Maybe we shouldn't have overthrown their government

[sabotabby]

When the Haitian people get to elect their governments fairly, they consistently want to vote for people whose primary platforms include providing services to the poor. And when that happens, countries like Canada and the U.S. cut aid to Haiti, and start funnelling money into projects like funding the opposition parties. The latest trick is to rig the elections process so that the parties that the poor majority like aren't allowed to run.
...
Even since 2004, Haiti has seen three major disasters. The 2004 Hurricane that destroyed Gonayiv, the two hurricanes and two tropical storms that hit the island in September, 2008 (that, again, devastated Gonayiv, among other areas) and now the 2010 earthquake. You'd think that after the first two disasters, we'd make it a priority to help build up infrastructure: roads, hospitals, emergency response teams, etc. But no. Canada has focused an inordinate amount of "aid" on elections, political reform, police and soldiers. I've sat in both the Canadian and the U.S. embassy in Haiti and listened to officials tell me that security must be the first priority because security is a necessary prerequisite to encouraging business interests. If you wanted security, maybe you shouldn't have overthrown the government in the first place!
—bcholmes, responding to the victim--blaming that's predictably started before the dead bodies of Haïtian earthquake victims have even started to cool.

Comments

[funnel101.livejournal.com]

Well said.

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

Seems like bcholmes believes in some sort of a laissez-faire policy, wherein you allow/demand people to self-determine and just pump aid into the country. I guess it's a popular post-colonial paradigm, often espoused by the political Left in the west. amright?

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

No, I think bcholmes believes what she's been told by so many Haitians: that they demand the right to determine what the future shape of their country will be, without interference. I don't think we should just "pump aid into the country." But I think we owe Haiti restitution and compensation, though. Especially France. If they could write Haiti a cheque for the USD $21B they owe Haiti, that'd balance the books, and give the Haitian government lots of money to work with.

[sabotabby]

For the record, sabotabby agrees with this.

[numb3r-5ev3n.livejournal.com]

As do I.

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

I am not at all familiar with the specifics of the situation in Haiti, but if I try to transfer what you are saying to either of two familiar contexts I see some trouble.

a) Palestinians, when let to choose the government that promises the most social support, elected Hamas. One thing you can say about Hamas is that it isn't a good government for a people that ever hopes to reach agreement with the state of Israel to have.

b) First Nations people in Canada, when let to decide what their lives should look like under a policy that supports the reserves system, make some decisions which I wouldn't wish upon my enemies.

Again, I don't know much about the history of international involvement in Haiti, but I treat with much skepticism the libertarian position that any involvement in Haiti, aside from the purely humanitarian, is necessarily, a priori, undesirable.

[sabotabby]

You lack context.

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

For the record, bcholmes agrees with this.

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

Well, if you can point me to some good reading material on international involvement in Haiti I will be only glad.

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

I'd recommend Paul Farmer's book, The Uses of Haiti for a historical perspective, and Peter Hallward's Damming the Flood for an analysis of the recent coup.

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

So far, an article by Farmer, along with a couple of others, was informative in the sense that I think I may now begin to explicitly separate the political from the factual in your post.

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

But your attitude towards such matters seems to me largely context-invariant. And the statement I'm making also purports to be largely context-invariant. So I don't think you get to use my self-admitted lacking of specific contextual knowledge against me here.

[sabotabby]

Generally speaking, yes, I do believe that people have the right to self-determination. (Which is a classically liberal viewpoint, incidentally, not a libertarian one.) I also believe that wealth and power are currently not distributed in anything approaching a just manner, and that this ought to be rectified, which is why I am a dirty commie.

Beyond that, it's not even so much a matter of sending aid to Haïti, though that would be nice too. We owe reparations and debt forgiveness, and we have no moral or legal right to demand conditions on this.

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

What if self-determination leads, as it arguably often does, to distributions, far from "just"?

[sabotabby]

I am unconvinced that it's up to rich countries to decide a solution. Anyway, it's hypothetical, as they never intervene to distribute resources in a more egalitarian manner.

[mcpreacher.livejournal.com]

what exactly are you saying? that those "fur'ners" aren't smart enough to elect a good leader?

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

I don't know what "fur'ners" means. But yours doesn't seem a formulation I'd espouse.

[mcpreacher.livejournal.com]

the haitians simply can't be trusted to elect their own leaders. The White Man needs to choose for them.

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

I see, political daltonism.

[ironed_orchid]

Well said.