the years after independence · Haitianspan
Petion and Boyer let the plantation die, and Stein defends them
›Read the full entryClose
Stein ends by defending the two rulers usually charged with wrecking the Haitian economy. Dessalines and Christophe could not grant the land reform ordinary farm workers wanted, because achieving and defending independence required plantation wealth for expensive national defence and for living regally. Only when the danger of French invasion passed, and the leaders' own pretensions declined, was a programme satisfying the typical farm worker carried out, and that was the work of Petion and Boyer, who abandoned the attempt to revive the plantation and let freed people hold their small plots. Stein calls the criticism unfair to both the rulers and the common people. Even intact, Haitian plantations would have suffered from changing Atlantic trade patterns, the general decline of the West Indian colonies and the crushing indemnities France demanded, and the majority were unalterably opposed to the system anyway. Where this account departs from the standard one: Rejects the argument, credited to the Heinls among others, that Petion and Boyer sealed Haiti's economic fate by scuttling the plantation system.