Haiti: Legacies of Dictatorships
By Hyppolite Pierre
When facing a dictatorial regime, the possibilities for any opposition to express its views are quite limited, and at times, even non-existent. The risk factor is usually extremely high, and lives are lost oftentimes senselessly.
Facing such dilemma and the real dramatic dangers, the opposition is constantly obliged to be on the look out, seeking for ways not only to express its views, but also to knock out such government in violent ways if necessary.
In a democratic setting however, an uncensored press gathers the news and informs the public at large, about the daily occurrences. Columnists express their views in the media without fear. The opposition makes public its agenda for the nation, and debates or criticizes governmental policies through all legal channels of communication.
But because of the guaranteed freedom of expression and even the probability that the opposition will some day, be responsible for the affairs of the state, the level of confrontation is usually tame. Politics is played, just to show the weaknesses or perceived weaknesses of the other party, and thus mark some point. The latter tactic satisfies a political party's base, its most passionate members. Nevertheless, the focus remains on the issues, rather than personalities. In fact, history keeps proving that institutions are what makes a great nation. Personalities through their policy may leave their mark on a country's affairs. But the institutions regardless, always outlast the individual.
Playing politics with personalities: the case of Haiti
When in a democratic setting all the lights are focused on a single personality, the usual consequence is distractions, away from the issues at large, not in the interest of the country. Such focus is even detrimental to a nation under a dictatorship. It sure allows the covert opposition to expose the dictator, but the dictatorial machine itself is shielded and may survive long after its leader. This was the case in Haiti after Duvalier had fled in 1986. No one ever considered the army as part of his machinery. That force (the army), was consequently detrimental to the democratic ambition of our leaders until 1995, when J.B. Aristide declared it no longer an active national institution.
It is always easy to attribute to the political Star of the moment, powers that are very likely beyond his means. In fact oftentimes, individuals and obscure political groups commit reprehensible actions, under the pretense of working for such leader. Such tactics may be beneficial to the opposition or the established leadership in the short term. However in the long run, those tactics may backfire if the accused uses effective ways to expose them as "crowd manipulations".
The legacies of dictatorship
A culture of dictatorship does not only lead to the eventual "personalization of politics". It also leaves behind long after its demise, a destructive tendency by the new leaders, to being highly confrontational. Such leaders also tend to believe that they are the only ones with the final solutions to the country's problems, regardless of their adversary's suggestion: it is always the "my way or no way" attitude.
But these are not the only legacies of a dictatorial regime. In Haiti's case where for almost two centuries dictators had reigned, the consequences permeate to this day, in virtually every aspect of society. An exhaustive analysis would include the study on society, at the economic, cultural, intellectual, and political levels. We can only state, and briefly consider these issues in this segment.
The economic issue
Haiti from an economic standpoint, has been a harsh victim of years of dictatorship. Only a few governments have tried to build up the country's economy. But none has been able to resolve the primary equation that would have allowed the people to change their economic lives: literacy.
It is now accepted amongst academics, that the more educated a population is, the greater the chances of that nation to prosper. Economists have long demonstrated for instance that, as education became more accessible to the U.S. population, the people's lives kept changing for the better. Every other industrialized nation guided by democratic principles, has experienced the same phenomenon. A still disputed but yet accurate analysis is, that a country with freedom of expression and the right to choose its leaders, has a greater chance to succeed economically, than one where such freedom does not exist. But in a dictatorship like the ones that ruled Haiti, it is safer to keep the population at large illiterate, thus safer for those in power. This guarantees their acceptation of the reality they live in, whatever that reality may mean. A reasonable, educated person asks for much and seeks for much more; the reasonable, but otherwise limited individual gets satisfied easier with the little that nature offers: agriculture of subsistence; a few belongings and a place to stay. This logic partially explains why the masses in such surroundings, have rarely stood up against the status quo.
The culture issue
A country's culture may also fall victim of dictatorship. From a strictly philosophical standpoint, culture or civilization, is the lifestyle of a people which responds to the objective reality in which that people lives. Based on that definition, no culture, however technologically advanced it is or may be, is superior to another.
My point in this segment is not to smear any group or class. It is rather to have a more or less objective analysis of the country's human infrastructure.
Haiti's elite and powerful (traditional allies of any existing regime) had for a long time considered the language of the masses, their music, even their art as below the standard of what should be considered culture. Haitian music for instance, a few generations ago was not as valued as it is nowadays. Rather, its sounds and rhythm were considered "pauper". Rodrigue Milien as an example, a Haitian artist of the 1970's whose sounds, words and musical style have thrilled the pauper, has never had his fair share of the pie that other musicians enjoy nowadays. His reality-based music was too "controversial", for a buying public that controlled the means of communication. Thanks to the interest of other Caribbean nations in "Haitian Compa", and the Dominican's interest in our Meringue, our elite has become more accepting of our music. The same goes for our art. Had it not been for the incredible interest of North American and European tourists in our so-called "art naïf", the poor painter in the dirty corners of the capital and the provinces, would never have had his art hanging in the living room of our well-mannered clan.
That attitude falls right into the path of what I like to call "control through deflation". Considering the country's language (Haitian or Creole as you may choose), would be recognizing that the non-schooled individual has some values worthy to society. As an example, speaking French in High Society, creates a much needed (by the upper echelon), and sure divisive line between the educated and powerful, and the poor non-schooled person of the provinces or the capital. The country itself suffers in the long run, a crisis of identity. Should Haiti's cultural model for instance, be France or, should it look within its own experience to find solutions to its problems? Our language (Haitian) is a cultural gift, that encompasses the people's philosophy, interaction and experience with nature and the existing environment. In a perfect world where that question is seriously debated, one could express the fact that the Haitian language delivers a mindset that should be exploited not only for its cultural values, but also for its potential in advancing the country's economy. Without being a linguist, it is easy for me for instance, to denote that the Haitian is far less rigid than its French counterpart. It is also more to the point and more business-like than French. In fact, it is so concise that I like to compare it to English.
In a world where economic realities and factors dictate one's life in so may ways, it would thus make perfect sense for a progressive state to learn how to utilize that cultural gift (our homegrown language), to advance our society.
The education issue
Haiti has also suffered intellectually, due to the long failed attempt of the ruling class to "francophise" the nation. Only recently under the leadership of the late Pradel Pompilus, have Haitians begun to formally study the country's authors in High School. It was before, for well over a century after our independence in 1804, Molière's theater, Montesquieu and Montaigne's philosophies that fascinated the minds of our educated youth. Etzer Vilaire's writings were obviously never considered valuable literary subjects to be discussed. Nor were Jacques Alexis, Jacques Roumain, or all our great writers of the preceding century.
It is amazing then, that we were still able to produce patriots, intellectuals, writers, thinkers the like of Rosalvo Bobo, Jacques Stephen Alexis, Charlemagne Péralte, etc. Had our youngsters been exposed long ago to our novelists, playwrights, thinkers and philosophers at the High-School level, our level of national consciousness would have probably been much stronger. Since the young today is the leader of tomorrow, they would more likely have been more patriotic and more apt psychologically at working for the betterment of the country, rather than exploiting it.
Looking back, we can even say that it is an aberration that a ruling elite may have been so unwilling to embrace its identity and built upon it a strong nation. But this is where we must be cautious and not be so harsh and cruel towards the so called "crème de la crème" of our society. We must acknowledge that our obsession with the French language for instance, and all that is European, as well as our rejection of what is purely Haitian or Black, may just be the psychological scars of slavery.
Psychologists now admit that an oppressed people, eventually swallows the ideology of the oppressor. Only the very strong is able to accept his/her complete self as worthy of humanity.
Despite our difficulty of accepting ourselves as Haitians, our ruling classes throughout time, have always paid special attention (in secret) to our voodoo. Maurice Sixto whom I consider Haiti's greatest sociologist of the latter part of the 20th century, has painted one well-to-do, French-speaking Haitian in one of his monologues, who was criticizing the "illiterate's religion", while he had all sorts of voodoo articrafts hidden in his home for protection of his family.
The political issue: legacy of slavery in Haiti's politics.
That part of this rather short analysis on a very important subject may be considered daring. It is however necessary for one to understand the problems of Haiti's political culture.
Fighting for one's freedom in the slavery context is clearly an issue of right against wrong. The slaves were right for wanting their freedom; the slave masters were wrong in denying them this basic human right. After that war and the acquisition of such fundamental freedom, the former slave was now not only free, but also the ruler. The generals of our new army, the political leaders and even many of the new administrators were in one way or the other, victims of the old régime. Now that everyone is free in his body, the mentality of "one right and one wrong" survived. A debate over land possession did cost the father of our new nation, Dessalines, his life. He was wrong according to the "wrongly" dispossessed and was not to be living. The spirit of consensus from that point on, never took roots in our political culture. One great Haitian leader, Henri Christophe, was a despot. He was right in his analysis of moving the nation forward, but his means were dictatorial and even inhumane. As a king, no subject of his kingdom ever survived criticizing his policies or techniques of implementing them.
Also, even prior to the war of independence, transcending personalities had dominated Haiti (St. Domingue then). Makandal and Boukman are two prime examples. Their passion for the cause of freedom, and their fight against the system of slavery had rendered life on the plantations like hell for the White Master. They also had some supposed supernatural powers. After their death, the latter made sure that all slaves knew of their demise. Boukman's head for instance, was hooked on a stick and exposed in public places so the slaves could see it, with the following inscription: "Head of Boukman, chief of the rebels". Also, the structure of their organization collapsed, or were seriously weakened following their death. No system was created for the survival of these individual leaders. Power was concentrated in their hands. After all, they were supposed to be super human, since they had supernatural powers.
The rigidity (or rather dichotomy) in the former slave's and newly freed thinking process, the total devotion to specific leaders and not to institutions, have survived through this day.
Despite the fact that Haiti is trying painfully to create a democratic system, very few leaders who claim their adhesion to that new faith, even comprehend the concept of democracy. To many of them, their policy goal is beyond reproach and those who disagree with them deserve death, at least in their minds. Many members of the opposition and a good number of those affiliated with the ruling party, would like the complete eradication of the other. Many political parties now functioning in Haiti will simply fade away following the death of their leader.
This sort of almost religious devotion to individuals rather than philosophy, creates a problem that is two-pronged. On the one hand it instills in the leaders mind, the belief that he or she is always right and should (and usually does) have unchecked powers. On the other hand, it impedes the possibility of continuity and progress in our political culture.
This moreover, makes it difficult to have institutionalized political parties in the country. Every time the political climate opens up for other ideas to flow, new parties have to be constituted. Whatever happened to the old "Parti Libéral" and "Parti National" in Haiti? One exception however, is the party constituted by Louis Déjoie the father, before Duvalier became president of Haiti. When the Duvalier régime becane extinct, Louis Déjoie part was reconstituted by his son. That, was solely based on the late Louis Déjoie I's personality, not on a core of ideas and principles.
Because of all these defects in our political system over the years, there haven't been serious debates about what constitutes the nation. The climate has never favored those debates about the core values of Haitian societies. Should those values be strictly French, European, like the ruling class wishes, or should they be indigenous?
How important are strong personalities in Haitian politics, and what should be their limits? What are the values of institutions in a community of people? How relevant is the value of continuity in societies in general, and in ours in particular? What would be the benefits of teaching our youngsters, the Haitian literature?
Those issues that we are now trying to tackle, were not seriously discussed by fear of sounding rebellious, revolutionary or else. Indeed, many of the intellectuals who dared consider those issues, were also almost naturally, against the political status quo.
Unfortunately, one of those who was against the establishment, was simply a demagogue, thirsty for power. In a strange twist of rationale, François Duvalier who was from the "Ecole des Griots", came out using certain concept of that school (the Négritude aspect of that school's philosophy), to create one of the most effective, ruthless and backward political machines in Haiti's history.
Now that a culture of democracy seems to have a chance to take roots in our politics, it is still hard for our leaders to focus on the issues. Many of them are still focusing on personalities, and believe that there is only a right, and a wrong in politics. The idea of consensus is hard to come by.
Changing that culture will take time, and a fundamental change in the country's structure. There has to be a commitment to seriously listening to the other sides, however ludicrous the others may sound. The country's reality must also change in ways that are possible.
Institutions have to be solidified and others created. Those who run those institutions must have the guarantee of independence and a profound sense of fairness to all, whether rich or poor. Our system of belief must also change. We must begin to believe that it's possible for Haiti to move forward and be at peace with itself culturally, politically and emotionally. The almost religious belief that "he is always right thus she must be wrong" must loose strength and disappear.
It has been after all, almost two-hundred years since the country has been freed by the slaves. It made sense then, that they believed that they were right. They were indeed and history has proven them to be so. But the world has changed and is more gray than it is black, or white. There is no longer any valid reason for anyone to still think along such dictatorial lines.
