1st Black Republic menaced of protectorate!

Post Reply

Post by T-dodo » Wed Dec 08, 2004 9:57 am


If Haiti was a person, I would tell you that only a pradigm shift can help it save itself. But, being a country, how can one imagine such a mental reprogramming take place in all the people, or the movers and shakers at least, at the same time? It is not impossible, but it is not likely to happen soon. But something has to happen, since the international community's patience appears to be wearing thin. Unlike Haitians, they have good memory, or good records,and hate to repeat the same mistakes twice.

On Haitian radios in Miami, there were speculations that the Dominican Republic is being considered as a potential solution to the Haiti problem. Now, every Haitian hearing that consideration must have every hair on their body erect, so much this is humiliating. The Dominicans have always been looking for an opportunity to get back at us for the 1833 occupation by Boyer. If offered to manage Haiti, it is hard to believe that th
e Dominican Republic won't see this as the opportunity so awaited for. While this is still far fetched, I hope the anti-Aristide group is not celebrating now their victory. For, the cost of that victory may have been worse than the defeat they so despised, compromising with Aristide. The elite had a clear choice: compromise with Aristide to improve thing a little but save the country from losing their sovereignty or risk chaos. They told us to follow their lead again and to choose chaos. They may have given up their own freedom to get rid of Aristide! I hope they knew what they were doing.

Now, Michel, you offered as a solution, to avoid the protectorate, that the diaspora go and fix the country at whatever cost to them. Let me remind you that huge number of them had done that already after Jean-Claude left and after Aristide was returned by Bill Clinton. All of the ones I know, without exception, who did that are back in the US or Canada today, their retirement funds gone, their comfortable job taken
by somebody else, and trying to start over again, but this time with plenty of grey hair, or whatever is left of the hair. In addition, you also know that for the diaspora to be able to do anything in Haiti the Haitians living there would have to let them do it. You already know that is a No No from the get-go, since Haitians through their Constitution and also their pejorative label of "diaspora" already let the diaspora know that they don't intend to let them manage their lives with them. In other words, your diaspora solution is not a realistic and workable one.

So, if the Haitians in Haiti cannot help themselves, while they would not accept the conditions for help from the diaspora, what is left for the country as a solution? You can keep saying we are against the protectorate - we all are against it - but you also have to provide a workable alternative solution to protectorate. Certainly, even occupation by Americans may not be possible. The American public would not let their government spend
money in Haiti that could be used instead to finance education, healthcare and social security for Americans at home. If you are crying you are against while you are not offering a workable solution, you are doing no different than the Haitians did against Aristide when they were not ready to compromise. Our situation is a very difficult one. We would have to compromise something, perhaps our freedom or our pride, in order to improve anything.

The way things are right now, as Haitians, we should remain open to discuss any solutions. The reason is that they are not many available to us now. The international community will not pump money into Haiti, even as loans, unless we show we are responsible and that we can make good use of it. Remember they also have their own problems in their backyards. When you are borrowing money, you have to give the lender the right to dictate how you live until such time their money is repaid. Otherwise, you'll get no money. If you don't believe me, ask Aristide. Also,
if you have a mortgage on your home, you may understand what I am alluding to. Like you, the last thing I would ever want to live and see is our Ayiti Cheri losing its sovereignty for which we paid so dearly in lives and money to acquire. But, at one point, we will be held accountable for our actions.



Post by T-dodo » Wed Dec 08, 2004 9:19 pm

Here we go again!

[quote] What the hell is "the international community"?

Is it the Republics of Botswana, Bangladesh, South-Africa etc... who want to take over Haiti? or is it the same old gang, once known as Christendom who want to continue their hegemonic racist rule everywhere non-europeans refuse to bow and kiss?[/quote]

Here, there is no idea expressed. It is the same old broken record of decrying racism when facing helplessness, solution-less, lack of imagination, and ego inflation.

[quote] Give me a break folks. What is happening here has nothing to do with a supposed inability of Haitians to self-govern but everything to do with a gang of racist criminals who have an overinflated sense of their own worth and power....who happen to find inside of Haiti an equally sick bunch of europeanizazonbified Africans unable to differentiate their people's
interest with those of their oppressors. [/quote]

Here, we get the broken record of racism a second time. Jaf, it is time you start bringing some new ideas. Otherwise, there will be no incentive to exchange ideas with you when in reality it is a one-way street affair.

[quote] All this talk about "alternatives" is nothing but gymnastics to say "I agree with the occupation plan, if...". As if ![/quote]

Thank you for your generous offer of communicating my true feelings for me. But, no thanks! With racism as the panacea for all ills, except those caused by you, I have access to more imaginative media for communicating my true feelings. For those who want to bother to think, there is the decision making process taught everywhere that says this:

1. Define a problem
2. Analyze it
3. Look for alternative solutions
4. Choose one alternative
5. Monitor its implementation
6. Periodically review results

Of course, it i
s easier to jump to conclusion than following some systematic approach to problem-solving and decision making.

[quote] Like in 1915 there were Uncle Toms who wanted the occupation of Haiti by the U.S. Marines. Like during the war against racial slavery, there were confused Uncle Toms who preferred to join the French and run away to Cuba and New Orleans with them. Like today, in the middle of 2004, there are plenty of confused Uncle Toms who, at every occasion, find a way to blame their own people for whatever crimes are committed against them, instead of showing courage to side with the "seemingly losing team" because it is the right thing to do - even if the most dangerous or difficult. This desire to always be on the "winning team" (even as a water boy) , even if it is a team of criminals is why, in the middle of 2004, they could enter our country and do what they are doing to it. [/quote]

Here again, we have racism as the idea. It is getting very boring. J
af, for all your talk about other people not showing courage, except you, I can't remember any time I read something involving you taking real action, even if it's not courageous, other than hiding behind a pseudonym “ak piafe” (piaffer comme un cheval). At least, Father Jean-Juste was not just saying he is tired of the treatment of Haitian refugees. He took the streets of Miami asking that they are given their rights and be treated with fairness. Fidel Castro took his guns and went to the mountains asking for change. Martin Luther King marched and protested non-violently. Randall Robinson went on a hunger strike, just to give you a few examples of people that can be taken seriously. All you are about is cheap talk of racism. If you cannot come up with new ideas, in the future I will just ignore your posts because of lack of new knowledge. As far as the Uncle Tom part, I'll say two things. First, you use it only when you are unable to be pragmatic and learn to know the reality of today's global life. That is
to impose your views, you must have power to back it up. When you cannot impose you negotiate. It is a smart thing to do to get your way out. Second, for Uncle Tom as a label, I will repeat what Caspar Weinberger said once about people using labels for complex problems. “Labels are used as a substitute for not thinking.”

[quote] The "alternative", the Haitian people had already chosen it.

Instead of the rule of CIA agents all over the country side, the people duly went to the polls and elected 100s of CASECS, ASECS, Depite, Senatè, Majistra, and a Prezidan. Each for a specified term. Criminals were trained by the CIA for over two years...provided full back-up by diplomats from France, the U.S. and Canada as they entered city after city in Haiti and deposed all the elected offcials, massacred their supporters, jailed hundreds more, including the legal Prime Minister and the Head of the Senate.

What part of all this don't we understand?[/quote]

The “alternative” you are referring to is democracy which you and I have no argument about as the right way Haiti should be governed. But, from a result standpoint, it was a failure. The chosen were incompetent, incapable of achieving what they wanted to do, and were not even able to keep themselves in power. The alternatives I was referring to were finding ways to feed hungry Haitians, to improve their lifestyle instead of being stuck in the past to old solutions that don't work and produced the mess we have today.

Instead of your cheap talk about racism, do something to feed those poor people and their family daily. Or you can do better, give them jobs and they will feed themselves. They have no use for the cheap talk about racism and choices that do not change their life of misery.

[quote] Luigi Einaudi told us "The real problem with Haiti is that the international community (white powers) are so screwed-up and divided that Haitians are running Haiti".
So they took it upon themselves to fix that. As they did in 1915 with Sudre Dartiguenave they selected one of our buffons and surrounded him by more buffons and gave them titles.....ALL THIS THEY DID IN OUR FACES. They also gave us details of what their long term plans are...[/quote]

Again, all you are doing is name calling and labeling without putting forward any new ideas for a change. You even admitted “All this they did in our faces.” It means that you don't have the power to fight them. How many lifetimes it will take you to recognize that and then look for alternatives to overcome that disadvantage to get your way out. That is what all the small countries everywhere, including in the Caribbean, did. You know, like Barbados, Jamaica, Dominican Republic, Trinidad, etc.

I say the time has come to speak in real english, real Kreyol or real french. No more bullshit. I am for HAITIAN SELF-RULE, as per before the racist coup of February 2004 where th
e leaders of the nation were the duly elected appointees of the PEOPLE of Haiti. I am against the cynical and racist plan concocted by sick and criminal elements inside and outside of Haiti to put the nation under foreign tutelage.

I suppose some of us would also be willing to discuss alternatives to slavery, before fighting to end it. [/quote][/quote]

Again, that is cheap talk when you are incapable of any action, have no new ideas to solve a problem and are too lazy to even try to think about it. While the so-called racists give you freedom to speak in whatever language you please, you as a non-racist cannot even guarantee that to your own people. Your so called "real speaking" is nothing more than just useless and empty noise as you have no power and courage to do anything more than just that to support your ideology. Even your cheap talk cannot find an audience with enough interests to captivate it to the end.


Leonel JB

Post by Leonel JB » Thu Dec 09, 2004 5:01 am

Well, I know that Jaf is going to answer back. But personally I do not think talking about "Racist practices with the help of Brainwashed Negroes in Africa or Haiti", is cheap.

By the way, there are different ways to help a Community. No one has to do like Martin or any other people mentioned by JM. We are helping our community just by talking at Ann Pale forums.

I wanted to say more, but I'm giving the space to Jaf to follow up.

L'union fait la Force,


Post by T-dodo » Thu Dec 09, 2004 7:56 am

[quote]Well, I know that Jaf is going to answer back. But personally I do not think talking about" Racist practices with the help of Brainwashed Negroes in Africa or Haiti", is cheap.[/quote]


It is cheap when the purpose of the talking is only self-promotion and not a mean to end that racism or to improve it. There is a lot of work that is being done to end racism. Every one in this forum that works hard daily, raises their children to become responsible, educated and successful adults tomorrow, that obeys the laws and follows the rules daily, that reads and learns something new daily, or that has some new ideas, like Guy did with this forum that improves the life of others or helps our culture. By doing all these things, when you have no bigger and brighter ideas, you earn respect of people who appreciate hard work, and you teach those racists that you are better than them if not, at the very
least, as good as they are. Then you make it difficult for the racists to find an argument to support their racism. But, when you see racism every time you feel lazy and don't want to do something and someone reminds you of your obligation, or when you blame everybody else for your errors, or when you use talk of racism for self promotion and ego inflation, you perpetrate racism and misery like it has been done in Haiti for years by politicians with talk only and no actions. Jaf has no monopoly on anti-racism talk. He did not invent the concept. He is using it only for lack of better ideas.

I have no problems if someone wants to be a politician. But bring new ideas on the table to help Haitians get out of their misery. But, to try to induce to follow you with false statements that discourage hard work is criminal.

I had no problem with Jaf's talk before, because after all it was noise in an empty chamber. But when he starts accusing every one who has a different perspective than him of racis
m or not having courage, he is indulging in censoring and I have no choice but to expose the merits of his efforts and ideas. I hate to go personal since I have no incentive to do it nor I enjoy it. I have no choice but to call a false prophet a false prophet, a false leader a false leader, an impostor an impostor. You want plain English and Kreyol talk, you can have it. I can also guarantee you, Jaf, I can do a better job at it.

Leonel, I gave you above examples of how we can help the community. These are what the average person like you and me can do. Yes, you don't have be like a Martin Luther King, and you are absolutely right. You can be above average by creating jobs for people, by inventing new scientific or biological ways that make their life easier, or by leading them with new ideas like Gandhi or Martin Luther King did. My guess is, and no offense to anyone, that most of us in this forum are not there yet as far as I know. If I am wrong, let me know, and I will be glad to admit I was not w
ell informed. But, with Jaf's Uncle Tom's accusation he raises the standards and he must be judged by the same standards.

There has been a lot of work done in the past 50 years by real leaders, and also every day people like you and me, to end racism throughout the world. Most of these people have no name nor public recognition. I can go to Miami Beach today to swim every time I want to. Forty years ago, that was not possible because I am black. I am a senior bank executive today of a bank in Miami. Forty years ago, this was not possible because I am black. I thank those with no names who came before me and made this possible for blacks all around the world who can go almost as far as their ability allows them. My advice to Jaf is the following: You want to be a political leader? Fine by me, even though in the present case, I am not smart enough to see a leader there. But you don't get to be a leader by alienating those you want to follow you. And, you don't get there by cheap talks, but instead wi
th new ideas that contribute to improve the people's lives. So, stop pointing fingers as a way to defend what you believe in. Attack the ideas you disagree with not the people who tried to bring them in looking for solutions. You and I are black and subject to the same racism that exists. You don't have a monoply on blackness.



Post by T-dodo » Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:28 pm

The funny thing is that I admire Jaf's dedication to the cause of Haiti and to blacks, whatever his motivations. But if he wants to convince people to do something more about racism, or to join him into his way of looking at it, calling them Uncle Tom, just because their perspective is different than his, is not the way to go. For, he is wrong thinking that just because someone tries to learn how to live in a society that still has racism does make them forget their origins or lose their identities.

I have no problem engaging into a productive discussion about the different aspects of racism and its effects on the conditions in Haiti. Again, Jaf, you and I agree that there is racism today and it has also been in the past. So, there is no need to question that in the future. When I tell you something, take it at face value, because that is the way I am. I have no hidden agenda. If we use this as a basis, you will find there are a lot of c
ommon grounds between you and me.

Your last response is pleasantly surprising, because it stays on issues only. I will engage you later into the discussions of those issues you put forth. For now, I want to thank you for your response.

Now, as far as Marilyn is concerned, I have to provide an answer.

[quote]It is cheap when the purpose of the talking is only self-promotion and not a mean to end that racism or to improve it.[/quote]
I'm sorry, Jean-Marie, but that's a cheap shot.

One must identify an enemy (racism) before one can put an end to that enemy. [/quote]

While you can challenge my statement, it is also unfair at the same time not to recognize that Jaf's gratuitous accusations of Uncle Tom's on people who are not as extreme as he is on racism is not only uncalled for but also raises questions of his credibility on the subject. You probably know Jaf better than I do. I don't pretend otherwis
e. But I can only judge his writings and what I read about him. By unleashing his wild and ferocious accusations of uncle Tom, he leaves himself open for people to question his motivations.

Marilyn, you don't need to go to college, earn a doctorate degree, when you are black, to be able to identify racism as an enemy. If you are telling me that Jaf's greatest contribution has been to identify that there is racism in this world or in North America, I will have to question the standards. When you read my post above, you will see that I provided Jaf with what I think has been and continues to be the winning weapons in the fight against racism.

The real difference between Jaf and me, when he is not doing name calling, is how we get rid of this cancer from the world and how long it will take. I believe the conventional way, though slow, is the most effective way of winning that war. He wants to use nuclear weapons, so to speak, to get rid of it. [That would be similar to the "Koupe Tet Boule Kay"
type of solutions that some people believe are part of the reasons Haiti is in the mess it is today.] With the progress and the advances made in the past 50 years in the fight against racism, his approach and solutions can only make us go backward and lose the gains recently made. To me, and it is just my opinion, if we want to continue to make progress in fighting the enemy, we need to recognize what progress we have made so far and what weapons have been effective in that war. There is no need to amputate when antibiotics can do, if you don't mind me using that analogy.

I also believe, unlike Jaf, that racism is not the reason for all the ills of the black world today. We can argue about this, and it would make for great discussions, as long as we stay on the issues.


Leonel JB

Post by Leonel JB » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:21 am

People we are very much alike, even though we have different philosophies or ideologies. I understand Jaf's frustration with Racism and Uncle Toms which no one can deny their existence. I also understand JM's points. It is good to have different opinions. Myself, I also think one can overuse the term "Racism or Uncle Toms". But in Jaf's posts, I can assure you that he is not referring to any of us. He is fed up with the Racist practices of the US Govt, France, Canada and the other European countries. We also know about the worst form of Racism in our jobs or everyday life. I'm talking about Institutionalized Racism...

In terms of Uncle Tomming and Aunt Jemima-ing-, they also exist. Not for all of us. But for some who would do anything for their Massers. Gwo Jera, Guy Philippe, Chamblain etc. Not people like Dessalines, Toussaint or some of our Forefathers. But, we also know, there were black people in the French army during our indepe
ndence war. We had Traitors in the 18th and 19th century. We had Uncle Toms helping the U.S. Marines to capture Charlemagne Péralte. And the list goes on and on.

Going back to JM and Michel, you are right also. Just because some of us are doing very well in this White World, it does not mean that we are "UT". I understand JM's frustration, cause some people really associate any progress of a Black person to being UT. I think personnally, it is a Racist attitude (Black or White) to think that no black person can be smart or capable enough to climb the ladder of poverty.

Now by saying this, I also think some oligarchic countries (USA, Canada, and in Europe) have this archaic mentality that Blacks can not govern themselves. We're not smart enough to be independent. And with the help of some UT, you can see that it is not by luck that the African and Caribbean Countries are the poorest in the World. Despite the fact that they own most of their natural resources. These so called Third World Countr
ies owe more money than one can imagine, in the name of AID (Help the negroes, for they can not help themselves).

When I see how much money a small developed country is getting just to fix an existing road... while, I think, a country like Haiti gets only 15-20 millions???

Now, the question is this, what can we do about it? Well, I think all of you have the right formula. Talk about the Racists and his UT's is good. The same way, JM and Michel are right with new approaches. Know the problems, analyze them and implement alternatives.

We can save Haiti. Everyone is welcome to save that sinking ship. It's not too late. The masses, the elites, the chimeres, Makouts and most of all, Diaspora. Please, we have so many experts and people (about 8 millions). We would respect and appreciate SOyet and Goltinber's opinion...

By the way, we have to be very careful with Racism. Not all White people are Racists. Take it from me. A lot of them were and are the unsung Heroes of Black movements
. They lost their lives for our causes. Remember there are Black Racists also (maybe for another post).

L'Union Fait la Force


Post by T-dodo » Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:51 pm

It is gratifying to see, at least in this forum, that we can resolve our differences and misunderstandings in a civil and constructive manner. The exchange shows how important civil discourse is, regardless of our differences in opinions. I am equally grateful of the caliber of the people in this forum who are intelligent enough to set limits to their outburst of emotions. I wish those in position of power in Haiti, whether they are politicians or part of the commercial elite, could show such self-restraint and spirit of patriotism.

As far as the questioning of Jaf's motives, several on this forum have come to his defense. They know him more than I do. I have to give him the benefits of the doubt based on the fact I can't know more than those who come to his defense do collectively. I hope in the future, we can debate the issues more by weighting their own merits and less by labeling those who advance them. We all disliked the way the Bu
sh and Republicans campaigns used labels to avoid discussing the issues and silence the opposition. We should not use the same tactics ourselves while criticizing their use of it. I think Jaf is capable of that if he wants to be worthy of the praises bestowed on him by all those who came to his defense.

If someone betrays his culture and people by selling his credibility, reputation and opinions to a cause or a project that is against the interests of his/her culture or people, then just describe the sale and how it harms his or her people. We are intelligent enough to draw our own conclusions, like Guy said perhaps in another post. But, bypassing those descriptions using labels in an effort to broaden and exacerbate the particular wrong committed against his/her culture, such as Uncle Tom and Aunt Jemima, overstates the wrong. Labels have that particular property of encompassing more than the narrow targeted act or point debated. In my opinion, it is not fair and honest, even though the recipient of
the label committed a wrong. The punishment is not commensurate with the crime, to use a judicial term employed in the American justice system.



Post by T-dodo » Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:32 pm


Perhaps, that was a bad analogy. The point is that labels, in general, tend to overstate by some degree the truth. Intelligent people who use them are attracted to that particular characteristics of them. Can you imagine where the Republicans would have been now, if they could not call an opponent a "liberal" any time the opponent pointed out to their greed and their lack of compassion for those less fortunate than them? In my opinion, to maintain our credibility by requesting fairness from others, we need to apply the same standard to them, even when they do not reciprocate. It would avoid us surprises when we are making our case in any court of public opinion. Otherwise, we are no different than them.


User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 2152
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 7:03 pm

Post by admin » Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:32 pm

Jean-Marie, this is what I had written in another post:
[quote]We are intelligent enough to capture the meaning of your messages without your interlacing your spellings with "KKK". Please, trust us. Let's call a cat a cat and a dog a dog, by writing the plain truth without artificiality.[/quote]

I well appreciate Jean-Marie's stance. It's not the particular words that I care about, whether they are "KKK" or "Uncle Tom" or "Aunt Jemima" or even words considered socially unbecoming as I consciously used one today in another post and do not have the slightest contrition about it whatsoever. I am not a prude and I am not Victorian. But I do believe that we should apply words in such a way that we leave no doubt as to how, why, in which situation, and to whom we intend to apply them. We need to be precise in our language in order to avoid confusion. In my view, Jean-Marie had a very strong reaction, not because
of Jaf's ideas, but because he felt that Jaf was calling him an Uncle Tom. As simple as that. Perhaps Jaf should go back to his writing (as I am well sure he did) to examine what it is that he said that clearly gave Jean-Marie that impression. If he discovers it, then certainly he will benefit from the exchange by being more precise the next time he is involved in an exchange of this genre, if in fact (and that's what I believe) he did not intend to insult Jean-Marie personally, but simply differed from him in the ideas previously expressed by Jean-Marie. [Wow, that was quite a complex sentence, I hope that the complexity did not mask the meaning.]

Jean-Marie will benefit as well from the exchange, as he had the opportunity to defend himself from the perceived accusation, without swearing enmity to his perceived accuser. I knew that there was an implicit danger in that sort of exchange, but it is a measure of the confidence I have in both Jean-Marie and Jaf that I felt it unnecessary to intervene
and I let them work it out. In the end, they did, and I have no doubt on my mind that, in spite of their differences (that have not vanished in any way) they can re-establish their respect for each other and work collaboratively for a new Haiti, making sure that they do not work at cross purposes. Of course, they will go at it, each in his own way and particular path.

There is a lot to be said for frank talk, as Jafrikayiti proposes. Personally, I am all for it. However, when it comes to labels, even when they do not "overstate" a case as Jean-Marie put it, they can miss the mark altogether due to the careless way in which they are usually thrown about, or they can obscure the message of the speaker with all the imprecision that is attached to such labels (due to their historical usage), and finally they can offend and alienate quite unnecessarily the very people that we need to create alliances with to further our goals.

I would more quickly use words generally considered vulgar to descri
be a given situation if I feel that those words happen to describe particularly my thoughts at that particular moment. But labelling a person is an altogether different situation, as the person tends to remember it forever. Situations are situations, people are people. Furthermore, people have feelings and we need to remember that, in order not to make too many enemies. The person who makes too many enemies ends up waging a fight alone and is bound to lose it. It's a lose/lose situation, and that's what labeling usually leads to, due to the very nature of their imprecision. So, I would advise all to be careful even when they feel that they must use them in some situations.

For my part, I am still dedicated to call a cat a cat and a dog a dog, by writing the plain truth without artificiality (and hopefully, without labeling). I believe that is possible.

Post Reply