Blame for the Victim and Praise for the Predator: Haiti in the Wake of Devastation

A recent Op-Ed piece in the New York Times by David Brooks demonstrates the worst colonial mentality of blaming the victim. In a piece titled The Underlying Tragedy, Brooks argues that the voodoo culture and poor work ethic are the underlying causes of the economic woes of the country. He postulates that other former colonies have been able to pull themselves up by the boot straps and ask why not Haiti. He proposes to fix Haiti by changing the Haitian culture through programs to teach hard work, responsibility and thrift.

Mr. Brooks is either ignorant or overlooks a critical difference in Haiti’s history. The Haitian people have struggled under a significant debt load since colonial times as a price for their “freedom”. The islands example of liberation has caused fears in Northern capitals for two centuries and to this day the island’s attempts at self rule are blocked by anxious outsiders worried by the example Haiti could represent to its neighbors.

Haiti became the third revolutionary republic of the modern era, joining the USA and France, when François-Dominique Toussaint Louverture successfully defeated the French, then the Spanish and finally the English to obtain liberation for the enslaved population of the island. This liberation was short lived as chains of force were replaced by chains of debt. While the United States initially supported the revolution through the policies of President John Adams, this was changed by Thomas Jefferson who feared an independent state of black people so close to the United would influence the South’s enslaved population. Jefferson went so far as to advocate the emancipation and colonization of American slaves to Africa to prevent another Haiti.

Haiti was left isolated after the revolution and had no friends in the colonial West. Besides slave holding United States, all of her neighbors were colonies that depended on slavery.

In 1825 Haiti was forced to sign a treaty with France to prevent another invasion and forced slavery by European forces. France’s king agreed to recognize Haiti's independence only if the new republic paid France an indemnity of 150 million francs and reduced its import and export taxes by half. By comparison, the United States paid France 60 million francs for the much larger Louisiana Territory.

Haiti was forced to borrow money from private European banks to pay the indemnity. The banks charged high interest and administrative fees that further increased the debt burden. The nation did not finish paying the French for their freedom until after WWII. The repayment of these loans has been a major factor in the continued invasion and occupation of Haiti by the United States. From the 1960’s and beyond, Haiti has suffered under International Monetary Fund management that has done little but assure that all GDP would be channeled to serving debt hosted upon the Haitian people by the governments imposed upon this people by governments acting on behalf of international banking.

While CNN commentators are praising the American response to this crisis, there seems to be little understanding of why we invaded Haiti so many times in the 20th century or the continued role of the United States in defending the interest of banks. There is even less understanding of the long term structural issues created by these policies.