Podcast Summary: “Haiti Since 1804” – A Conversation with Dr. Alex Dupuy and Dr. Robert Fatton
In this deep and provocative episode, host Patrick Jean-Baptiste welcomes two titans of Haitian political thought—Dr. Alex Dupuy and Dr. Robert Fatton—for a rare joint discussion centered on Dr. Dupuy’s latest book, Haiti Since 1804: Critical Perspectives on Class, Power, and Gender. Framed by their decades-long friendship and intellectual camaraderie, the episode traces the contours of Haiti’s post-independence struggles through a critical Marxian lens that prioritizes class over race or gender as the fundamental axis of analysis.
The conversation opens with reflections on friendship, intellectual lineage, and shared commitments to class analysis. From there, Dr. Dupuy outlines the central thesis of his book: that Haiti’s enduring underdevelopment stems not primarily from the indemnity paid to France, but from the Haitian ruling class’s failure to reconstitute plantation-based capitalism or industrial infrastructure following independence. He challenges popular moral narratives that center the indemnity as Haiti’s original economic wound, arguing instead that the indemnity was voluntarily proposed by Haitian elites to secure international recognition and protect their property interests.
Dr. Fatton complements this perspective by underscoring how Haiti’s post-revolutionary peasantry successfully resisted attempts at re-subjugation. Their autonomy undermined elite attempts to restore large-scale plantations, forcing a pivot to a rent-based model that stifled capitalist accumulation. Together, the scholars unpack the historical use of extrajudicial violence, gang formations, and foreign interventions as tools wielded by state actors to enforce elite power.
The discussion grows sharper when addressing reparations and gender. Dr. Dupuy provocatively argues that calls for reparations lack legal grounding because Haitian elites themselves initiated the indemnity. He extends this critical lens to gender, insisting that oppression must be situated within class relations—where elite women also exploit working-class women under capitalism.
Fatton and Dupuy also critique contemporary Haitian scholarship that leans heavily on race-based or nationalist narratives, cautioning against what they term “race reductionism.” They stress the need for fact-based, materialist analysis over sentiment or moralism.
The episode concludes with reflections on the next generation of Haitian scholars, the legacy of Black Lives Matter, and the urgent need to center internal class dynamics—rather than external blame—as a foundation for understanding Haiti’s ongoing crisis.
Key Themes:
- Class as the primary engine of Haitian history
- Reassessment of the French indemnity and its true origins
- Resistance of the peasantry and the failure to rebuild plantation capitalism
- Gender inequality situated within class hierarchy
- Skepticism toward reparations and moral narratives devoid of evidence
- Critique of race reductionism and nationalist historiography
- The role of Haitian elites in shaping—not just suffering from—underdevelopment
Quote to remember:
“Moral arguments without facts are just that—moral arguments. They’re not history.” – Dr. Alex Dupuy
This episode is a must-listen for anyone seeking a rigorous, unsentimental rethinking of Haiti’s post-1804 trajectory—one that foregrounds the power of class, critiques romanticized narratives, and demands historical accountability from within.
Subject: A critical examination of key historical and societal issues in Haiti since its independence, focusing on class, power, gender, the indemnity, economic development, and the role of the Haitian ruling class and external forces.
Key Themes and Arguments:
This source presents a critical perspective on Haitian history, challenging commonly held views, particularly regarding the indemnity paid to France and the root causes of Haiti’s underdevelopment. The central argument revolves around the primacy of class as the primary analytical lens through which to understand Haitian society and its historical trajectory, subsuming other categories like race and gender within this framework.
Most Important Ideas and Facts:
- Primacy of Class: Both Dr. Alex J. and Dr. Bert F. emphasize the central importance of class in understanding Haitian history and society. Dr. Bert F. states, “we both always talk about class and we don’t like what you might call race reductionism or gender reductionism. We think that class As primacy over all the other categories.” They argue that class divisions and the actions of the Haitian ruling class are the primary drivers of Haiti’s problems.
- The Indemnity: A Ruling Class Initiative: Dr. Alex J. fundamentally challenges the narrative that Haiti was simply forced to pay the indemnity to France at gunpoint. He argues that Haitian rulers, specifically Alexandre Pétion and later Jean-Pierre Boyer, first proposed the idea of paying an indemnity to compensate former French planters in return for French recognition of Haiti’s independence.
- “there was a no Haitian rulers who first proposed to pay France an indemnity in return for its recognition of Haes. Independence”
- This was seen as necessary for Haiti to gain recognition from other Western powers, including the US.
- Subsequent Haitian rulers accepted and continued to pay the indemnity, benefiting from the security it provided against further French invasion and gaining full control of Haitian land.
- Dr. Alex J. insists there is “no case for restitutional reparations to Haiti without. Understanding that it was a Haitian ruling class under its own agency for its own interests that put the issue on the table.”
- The Indemnity as a Financial Drain, but Not the Sole Cause of Underdevelopment: While acknowledging the indemnity was a considerable financial burden on Haiti, Dr. Fatton argues it was not the main reason for Haiti’s underdevelopment.
- “I don’t think that explains the predicament of modern Haiti.”
- He points out that other countries have overcome significant debt.
- Crucially, the victims of the debt were primarily the peasantry, not the ruling class, who benefited from the stability and control of land that came with recognition.
- Subsequent borrowing by Haitian governments, unrelated to the indemnity, also contributed to indebtedness.
- Failure to Recreate the Plantation System as a Root Cause of Economic Stagnation: Dr. Alex J. argues that the fundamental reason for Haiti’s economic underdevelopment was the inability of the post-independence ruling class to subjugate the former slaves and recreate the large-scale plantation system of the colonial era.
- After failing to enforce draconian labor laws, the former slaves became land-possessing peasants, exercising significant autonomy.
- The ruling class had to rely on renting land to peasants or on peasant production for export crops (primarily coffee).
- This lack of control over labor and the failure to establish large-scale, organized agricultural or industrial production hindered sustainable economic development throughout the 19th century.
- State-Sanctioned Violence and Political Instability: The source highlights the history of state-sanctioned extra-judicial violence and constant internal conflict among factions of the ruling class as major contributors to Haiti’s instability and inability to create a functional state for economic development.
- The assassination of Jean-Jacques Dessalines in 1806 is cited as inaugurating “the recourse to organize criminality. By heads of state.”
- Early rulers like Christophe and Pétion used force to gain and maintain power, leading to civil war.
- Paramilitary organizations were created by various heads of state throughout history to suppress opposition.
- The Role of the Haitian Elite: The Haitian elite are portrayed as self-interested and exploitative, prioritizing their own enrichment through control of the state. They are seen as no more or less “corrupt” than other elites globally but operate within specific historical and global economic constraints. There is a “convergence of interest between the elite and external forces and financial forces.”
- Gender Exploitation within a Class Framework: Dr. Alex J. contends that the exploitation and subordination of women in Haiti must be understood within the class context.
- “one cannot understand. The, the domination, suppression and exploitation of women in Haiti outside of the class context of Haitian society.”
- Women in the dominant classes participate in the exploitation of women in the lower classes.
- Women are paid less for the same work, particularly in assembly industries, which relies heavily on cheap female labor.
- While acknowledging gender-specific violence, the analysis stresses that class structures facilitate and shape this exploitation.
- Critique of Romanticized Views and External Blame: Both speakers push back against romanticized views of alternative societal structures (like the “lakou” system) as sustainable long-term solutions for economic development, especially within the context of the global economy. They also critique the tendency among some intellectuals to solely blame external factors for Haiti’s problems, arguing for the necessity of analyzing the internal dynamics and agency of the Haitian dominant classes.
- “everything that goes wrong in Haiti …. is found in external factors. External factors are important, but they’re not the only one.”
- Skepticism Regarding Reparations and Moral Arguments: Dr. Alex Dupuy is skeptical about the feasibility and justification for reparations based on the indemnity, given the Haitian ruling class’s agency in proposing it. Dr. Robert Fatton echoes this skepticism, highlighting the lack of Haitian power to demand reparations and the historical reluctance of Western powers to return even stolen artifacts.
- Moral arguments for reparations are seen as insufficient without factual evidence supporting the claims and recognizing the historical agency of Haitian actors.
- “Moral arguments without facts are just that moral arguments.”
Supporting Evidence and Examples:
- The historical record showing Pétion and Boyer’s proposals for indemnity payments.
- Dr. Alex J.’s research in French archives.
- Leslie Péan’s work on state-sanctioned criminality.
- Examples of paramilitary groups throughout Haitian history (Sulouk’s, Riste’s Zeo, Duvalier’s Tonton Macoutes).
- The failure of Boyer’s attempts to reimpose draconian labor systems.
- The reliance on peasant-produced export crops (coffee, lumber) in the 19th century.
- The US occupation in 1915 and subsequent introduction of assembly industries reliant on cheap labor.
- The low wages paid to women in assembly industries.
- The high percentage of remittances in Haiti’s GDP (over 25%).
- Anthony Phillips’ research on the financial drain of the indemnity and subsequent debts.
- The overthrow of Boyer in 1843, where the indemnity was not a stated grievance.
- The historical context of the dominant plantation economy in the Caribbean during the 19th century.
- The demographic impact of the Haitian Revolution, leading to a shortage of labor for plantations.
- The limited return of African art objects by France despite initial promises.
- The allocation of earthquake relief funds, with a small percentage going to Haitian entities.
- The issue of “PetroCaribe” money being stolen by the ruling class.
- The New York Times series linking the indemnity directly to Haiti’s underdevelopment (seen as simplistic).
Conclusion:
The interview on the book provides a provocative and class-centric reinterpretation of Haitian history. It strongly argues that the actions and interests of the Haitian ruling class, particularly their decision to propose and maintain the indemnity and their failure to establish a sustainable economic system beyond peasant-based production, have been the primary drivers of Haiti’s challenges since independence. While acknowledging external pressures and historical context, the source emphasizes the internal dynamics of class power as the most crucial factor in understanding Haiti’s trajectory. The discussion is underpinned by a strong emphasis on factual evidence and a critical approach to commonly accepted narratives, particularly those based on purely moral or race-reductionist arguments.
Haiti Since 1804: A Critical Perspective
Study Guide
This study guide is designed to help you review the key arguments and concepts presented in the provided excerpts from the episode with author Alex Dupuy book’s “Haiti Since 1804: Critical Perspectives on Class, Power, and Gender.” The interview primarily focuses on a critical analysis of Haiti’s post-independence history, emphasizing the role of class power, the indemnity, and the challenges to economic development.
Key Themes and Arguments:
- Primacy of Class: Dupuy et Fatton, following a Marxist tradition, argue that class is the fundamental category for understanding Haitian society and its historical trajectory. While acknowledging the importance of race and gender, they believe these are ultimately subsumed under class relations.
- The Indemnity: A central point of contention is the indemnity paid to France after independence. Contrary to the common narrative that Haiti was forced to pay under duress, the authors argue that the Haitian ruling class proposed the indemnity to gain recognition from France and other Western powers, thus securing their control over property and the state. The indemnity is viewed as a financial drain, but not the primary cause of Haiti’s underdevelopment.
- Failure to Recreate the Plantation System: A key argument is that Haiti’s economic underdevelopment stemmed from the inability of the ruling class to re-establish the large-scale plantation system after independence. The former slaves, who became land-possessing peasants, successfully resisted subjugation, maintaining a degree of autonomy and producing crops primarily for their own sustenance and sale to the export market.
- Internal Class Conflict and State Control: The constant internal conflicts among factions of the ruling class to control the state for personal enrichment is identified as a significant factor hindering sustainable economic development.
- The Role of the Peasants: The peasantry, by resisting forced labor on large plantations and maintaining control over land (either as owners or de facto occupants), played a crucial role in shaping Haiti’s post-independence economy. While this secured their autonomy, it also limited the ruling class’s ability to generate wealth through large-scale agricultural production for export.
- Gender and Class: The authors argue that the exploitation and subordination of women in Haiti cannot be understood outside of the class context. Women in the dominant classes participate in the exploitation of lower-class women, and the preference for hiring women in assembly industries is linked to their lower wages and greater vulnerability to suppression.
- Skepticism towards Reparations/Restitution: Dr. Alex expresses skepticism about the case for reparations from France, arguing that the indemnity was initiated by the Haitian ruling class for their own benefit. The authors also highlight the lack of power Haiti has to demand restitution in the current global power structure.
- Critique of Race Reductionism and Nationalism: The authors critique analyses that attribute Haiti’s problems solely to external factors or frame them solely through a racial lens. They emphasize the agency and responsibility of the Haitian dominant classes in contributing to the country’s current state.
- Evidence-Based Analysis: Both authors stress the importance of basing arguments on factual evidence and archival research rather than solely on moral claims or feelings.
Quiz Questions:
- According to Dr. Dupuy and Dr. Fatton, what is the most important category for understanding Haitian society, and why?
- Who do the authors claim initially proposed the idea of the indemnity to France, and what was the primary motivation?
- What do the authors identify as the main reason for Haiti’s economic underdevelopment after independence, as opposed to the indemnity?
- How did the former slaves, who became peasants, resist the efforts of the Haitian ruling class to recreate the colonial economic system?
- Besides the failure to recreate the plantation system, what other internal factor do the authors identify as a significant contributor to Haiti’s instability and underdevelopment?
- How do the authors integrate the analysis of gender into their class-based understanding of Haitian society?
- Why is Dr. Alex skeptical about the possibility and justification for reparations from France to Haiti?
- What critique do the authors offer regarding some contemporary analyses of Haiti’s problems?
- What is the authors’ stance on the importance of evidence in historical analysis, particularly when compared to moral arguments?
- How did the US occupation of 1915 attempt to alter the economic landscape and labor force in Haiti?
Quiz Answer Key:
- According to Dr. Alex and Robert Fatton, class is the most important category for understanding Haitian society. They believe that while race and gender are important, they are ultimately subsumed under class relations and the dynamics of power and exploitation within the class structure.
- The authors claim that the Haitian ruling class, specifically figures like Boyer, initially proposed the idea of the indemnity to France. Their primary motivation was to gain recognition of Haiti’s independence from France and other Western powers, which would legitimize their control over the state and land.
- The authors identify the inability of the Haitian ruling class to recreate the large-scale plantation system as the main reason for Haiti’s economic underdevelopment. This failure stemmed from the successful resistance of the former slaves who became land-possessing peasants and maintained their autonomy.
- The former slaves, who became peasants, resisted the efforts to recreate the plantation system by refusing to be subjugated as forced laborers. They gained access to or occupied land, allowing them to produce crops with a degree of autonomy rather than being compelled to work on large estates.
- Besides the failure to recreate the plantation system, the authors identify the constant internal conflict among factions of the Haitian ruling class to control the state as a means of personal enrichment as a significant contributor to Haiti’s instability and inability to develop sustainably.
- The authors integrate gender into their analysis by arguing that the exploitation and subordination of women are deeply embedded within the class structure. They contend that women in the dominant classes also exploit lower-class women, and the preference for hiring women in assembly industries is linked to their lower wages and vulnerability based on their class and gender.
- Dr. Dupuy is skeptical about reparations because he argues that the indemnity was not imposed by France but was initially proposed by the Haitian ruling class for their own strategic benefit. Dr Fatton also points to Haiti’s lack of power in the current global system to effectively demand and receive significant restitution.
- The authors critique contemporary analyses that rely heavily on race reductionism or nationalistic perspectives, which tend to blame external factors for Haiti’s problems while overlooking the agency and role of the Haitian dominant classes.
- The authors strongly emphasize the importance of basing historical arguments on factual evidence and research, including archival work. They view moral arguments, while potentially well-intentioned, as insufficient without empirical support.
- During the US occupation, there was an attempt to force peasants to work on plantations and to introduce assembly industries that relied on cheap Haitian labor, particularly women workers.
Essay Format Questions:
- Analyze the authors’ argument that the Haitian ruling class, rather than external pressure, was primarily responsible for initiating the indemnity to France. Discuss the motivations and consequences of this decision according to the provided text.
- Evaluate the authors’ claim that the inability to recreate the plantation system was the root cause of Haiti’s economic underdevelopment. Compare and contrast this perspective with other potential contributing factors mentioned or implied in the text.
- Discuss the authors’ class-based analysis of gender relations in Haiti. How do they argue that the exploitation of women is intertwined with and shaped by the country’s class structure?
- Critically assess the authors’ skepticism regarding reparations and restitution for Haiti. Based on their arguments, explain why they believe there is no strong case for such demands and what they see as the primary obstacles.
- Examine the authors’ emphasis on the importance of evidence-based analysis in understanding Haitian history. How do they contrast this approach with analyses based primarily on moral arguments or feelings?
Glossary of Key Terms:
- Indemnity: The sum of money paid by Haiti to France after its independence, initially presented as compensation to former slave owners for their lost property.
- Race Reductionism: An analytical approach that primarily explains social phenomena, such as inequality and historical outcomes, through the lens of race, potentially minimizing the importance of other factors like class.
- Gender Reductionism: Similar to race reductionism, this approach primarily explains social phenomena through the lens of gender, potentially overlooking the influence of other factors like class.
- Class Primacy: The belief, central to the authors’ perspective, that class is the most fundamental and determining category for understanding the dynamics of power, inequality, and historical development in a society.
- Plantation System: The large-scale agricultural production system, prevalent during the colonial era in Haiti, based on forced labor (slavery) and focused on producing cash crops for export.
- Land-Possessing Peasants: Former slaves in post-independence Haiti who, through resistance and de facto occupation or ownership, gained control over land and produced crops largely autonomously from large-scale plantation structures.
- Assembly Industries: Industries that import components and assemble them into finished products, often located in countries with low labor costs, as they became significant in Haiti after the US occupation.
- Moral Argument: A claim or perspective based on ethical or moral principles, which the authors distinguish from arguments based on factual evidence.
- Restitution/Reparations: The act of making amends or providing compensation for past harms or injustices. In the context of Haiti, this refers to potential demands for France to compensate Haiti for the indemnity and the harms of slavery.
- Agency: The capacity of individuals or groups to act independently and make their own free choices. The authors emphasize the agency of the Haitian ruling class in the events of post-independence Haiti.
- Disaster Capitalism: The practice of taking advantage of a crisis or disaster to implement policies or initiatives that benefit private interests, often at the expense of the affected population.
- Remittances: Money sent by people working abroad to their families in their home country, identified as a significant source of revenue for the Haitian population.
convert_to_textConvert to source
Don’t blame moi if the translation below sucks–blame my ai robot, Soulouque. He’s still learning.
Ayiti Depi 1804
===
Mezanmi, nou gen yon bèl bagay pou nou jodi a. Mwen gen de envite distenge ki parèt nan emisyon an. Pou premye fwa ansanm, nou gen Dr. Alex, Alex j, ak Dr. Bert. Byenveni nan emisyon an, frè m yo. Mèsi pou nou tout. Mèsi. Wi, se bèl. Anvan nou antre nan sa, mwen t ap kraze sèvo m yè swa ap panse a egzanp pi popilè nan jeyan entelektyèl ki te pi bon zanmi pandan tout lavi yo.
Mwen te ka sèlman panse a de ki te vin nan tèt mwen, David Hume ak Adam Smith. Lòt la se Pablo Neruda ak Gabrielle Garcia Marquez. Nou tou de se ekriven. Ki tit liv ki ta pi byen dekri long amitye nou an? Tit liv la? Wi, si ou ta bay yon liv, yon tit mwen. Pou dekri amitye nou an pandan tout lavi a, ki sa li ta ye? Kapital Marx la. Pèdi Marx ak Pèdi Kapital. Paul Marx? Non. Wi, mwen konnen, men o, pou ou li Marx. Kapital Marx la. Oke. Men, mwen ta itilize klas, ki se nan yon sèten mezi menm bagay la, men nou tou de toujou pale sou klas epi nou pa renmen sa ou ta ka rele rediksyonis rasyal oswa rediksyonis sèks. Nou panse ke klas.
Gen primasi sou tout lòt kategori yo. Pa ke lòt kategori yo pa enpòtan, men yo soumèt anba klas. Se konsa, mwen panse ke sa se liy nou an. Epi evidamman li date tounen nan Marx. Mm-hmm. Epi bliye evidamman zanmi Marx ak Engels. Sa se yon lòt long amitye. Poukisa ou ta soumèt lòt kategori yo kòm kòz, si wi klas. Mwen pral kite Alex pale sou sa paske nan liv li a, li gen yon chapit sou sèks.
Li trè klè ke klas pi enpòtan, ak chapit li sou endemnizasyon an montre tou ke klas pi enpòtan pase yon kalite reyaksyon nasyonalis, oswa ke nou tout se Ayisyen e nou tout nan sa ansanm. Anplis de sa aktyèlman fè li klè ke nou pa. Nou tout nan sa ansanm, yo gen gwo divizyon ak kèk moun benefisye de divizyon sa yo. Se konsa, poukisa mwen pa kite Alex pale sou sèks, endemnizasyon an, paske nan liv ke li fèk pibliye a 80, depi 1804, mwen, mwen gen yon blurb nan fen a epi mwen te di. Agiman an nan liv la konvenk epi yo pral defi anpil soti nan zòn konfò yo ke mwen te rankontre ke mwen pral reponn sa. Mwen te vle mande ou menm si, anvan nou antre nan liv Pwofesè Deiz la, ha. Depi 1804, mwen. Èske Karl Marx ak Engels te gen anpil bagay pou yo di sou revolisyon Ayisyen an?
Li mansyone Ayiti, youn nan volim travay kolekte li yo, men li pa t gen anpil bagay pou l di sou sa. Li te konnen Revolisyon Ayiti a, men li pa t antre nan li. Yo pa t peye anpil atansyon sou revolisyon an oswa sou sa ki te pase nan Ayiti. Sansi revolisyon. Se konsa, Pwofesè Dik, nouvo liv sa a ke Dr Fatton mansyone. Ke nou pral pale sou jodi a. Tit la se Ayiti depi 1804, Pèspektiv Kritik Sou Klas Pouvwa ak Sèks. Ki sa ki diferan sou liv sa a konpare ak lòt ou te ekri yo?
Mwen jis vle di ke mwen dwe yon gwo rekonesans a, pou li chapit yo nan liv la epi ban mwen fidbak li. Epi tou yon lòt kòlèg Anton, ki se nan Kanada. Li menm tou li te li anpil nan chapit yo epi li te ban mwen bon fidbak. Se konsa, mwen trè rekonesan anvè yo tou de pou fè sa. Ak lòt moun tou li diferan chapit, epi mwen mansyone yo nan remèsiman liv la. Men, fondamantalman sa mwen eseye fè nan liv sa a se defi anpil nan pèspektiv dominan yo sou endemnizasyon an, ki fondamantalman.
Dekri Ayiti kòm tou senpleman kapitile nan demand yo nan Lafrans pou reparasyon, pou te defèt franse yo pandan Revolisyon Ayisyen an. Epi mwen te panse sa a te manke aspè santral la nan li, ki se ke te gen yon okenn chèf Ayisyen ki premye pwopoze yo peye Lafrans yon endemnite an retou pou rekonesans li nan Haes. Endepandans paske osi lontan ke Lafrans te refize rekonèt li se endepandans, pa gen okenn lòt pouvwa Lwès te vle fè sa, ki gen ladan Etazini ak lòt pouvwa Ewopeyen yo pou Ayiti te kapab rantre nan rès peyi endepandan yo nan mond lan. Li te oblije peye yon pri pou fè sa, ki se te fondamantalman di Lafrans, oke, nou pral konpanse ansyen plantè yo pou pèt yo an retou Pou sa, ou rekonèt laj endepandan, ki se sa endemnite a te tout sou yon fwa, poukisa li mete sa nan ajanda a.
Lafrans te pran li epi li te kouri avèk li epi li te rive nan tèm sou kantite lajan endemnite a okòmansman, 125 milyon. Frank ki pita redwi a 60 milyon depi Ayiti te prete 30 milyon pou peye premye tranch yo sou endemnite a ak kantite total lajan yo dwe Lafrans, te rive nan yon 90 milyon fran epi yo pa 150 milyon fran, kòm pifò moun te ekri sou. Se te rezon ki fè mwen te vle ekri chapit sa a, fondamantalman pou ofri yon pèspektiv pi kritik sou ajans klas dominan Ayisyen an. Nan pwopoze endemnite a, ak pifò ekriven yo te blame endemnite a tou pou enkapasite Ayiti a pou devlope ekonomi li. Epi mwen te diskite olye ke se te enkapasite fòs klas dominan yo pou subjuge ansyen esklav yo ki te vin peyizan ki posede Lynn.
Epi isit la ankò, pwoblèm klas la te santral nan agiman mwen an paske. Apre Draconia li te toujou pa t ‘kapab rkre sistèm nan gwo echèl plantasyon ke franse yo te etabli pandan epòk la kolonyal. Epi li te echwe ke peyizan yo ki te vin pwopriyetè tè oswa posede tè yo te kapab egzèse yon gwo zafè, plis otonomi nan sa yo te pwodui, Arabi, Ayisyen, boujwazi a. Menm moun ki posede tè te oblije lwe tè yo bay peyizan yo pou pwodui rekòt yo te ekspòte, ki se te kafe. Agiman mwen an se te ke se te enkapasite klas dominan an pou repwodui. Sistèm nan gwo echèl plantasyon nan epòk la kolonyal ki te nan rasin enkapasite Ayiti a pou devlope ekonomi li.
Konbine avèk, menm jan mwen ale nan, diskite konfli konstan entèn nan mitan faksyon nan klas la dominan kontwole eta a kòm yon mwayen pou anrichisman pou moun ki kontwole li. Si ou gade revolisyon yo oswa konfli nan mitan manm yo nan klas la dominan politik, li eksplike enstabilite relatif Ayiti a nan kreye yon eta ki ta ka fonksyone pou devlope ekonomi an nan yon fason pi dirab. Se konsa, se sa ki te pouse m ‘analize pwosesis sa yo nan chapit yo nan liv la. Yo nan lòd pou Ayiti yo rekonèt kòm yon nasyon, mwen. Pwoblèm nan endemnite te dwe rezoud epi yon fwa poukisa mete sa sou tab la? Pa gen okenn lòt chèf nan Ayiti defye sa. Yo pa janm eseye. Renegosye oswa jwenn zanmi yo sispann peye. Sa vle di, yo tout obsève, yo tout respekte desizyon li pou peye endemnite a, epi yo tout te fè sa jouk nan fen syèk ki sot pase a lè yo te fin peye endemnite a nan 83 li yo.
Se konsa, fondamantalman faksyon yo nan klas la dominan ki te rive sou pouvwa. Aksepte endemnite a kòm si menas yo te konplè. Epi lè sa a, kesyon an te Lè sa a, ki jan yo te pral reòganize ekonomi an akimile richès? Sa te mennen nan kesyon an. Uh, enkapasite a rkre gwo echèl plantasyon, uh, ekonomi nan epòk la kolonyal, ki te vle di boujwazi a te konte sou pwodwi ki te pwodui pa peyizan yo ki te swa pwopriyetè tè oswa fondamantalman defacto okipe tè a nan ki, sou ki yo te pwodui rekòt yo itilize pou ekspòtasyon, prensipalman kafe. Hey, eep pa t ‘kapab kreye. Fòs enfrastrikti yo te soutni devlopman ekonomik ak endistriyèl pandan syèk Ian an, ki te fini nan okipasyon ameriken an, Atlassian 15. Sa se yon lòt aspè nan transfòmasyon nan 80 nan prensipalman yon ekonomi ekspòtasyon ki baze sou travay la relativman pi bon mache. Pri travayè Ayisyen yo pase lòt pati nan Karayib la, men sa a se plis nan anvan yon syèk.
Mwen vle fè yon brèf sou itilizasyon vyolans ekstrajudisyè leta sanksyone nan tout istwa Ayiti a, ke ou dokimante reyèlman byen. Isit la ou site yon Leslie Payer ki te di ke asasina Jean Jacques Dile Hades premye prezidan an nan 1806. Ofisyèlman inogire sa li te rele rekou a òganize kriminalite. Pa tèt eta yo ki ta sèvi ak monopoli yo sou itilizasyon fòs pou siprime moun ki te opoze dikte yo? Wi, nan kou, paske sa a se te sèl fason ke pifò nan chèf yo byen bonè te ka jwenn aksè nan pouvwa. Se pa t ap atravè mwayen demokratik, men Kristòf te enpoze ansyen tribi a jwenn pouvwa pa fòs. Te gen yon gè sivil ki te divize peyi a an fondamantalman. Okòmansman twa pati ak Kristòf nan nò a, Petion nan lwès la, epi nou ale nan sid la jiskaske lèt la te bat pa Petion ak Petion reyini sid la ak lwès la.
Epi lè Kristòf te komèt swisid, lè sa a poukisa li te reyini tout peyi a. Men, mwen. Fondamantalman règ la idwo draconian vle di, espesyalman Christoph nan nò a, te eseye enpoze yon sistèm relativman mwens represif. Men, paske li pa t ‘kapab defèt ansyen travayè esklav yo ak rkre sistèm nan plantasyon nan sid la, yo te reyisi anpeche l’ fè sa. Peyi a te reyini nan Boer la. Li te eseye reenpoze sistèm draconian an. Nan travay men pa t ‘kapab reyisi. Se konsa, Ayiti, pandan diznevyèm syèk la, prezidan yo te egzèse, pwodui ak vann rekòt yo oswa peye lwaye bay pwopriyetè tè a epi vann rekòt yo bay klas la komèsan oryante ekspòtasyon nan Ayiti. Se konsa, se konsa Ayiti te fè pifò nan revni li nan ekspòtasyon li yo.
Lè ale nan katalòg la nan eskwadwon teworis òganize sa yo ou rele, èske ou ka pale sou 1847 a 185
