacing the American republic unlike the peace and isolation Haiti experienced, one must consider internal threats. The Indian Wars were not resolved until the 20th century, and for the first three centuries of American history there was roughly one battle with Indians per week on the American frontier. The last battle with American Indians wasn’t fought until 1924.

  3. “The last battle with American Indians wasn’t fought until 1924.”

    Citation? I always thought that the final surrender of the Apaches ended the Indian Wars if you don’t count riots on various reservations, which I don’t as they hardly count as military “battles.” If you do count these riots and shootouts with the police then I don’t see why the 1973 Wounded Knee protest by AIM (American Indian Movement) at the Pine Ridge Reservation in which two people were killed and a dozen injured by gunfire doesn’t count too.

  4. Re: ‘Puerto Rico is nowhere near as bad off today as Haiti’:

    That is true, but only according to a WHITE understanding of ‘bad off’.

    Living in their OWN exclusive territory (Haiti) according to THEIR own nature, to the best of THEIR abilities, might NOT really be ‘bad off’ for THEM, as a bird in the wild is better off than a bird in a cage though it might live much longer in the cage — and it must be kept in mind, constantly, that one million Africans should NEVER have been forcibly taken and re-settled in Haiti, and that thanks to that ‘error’, half of the island probably belongs exclusively to them now.

  5. “Britain and France, acting as traditional great powers, routinely provided arms to hostile Indian nations in the hope of menacing the American frontier”

    The French did no such thing after the end of the French and Indian War. They were our allies against the Brits during the Revolutionary War and Napoleon willingly sold us the entire center of the country during the Jefferson administration.

    “Conflict over the Oregon Territory nearly led to war with Britain in 1845”

    Neither London nor Washington had any desire whatsoever for war and therefore negotiated the Oregon Treaty in 1846. Subsequent confrontations such as the farcical “Pig War” of 1859 were fomented by disgruntled Canadians who were still upset about the Treaty. At no point did London condone any of the blustering done by their local forces in the San Juan Islands.

    The Trent affair was a unilateral action by a U.S. ship captain and was repudiated by the Lincoln regime.

    In point of fact, the British really abandoned any future interest in war with the United States after the Treaty of Ghent ending the War of 1812. Hence their ultimate failure to support the Confederacy militarily.

    Your claims that the European powers were interested in containing the United States in the 19th century are ludicrous. From the Monroe Doctrine onwards it was the U.S. that was the imperialist aggressor.

  6. “…and it must be kept in mind, constantly, that one million Africans should NEVER have been forcibly taken and re-settled in Haiti…” – M.N.

    Why should it be kept in mind? If one is a Christian, one must always recognize the providential nature of the acts of God [Rom. 8:28, Eph. 1:4] and seek to read history as the fulfillment of that Providence- a term with which even the American Founding Fathers were conversant and nodded their bewigged heads toward.

    Slaves cannot ‘own’ anything. They are chattel, and not free men. If we are seeking to reform our own historical consciences on sites such as this one, where the fallacy of ‘equal rights’ is constantly being questioned (thank God!) to make some sort of ontological case for ‘equality of hominidity’ for the Haitians merely gives the liberal loons the pseudo-moral ‘Grund’ to deny US, OUR own legitimacy when claiming freedom to opt out of the Obamanation.

    If Whites brought the slaves, and if they were successful, and if Christendom is synonymous with Europe [cf. H. Belloc] then to say that the curse of the ground [Gen. 3:15] post-White rule in Haiti was somehow aberrant, is to question God’s covenantal exclusivity [Amos 3;2] to His own [ Matt. 1:21]… or to give to residents of the Niger our own ontological merit… which brings us back to the fallacy of Jefferson and the Enlightenment Loons. ‘All men are created equal’ is a truism, only if we limit ‘Men’ to Whites.

    If not, we have not a leg to stand on in this era, with the Bolshevik Paradise of a socialist, multicult hell as the only given. We then end up with a “Hold Back this Day” world. Which is something I’d rather die, than acknowledge.

  7. Nice history lesson on Haiti but to what end? Really, the average white American, including the average pro-white American, doesn’t give an owl’s hoot about some obscure island in the Caribbean. Frankly, such efforts are an enormous waste of time, and more along the lines of what the effete inhabitants over at Counter Currents busy themselves with.

  8. Fr John, I’m not giving the Niger residents our own ontological merit (I THINK not) but merely acknowledging their sole possession of the western half of that island, and that they are no threat to us as long as they remain there, and that they may well be left alone there, to live and let live and be respected like endangered lions, elephants and great apes in an African national park game preserve, ‘born free’ and all that. I suppose the white French who were exterminated might consider retaking it, but that is up to them — and I don’t carry that analogy to conditions in our states, such as creating similar reservations or preserves in some of our states. Haiti is an ideal. tropical environment for them to sink to mud hut and jungle existence, but your harsh Minnesota environment would be fatal. They may be cursed but they are still God’s creation, Who makes no mistakes. We also respect the Divine purpose of rattlesnakes, elsewhere, but we exterminate them on our own properties.

    African slavery was the original, first, slavery-based multiracial caste elitist experiment in the New World, and it was just as wrong as ‘Their’ current models.

  9. oh btw…

    http://books.google.com/books?id=euVJAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA772&lpg=PA772&dq=tarragona+relic+relocated+to+genoa&source=bl&ots=-M1HFnLbP3&sig=Jbmq4ZR7yMEEbrOaH86xFk8do84&hl=en&sa=X&ei=IDTdUobTO_bUsATzxoCwDw&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=tarragona%20relic%20relocated%20to%20genoa&f=false

    This is about the resettlement of Catalan populations in Liguria specifically the connection to Genoa (and what i’d mentioned about Columbus’s family roots). I’m pretty sure the entire town of Tarragona actually accompanied the monks. They then acted in a federation of cities to fight back against the Muslims from the Ligurian and Catalan ports that remained in Christian hands. I understand that the Corsairs pursued the Christians there and sacked Genoa at one point.

  10. @Rudel

    Citation? I always thought that the final surrender of the Apaches ended the Indian Wars if you don’t count riots on various reservations, which I don’t as they hardly count as military “battles.” If you do count these riots and shootouts with the police then I don’t see why the 1973 Wounded Knee protest by AIM (American Indian Movement) at the Pine Ridge Reservation in which two people were killed and a dozen injured by gunfire doesn’t count too.

    The 1973 Wounded Knee Protest does make for an interesting case. Was it the last battle of the Indian Wars, or was it part of the general phenomenon of left-wing terrorism in the late 1960s and early 1970s?

    In any case, the main period of conflict in the Indian Wars ended in 1891–the last year service in the Old West made a soldier eligible for the Indian Campaign medal. But skirmishes with American settlers continued at a low rate until 1924–when the last Apache raid ever was mounted. In neighboring Mexico the Apaches continued fighting up until 1933.

    The French did no such thing after the end of the French and Indian War. They were our allies against the Brits during the Revolutionary War and Napoleon willingly sold us the entire center of the country during the Jefferson administration.

    The same French “allies” interpreted the Anglo-American Treaty of 1894 as an Anglo-American alliance and began preying upon American shipping, leading to the quasi-war. The French Spoliation claims weren’t legally settled until 1915.

    Neither London nor Washington had any desire whatsoever for war and therefore negotiated the Oregon Treaty in 1846. Subsequent confrontations such as the farcical “Pig War” of 1859 were fomented by disgruntled Canadians who were still upset about the Treaty. At no point did London condone any of the blustering done by their local forces in the San Juan Islands.

    This is true, but actions on the frontier far from the imperial metropole can spiral out of control and take on a life of its own–this is why the English often jokingly comment that they acquired their empire in an absent fit of mind.

    Even today with instantaneous telecommunications, the independent actions of diplomats and military commanders in the field can spark a crisis which leads to war. The terror of the Cuban Missile Crisis is a good example. A young republic with many rowdy frontiersman bordering the world’s greatest empire was always just one crisis away from war.

    But yes–America was fortunate that cooler heads in Washington and London prevailed.

    The Trent affair was a unilateral action by a U.S. ship captain and was repudiated by the Lincoln regime.

    Yes, but it was the most serious diplomatic crisis of the Civil War. Prince Albert personally intervened in the crisis and edited Palmerston’s diplomatic correspondence to make it more acceptable to Lincoln. What if Prince Albert had not intervened and Lincoln suffered a domestic political crisis as a result of Palmerston’s originally haughty tone?

    In point of fact, the British really abandoned any future interest in war with the United States after the Treaty of Ghent ending the War of 1812. Hence their ultimate failure to support the Confederacy militarily.

    Interest, sure. Possibility, no. A better example than the Treaty of Ghent were the two Treaties in 1818, which largely demilitarized the Great Lakes. Naval and military forces were maintained in British North America after the war, and Bermuda was heavily fortified. The Royal Navy constructed and maintained a large dockyard on Bermuda after the Revolutionary War in order to maintain the ability to dominate the Eastern Seaboard.

    Bear in mind here in your responses that we are comparing the foreign threats America faced in her early days to those Haiti faced. Neither France nor Britain ever saw a need to maintain military and naval forces in response to Haiti.

    Britain’s ultimate failure to support the confederacy was a consequence of Britain’s powerful anti-slavery lobby. Domestic politics generally decide foreign policy, and the anti-slavery faction in Britain prevailed over the textile interests.

    Your claims that the European powers were interested in containing the United States in the 19th century are ludicrous. From the Monroe Doctrine onwards it was the U.S. that was the imperialist aggressor.

    This statement is contradictory. If the USA was an imperialist aggressor, then logically other states would try to contain the USA. Historically this was the case, but the distance of the USA from Europe allowed the country to eventually grow too powerful to contain (unlike, say, Germany).

    Incidentally, something in your tone makes it seem like you believe imperialism is somehow wrong, when in fact it is the noblest and most progressive force in human history.

  11. The average “pro-White” American wants to hear either 1.) the Jews are getting us or 2.) the niggers have killed such and such !!! !!!

    Is there anything particularly wrong with that? As long as it isnt fanatically repeated at all times?

  12. Re: Catalan immigration to Liguria: I had referred to that theory (along with all the other theories and claims) which might tie together the both the Spanish and the Italian claims to Columbus’ origin.

    Some Jews are still claiming him (as you know) but others say they really don’t WANT him.

  13. ‘The average “pro-White” American wants to hear either 1.) the Jews are getting us or 2.) the niggers have killed such and such !!! !!!’

    Whereas ABOVE-average, ‘Mainstreaming WN’ pro-Whites DON’T want to hear that the Jews are getting us, but say DON’T ‘blame the Joooos for everything’ nor engage in any of that ‘Mossad silliness’, but rather 2.) use expressions like ‘BLACK (?) RUN America’ !!! !!!

  14. ‘something in your tone makes it seem like you believe imperialism is somehow wrong, when in fact it is the noblest and most progressive force in human history’

    It is only ‘noble’ and ‘progressive’ from the EMPIRE’S perspective. The defeated or genocided tribes and peoples overrun by empire either know or will soon come to understand that it is neither noble nor progressive!

    WE are suffering and being destroyed right now, under an imperial yoke. ‘What will you do without freedom’?

  15. “Incidentally, something in your tone makes it seem like you believe imperialism is somehow wrong”

    Nonsense. My words “imperialist” and “aggressor” were clear and descriptive. My views on imperialism vary by who is colonizing whom. Clearly American imperialism has been a mixed bag for American citizens as far as to whom the economic benefit, if any, has accrued. The claim that imperialism is noble or “progressive” (a dubiously Whiggish term in itself) is totally contingent upon the particular circumstances at hand.

    As far as “nobility” is concerned. The United States hasn’t fought a “noble” war since 1812 and only that if you support the entire idea of the American Revolution, an enterprise about which I hold grave doubts.

  16. “This statement is contradictory. If the USA was an imperialist aggressor, then logically other states would try to contain the USA”

    No it’s not. And the other state was primarily Mexico which except for a brief period of ludicrous French interference was the opposite of a European power, they having thrown off the shackles of Spanish imperialism.

  17. @Rudel

    Nonsense. My words “imperialist” and “aggressor” were clear and descriptive. My views on imperialism vary by who is colonizing whom. Clearly American imperialism has been a mixed bag for American citizens as far as to whom the economic benefit, if any, has accrued. The claim that imperialism is noble or “progressive” (a dubiously Whiggish term in itself) is totally contingent upon the particular circumstances at hand.

    Fair enough. I didn’t mean to appear Whiggish either, I genuinely believe imperialism and conflict tend to improve human civilization (unlike, say, gay marriage).

    As far as “nobility” is concerned. The United States hasn’t fought a “noble” war since 1812 and only that if you support the entire idea of the American Revolution, an enterprise about which I hold grave doubts.

    Why was not Polk’s war with Mexico noble? Conquering the entire Southwest and allowing it to be settled by enterprising Americans rather than idle Mexicans seems noble to me.

    I also have my grave doubts about the American Revolution (this blog does a wonderful job of cementing those doubts), though it did have the benefit of ensuring the North American continent would be settled by Americans from sea-to-shining-sea. Under British rule, the expansion of Americans across the continent was readily sacrificed for European great power politics (understandable from their point of view).

  18. “Why was not Polk’s war with Mexico noble? Conquering the entire Southwest and allowing it to be settled by enterprising Americans rather than idle Mexicans seems noble to me.”

    Polk’s war was widely unpopular and considered a Constitutional disgrace by many. There were far more Indians than Mexicans residing in the “conquered” territories.

    BTW, what have you got against “idleness.” I myself am about to take a nap.

  19. “Taking this analogy further, one can only speculate as to why Haiti in the 19th century didn’t produce nearly as many significant figures as France in the arts, science, and technology, such as those listed in Charles Murray’s book, Human Accomplishment. Where is the Haitian version of Louis Pasteur?”

    To me, statements such as this are right out of the Creativity play book. Don’t mistake what I am saying. I’m not saying you’re a Creator or your views are shaped in any way by this “religion”, but this type of point is one typically leveled by people who seem to have a notion of superiority, and this attitude is clearly present in Creativity. I don’t want to put words in anyone’s mouth but what I take away from this is that a lack of achievements equal to the achievements of others is indicative of inferiority. Couple that with comments like, “It’s great stuff. The only controlled variable is their blackness. The conclusion is obvious.”

    The question is why speculate? Is it perhaps that some people are looking to “prove” a correlation between race and advancement of culture? The greater question is why would someone want to do that? My opinion is that some people want to “prove” this because they think it proves their belief of their races superiority, errr, supremacy. This country made up of primarily of this race didn’t produce as much stuff therefore they are less advanced and should be viewed as inferior. Got it.

    I think you have raised some good points and have provided a lot of context, but like anything else that’s typically argued over, it is mostly subjective and debatable. I’m certainly not in a position to debate on these points, but my hunch is that there is a reason for doing something such as cataloging all the reasons and supporting data to prove why a place like Haiti is a “failed state”. If I had to guess, it’s because some people are tired of being “beat up” over something they believe in their hearts to be true. Their superiority as a race of people. It would definitely place you at a certain advantage in argument to say to your detractors, “Didn’t you read my blog on why Haiti is such a $***hole?”

    I’m going to give you the benefit of a doubt that, that is not the reason why you are doing this, although I’m quite skeptical. I’m going to assume that you really aren’t looking to find evidence that one’s race has a direct correlation with their advancement. Maybe you could talk a little about why this is important to examine from your point of view. In what way is your life enhanced by knowing why Haiti is or appears to be failed?

    Again, I think you’ve made some strong points and you’ve also cited some evidence, but I’m just not quite sure of motivations.

  20. Spelunker,

    I will respond to the rest of your comment later this afternoon, but in the meantime I will point out that for someone who spends so much time documenting every little move made by Matt Heimbach and Matt Parrott, I am sure you know enough about my biography by now to know that I have no connection whatsoever to the anti-Christian cult that is the religion of “Creativity.”

    Southerners and other Europeans – men like the British Consul, Sir Spenser St. John – were writing about Haiti a long before anyone had ever heard of “Creativity.” There are many books about the impact of the Haitian Revolution on the course of secession in the US South and the abolition of slavery elsewhere in the Caribbean.

  21. Motivations?

    What about money? The coons constantly beg for more capital! More money borrowed.

    The next problem, ordinary blacks are generally better off with white rulers. Rhodesia was more livable than Zimbabwe. The blacks also have a nasty repeated habit whereby they massacre any white minority or drive them away. Then the apes stick their mitts out begging for gibs from whitey.

  22. Sure, I’m aware of that. Perhaps it’s my error to speculate as to why a country so far away from the one we reside in is so important to our lives. Maybe I’m only speaking for my life and experiences but I just don’t see why it’s so important to “prove” to people why Haiti is failed. It really has very little to no effect on my life. From a strictly historical standpoint, it is definitely an interesting thing to examine. I’m actually looking forward to reading more of what you have to write on the topic. Personally, I’m highly suspicious of the motivations for it, but I’ll wait to see what you have to say about it. It’s not my place to demand explanations from you for your reasons for your beliefs, whatever they may be. I am however quite intrigued as to how Haiti effects your life in any way, besides your own desire to simply understand history more thoroughly. Like I said, I’m skeptical.

    I would like to address something though if I may. Prior to Matthew Heimbach becoming a story in Maryland, I really have no thought to topics of race relations in my entire life. My efforts to chronicle Trad Youth grew out of my absolute horror in listening to him tell the World that there was a major problem with Black on White crime in Towson, MD. That is an easily provable lie. The crime statistics at that college did not support the claim. That right there is the reason why I even know who Matthew Heimbach is. Prior to my hearing him on the radio, I’d never even really given much thought to things such as these. It was actually an awakening for me in a way to all of these things going on all around me. If people don’t like my blog, and they don’t like me reposting or translating into text things people are saying in forums that are not typically translated into text, don’t be mad at me, be mad at the people saying the things I’m being critical of. White Nationalists as a whole have an awfully big chip on their shoulders and insanely enormous egos. If you hate what I do, then tank Matthew Heimbach for that. I invite any single one of you not to argue with my opinions, after all, just like you, I think I’m entitled to have them, but just go ahead, tell me that when Matthew Heimbach says the US government should drop bombs on abortion clinics that I’m the one who’s taking things out of context or creating controversy where there is none. My opinion is it’s telling to watch someone with such extreme views existing alongside throngs of people that I highly suspect hold as extreme if not more extreme views who are completely scared to death to man up. White Nationalism, at least what I have seen of it is a hologram. It’s a bunch of big talkers, no action, scaredy cat, chumps. For every thoughtfully written blog, carefully constructed to position yourselves so as not to be criticized, in almost every case some douchebags gotta go ruin it for everybody by putting on display what it’s all really about. Look no further than Captain John Charity Spring MA who says,

    “You should post this over at Crossroads.

    It’s great stuff. The only controlled variable is their blackness. The conclusion is obvious.”

    Remember THE ONLY controlled variable is their BLACKNESS. Don’t forget it.

  23. P.S., remember, it’s the “COONS” and more importantly the “JEWS”.

    “What about money? The coons constantly beg for more capital! More money borrowed.”

  24. Re: Spelunker

    1.) Like Cuba and the Bahamas, Haiti is actually one of the closest nations to the United States, which is why there are so many Haitians in Florida.

    2.) Haiti is the longest running experiment in black freedom in the world. Liberia is the second longest running experiment.

    3.) I’ve studied and written about the wider region, not just Haiti. It’s important to keep in mind that Barbados, Bermuda, and the Bahamas would never be confused with Haiti in spite of their shared history of slavery.

    4.) We’re constantly told by people who don’t know much about the subject that black people were crippled for all time by slavery, white supremacy, and colonialism. The Caribbean is one reason why I don’t buy into that.

    Barbados, the place which was the model for the spread of slavery across the Caribbean and the South, where slavery lasted longer than almost anywhere else, is today one of the most successful black countries in the world. Haiti, where freedom and independence has lasted the longest, is many times worse off country than any other country in the region.

  25. That doesn’t really change my perception of the potential motivations for wanting to point all of this out. I guess perhaps I’m just a natural skeptic. I will agree with you that all of the problems in Black culture don’t stem from the practice of slavery or even an overwhelming amount of supremacy, but both of those things are contributing factors to some of the problems in Black culture. As a White, even if not one that any of you would ever claim any connection to, I can certainly recognize that the belief that our $**t don’t stink is, well, $**t. Someone please show me a perfect race or culture. It doesn’t exist. All races and cultures have shortcomings and advantages. Perhaps the reason that I don’t recognize the importance of any of this is my own belief that I see all humans as just that, humans. This belief that were all somehow different and that we have to protect ours is stupid. We should all be trying to figure out how to work together to solve all of the problems we all share as being residents of this planet, together. Not incessantly trying to place blame and shift responsibility for problems we all commonly share by virtue of all being residents on Earth. I read an interesting story on the Golden Dawn. In the comments, someone who pretty obviously was connected to the Golden Dawn challenged the author of the article to also subject the Likud party to the same amount of criticism as they were looking at the Golden Dawn with. Guess what, I agree. These ideas of patches of ground for me and me only are stupid. I don’t support the idea of Zionism. I don’t support the idea of ethnostates. I see no difference between Jewish people calling for an entirely Jewish state or a Neo-Nazi calling for an all White state. I don’t agree with either idea. I think they’re both bad ideas. The reason why is because this goes against what I know in my heart to be true, Black, White, Asian, Indian or Jewish, we all bleed blue/red. Back to my original point, the “White” man is certainly not the cause of all of the problems of the “Black” man, just as the “Jewish” man is not the cause of all of the problems of the “White” man. All of this bitching and moaning you p*****s do all day long is energy much needed but wasted in solving the Worlds problems.

  26. Re: ‘we all bleed red’:

    Yes, Spelunker, a human race, the species homo sapiens exists, but so do subspecies, varieties or races (which are not always sharply defined, but grade into one another) and sub-varieties or ethnicities, and tribes, local ethnic communities, families, etc., as well as individuals. Why do you want to ignore, perhaps even want to erase, some of these natural variations? Did God make a mistake when He made us so? Isn’t the lesson of the story of Babel that He does NOT want the human race united?

    Hunter wrote: ‘Haiti is the longest running experiment in black freedom in the world. Liberia is the second longest running experiment’

    I think Subsaharan AFRICA is the longest running experiment in BLACK freedom, millions of years of having half the continent to themselves. Haiti and Liberia are hybrid experiments, in partly what WHITE people consider is freedom for Blacks.

  27. Have you ever read the Yearling?

    The author pointed out in her autobiography that a human can survive without much contact with other people. But a human cannot survive without the land.

    So, that patch of territory or land you dwell on is your sustenance. For a fundie like Nagant it’s also something spiritual.

    Anyway back to the point. Blacks have a nasty habit of cannibalizing productive whites. Either directly Cannibal, like Jean Zombie from Haiti (look him up) or via indirect means like Robert Mugabe or via tax codes like Obama. We even see spiritual cannibalization when we see Neo-socialist Realism statue carved in China shipped here to commemorate a sexual degenerate like MLK (see the Molech). Who paid for that granite monster? Shamiqua?

  28. Jews don’t require an all Jewish state. As long as they maintain 50% plus they can keep Israel as a Jewish state. They do not mind having servile Arabs and Shiksas servicing them doing the menial jobs. Jews are not unused to minority status as long as they have exclusive rights to finances and vice businesses like distilling, pimping and tobacco or sugar. They also like to control grain import and export exchanges.

    White Gentiles are particularly vulnerable to elimination outside their historic homelands because they are generally quite conspicuously white, conspicuously successful and universalist. increasingly the historic capitals of European nations are being filled with Africans and Asians who practice nepotism and elimination its rhetoric. phenomenon like UKIP and Wilders are just examples of Europeans waking up the cannibalization of their patch of soil.

  29. “it is mostly subjective and debatable.”

    Group differences in IQ and behavior are based on objective data and have moved beyond debate to established scientific theory. Blacks have lower average IQs and a exhibit a high time preference in their behaviors. They are also more violent than the rest of the human race and engage in rape and murder several times more frequently. This is true whether they are observed in a state of nature like African Bushmen or observed in the highly urban environments of the industrialized world.

  30. “Re: Catalan immigration to Liguria: I had referred to that theory (along with all the other theories and claims) which might tie together the both the Spanish and the Italian claims to Columbus’ origin.”

    Stop beating a dead horse and STOP LYING!

    I have given extensive proof of Columbus’s Italian heritage by eminent scholars who include baptismal records but you continue to spread FUD. It was some Genoans who migrated to Gibraltar and NOT the other way around you dummy, and they did it after Cristoforo’s time. How can you call yourself a Christian and lie as much as you do?

  31. ‘It was some Genoans who migrated to Gibraltar and NOT the other way around you dummy, and they did it after Cristoforo’s time’

    Rudel, please review it for me again, briefly. You’ve studied it or read much more than I have, evidently. I HAVE given up the possibility of the Jewish claim, or I’m about 99% certain. I do have enough science and history background to allow room for new information. Columbus’ origin is one of the last issues I would ever take time to research.

  32. ‘This is true whether they are observed in a state of nature like African Bushmen or observed in the highly urban environments of the industrialized world’

    Then, exposure to Whites in a multicultural setting does NOT seem to make them any MORE violently unstable than they would be in their natural setting?

    Do first-generation mulattoes, and succeeding mixed generations exhibit less, equally, or MORE violent tendencies?

  33. “I think Subsaharan AFRICA is the longest running experiment in BLACK freedom, millions of years of having half the continent to themselves.”

    Blacks have not had half the continent to themselves for “millions” of years. Homo Sapiens has only been around for a couple of hundred thousand years. Negroes didn’t exist before then.

  34. Yes, Rudel. I fired that hyperbole off, and it is impossible to edit on WordPress. Less than two hundred thousand years for homo sapiens itself. Less than ten million years since the last ‘common ancestor’ of apes and homo sapiens. About 70 million years or more for primates. Suppose I had written six or seven thousand years? But Africa IS the longest running experiment in true African freedom.

  35. I meant: What would you say if I had written ‘six or seven thousand’ — according to ‘Creation Science’?

    Final restatement: Hunter is right in calling them ‘experiments’ in Black freedom, but in another sense, the longest running and most accurate ‘experiment’, in PURELY Black freedom, is the history of originally and EXCLUSIVELY Black subsaharan Africa.

  36. Nope. The Monks were kicked out in the 700s.

    There’s a monastery they founded there. They brougt the town with em.

  37. Rudel, I still don’t understand WHY you cited the history of Genoans in Gibraltar, something which took place AFTER Columbus, in response to my response http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2014/01/19/haiti-the-usual-explanations/comment-page-1/#comment-2402547 to your comment http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2014/01/19/haiti-the-usual-explanations/comment-page-1/#comment-2401956 about the migration of Catalans to Liguria BEFORE Columbus. It was you, Rudel, who brought up the subject and began this digression, with your first comment about the migration, which seemed to be about presenting a possible Spanish (Catalan) connexion — so that he really COULD be considered BOTH Spanish, or Catalan, AND Genoese. Are we on the same page now?

  38. “he really COULD be considered BOTH Spanish, or Catalan, AND Genoese. Are we on the same page now?”

    No, because while he COULD be he is in fact not. This has been proven by eminent biographers and historians who traced his ancestry back through both church and municipal records. You COULD be a space alien yet I’ll wager you are not.

    Why must you insist on spreading rumors and speculations which have been disproven? You sound like a conspiracy theorist crackpot when you do.

  39. “Africa IS the longest running experiment in true African freedom.”

    And I would say that it has by and large been a great success. Blacks are remarkably well suited to their environment through natural selection. On of the oldest strain of humanity are African Bushmen (who are not all that closely related to Bantu blacks) and they are superbly adapted to their natural habitat which most other humans would find harsh and desolate yet they thrive there.

  40. Rudel, it was you who brought up the subject here, and you began by appearing (albeit unintentionally) to be shedding light on Columbus’ ‘family roots’. You wrote: ‘BTW…THIS IS ABOUT the resettlement of Catalan populations in Liguria specifically the connection to Genoa and what i’d mentioned about COLUMBUS’ FAMILY ROOTS’ (my capitalisations) so the inclusion of ‘Columbus’ family roots’ makes it seem at first glance you were thinking of a connexion to Columbus (even though the Catalans came seven centuries earlier) but it turns out it has NOTHING to do with ‘Columbus’ family roots’ as such. Explaining it by citing Genoese involvement in Gibraltar, which took place after Columbus, was also confusing. Remember I have NOT really STUDIED the subject, as you seem to have done. Since you are in accord with the vast majority of scholarship, I take your word for it and I agree. By the way, I’ve decided the Jewish ancestry claims by those Jewish historians are false. They want to claim credit for EVERYTHING. Empirically speaking, I’m 99% certain, and that’s as good as it gets outside ‘theology’.

    I appreciate your passion for historical accuracy and science. Let’s not talk past one another.

    I agree about Africans’ successful natural selection for their environment — and the Bushmen, who have a unique game tracking ability or instinct, surpassing all other peoples. Yet the Negro race seems to have taken a different path than the others in developing ‘creativity’, ‘normal ambition’ and sense of morality.

    What do we know about mulattoism? To what extent are African traits (lack of moral sense etc.) passed on or even could they even be intensified by mixing? The elite of Haiti are mulattoes. Haiti is not really an experiment in BLACK freedom as such, with all the white interventions and a mulatto leadership.

  41. Whatever else Colombus identified with he wasn’t Jewish. And I never at any point claimed he was born in what is now modern Spain. I just pointed out that a great deal of Cattellans fled in the face of the Arabs in the invasions and they resettled relics in Liguria. Colombus sought his fortune in Spain. He could have ended up in Crimea or Cyprus plying his trade with Genoese colonies there. Instead he seeks the patronage of Castille and Aragon. That is all…

  42. That’s absurd to say that God created us all when you have zero proof besides a set of books said to be non-fiction but possibly just as easily works of historical fiction. The argument over Creation is unprovable, so I’m not going to waste my time arguing over it. We are all humans. Are there sub-species, etc.? Of course, but I see no reason for division, period. I love every human on this planet equally. It’s a shame that so many people want to try and convince the world that they are such great people while seeking to divide. I feel bad for all of those people. I know one thing. If there is such a thing as God, which I’m highly skeptical of, I have a feeling I know where he’s sending a lot of you people when you depart. My point was that there is a reason why Hunter wants to examine this issue. I stated my opinion of what I think the reason is. If you don’t like it. Ok that’s fine. I think anyone that invested any amount of time reading the comments here, and that was being honest about it would probably arrive at the same conclusion. I’ll bid you farewell now. I don’t typically comment here, but the post caught my interest. Take care White nationalists, or whatever you want to be known as.

  43. “Instead he seeks the patronage of Castille and Aragon.”

    That just shows excellent judgement on his part. Ferdinand and Isabella were hands down the winningest team going at the time. And they backed him. They recognized talent when they saw it.

  44. Ah, you will burn in a hell that doesn’t exist if you observe the fact that there is no such thing as racial equality.

    Fine logic there. You are more religious than you think. You appear to believe in the miracle of the human mind.

    There is a great trick question:

    Which of the following is the odd one out? And Why?

    St Thomas Aquinas
    St Augustine of Hippo
    Richard Dawkins
    Charles Darwin

  45. He attempted to get Henry VII to sponsor him. A half hearted offer of some sort.

    He quite clearly adopted the identity of a Spanish noble either way.

    Had Washington been commissioned in the Regulars, would he have been British? Arguably yes.

Comments are closed.