Denis and Duvalier print a claim that biology sets social behaviour

On 11 September 1936 Lorimer Denis and Francois Duvalier published an essay on what they called the Haitian ethnie in Le Nouvelliste, the country's main daily paper. Their claim was that biology determined the psychological and social behaviour of the different colour groups in Haiti. The country had been divided since independence between a largely light skinned elite and a Black majority, and that quarrel had always been fought in the language of politics, property and class. Denis and Duvalier moved it onto race as a physical fact, borrowing the vocabulary of European racial science and turning it against the elite that had used the same vocabulary to justify its own standing. The essay is the founding document of noirisme. It supplied the reasoning Duvalier used as president after 1957 to argue that power in Haiti belonged to Black Haitians by nature, and that opposition to him was opposition to the majority itself.

The sharp increase in Jewish immigration into Palestine between 1933 and 1936 hardened Arab opposition to the Balfour Declaration and produced strikes, bloodshed and then open rebellion that lasted from 1936 to 1939. Serious disturbances broke out on 19 April 1936, and on 7 August a royal commission was appointed to establish the underlying causes and to determine whether either Arabs or Jews had legitimate grievances under the terms of the mandate. The commissioners reported on 22 June 1937 that partition was the only method they could propose for dealing with the root of the trouble, on the principle that half a loaf beats none. The Woodhead Commission sent out in 1938 found no workable partition scheme, and the White Paper of 1939 was a further British attempt at a settlement. The mandate ended on 15 May 1948 and the war followed at once.

For three days and nights beginning 2 October 1937, Trujillo's forces killed Haitians along the Dominican frontier. Estimates run from fifteen thousand to twenty thousand. The border river is the Massacre, named in 1728 for the killing of a band of boucaniers by Spanish colonists, so the place had the name two centuries before it earned it again. Machetes were used rather than rifles so the state could describe it as a spontaneous act by Dominican farmers. The parsley test, making people say perejil to catch a Kreyòl speaker's r, is remembered because it turned language into a death sentence. Haiti eventually accepted a settlement of about thirty dollars a head, of which very little reached any family. I want the two facts adjacent: a river already named for a massacre, and a payment of thirty dollars per person. Both are things a state chose.

From the end of the 1930s colonial administrations in Africa began pushing plantation farming on the North American model, planned in offices and imposed on rural districts. The intervention was heavy handed and it produced resentment in the countryside that lasted for decades. It also broke something political. British rule across much of Africa worked through indirect rule, which governed villages by way of chiefs recognised, paid and sometimes invented by the colonial power. Agricultural planners dealt with land, labour and quotas themselves and went around those chiefs. The authority of men who already carried the stigma of collaboration drained away, since Africans in many walks of life had long treated the whole arrangement as irrelevant to them. Colonial power was dismantling its own local scaffolding while still leaning on it. What remained was a rural population with fresh grievances and a set of traditional authorities with no credit left to spend, which cleared the ground for a generation of nationalist leaders who owed those authorities nothing.