- This topic has 4 voices and 12 replies.
-
Posts
-
A news story caught my eye:Good Question: Why Is Haiti So Poor?Since I am interested in this question, I read the story. The journalist interviewed a professor of French at the U of Minnesota who also teaches a course on the history of Haiti. What gave me pause was when the professor got to the following, which was made in response to Pat Robertson's remark:
"I don't consider voodoo a pact with the devil at all," Knutson said. Rather than voodoo being associated with darkness and evil, "I think of light, strength and beauty," she said.
I wondered why that kind of subjective comment was put in a story that was supposed to be about history, but it wasn't the only kind of opinionated remark:
"These self-emancipated slaves defeated Napoleon's army in 1804. January 1, 1804. It's a glorious moment in the history of Haiti and the history of the world," Knutson said.
And then:
"The U.S. occupied Haiti for 19 years and put down any attempts of the Haitian people to reassert their independence to become a self-sustaining country," Knutson said. ..."Haiti's a country the rest of the world ignores. Governmentally, I think the great powers want to contain Haiti, they want to keep it poor," she said.
Rather than being educated in the history of Haiti which gave rise to its poverty, I could tell I was being told some less-than-objective account based on someone's set of left-leaning values. Do other nations really want to keep Haiti poor? Has Haiti been ready to thrive, but for the restraint placed on it by Western powers? I find that hard to believe.I did a little searching and discovered that the professor in the story is elsewhere labeled as a "Professor of Marxism at the U of M". I wish the journalist would have tried to find a more objective voice to speak about Haiti's history.
On 1 January 1804, Haiti proclaimed its independence. Through this action, it became the second independent state in the Western Hemisphere and the first free black republic in the world. Dessalines, who had commanded the black and the mulatto forces during the final phase of the revolution, became the new country's leader; he ruled under the dictatorial 1801 constitution. White residents felt the sting most sharply. While Toussaint Louverture, a former privileged slave of a tolerant white master, had felt a certain magnanimity toward whites, Dessalines, a former field slave, despised them with a maniacal intensity. He reportedly agreed wholeheartedly with his aide, Boisrond-Tonnerre, who stated, "For our declaration of independence, we should have the skin of a white man for parchment, his skull for an inkwell, his blood for ink, and a bayonet for a pen!" Accordingly, whites were slaughtered wholesale under the rule of Dessalines.To restore some measure of agricultural productivity, Dessalines reestablished the plantation system. Harsh measures bound laborers to their assigned work places, and penalties were imposed on runaways and on those who harbored them. In 1805 Dessalines crowned himself Emperor of Haiti.Conflict between blacks and mulattoes ended the cooperation that the revolution had produced, and the brutality toward whites shocked foreign governments and isolated Haiti internationally. "Of the twenty-two heads of state between 1843 and 1915, only one served out his prescribed term of office, three died while serving, one was blown up with his palace, one presumably poisoned, one hacked to pieces by a mob, one resigned. The other fourteen were deposed by revolution after incumbencies ranging in length from three months to twelve years." LeyburnHaitian politics remained unstable. From the fall of Salomon until occupation by the United States in 1915, eleven men held the title of president....The Duvalier dynasty (XXth century)The first few years after Jean-Claude Duvalier's installation as Haiti's ninth president-for-life were a largely uneventful extension of his father's rule. Jean-Claude was a feckless, dissolute nineteen-year-old, who had been raised in an extremely isolated environment and who had never expressed any interest in politics or Haitian affairs. Widespread discontent began in March 1983, when Pope John Paul II visited Haiti. The pontiff declared that "Something must change here." In September 1988, another coup brought Prosper Avril to power. Avril was an experienced officer with a career dating back to the Duvalier era.In December 1990, the former priest Jean-Bertrand Aristide won the election by more than two thirds of the vote. His mandate began on 7 February 1991. In August 1991, Jean-Bertrand Aristide's government faced a non-confidence vote within the Haitian Chamber of Deputies and Senate. Eighty three voted against him, while only 11 members voted in support of Aristide's government. Following a coup d'etat in September 1991, President Aristide was flown into exile. Aristide was re-elected in 2000. His second term was marked by accusations of corruption. In 2004 a paramilitary coup ousted Aristide a second time.Aristide was removed by U.S. Marines from his home in what he described as a "kidnapping".Boniface Alexandre assumed interim authority. In February 2006, following elections marked by uncertainties and popular demonstrations, Ren? Pr?val (close to the still-popular Aristide and former president of the Republic of Haiti between 1995 and 2000) was elected president.The United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (also known as MINUSTAH) has been in the country since the 2004 Haiti Rebellion.http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/httoc.html#ht0013 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/country_profiles/1202772.stm Seems to be hopeless ... Things started to get worse long before the US intervention though !! TMO, the problem comes from Napoleon first, Haitians themselves then the Pope ::)
Monroe doctrine or America's backyard ?? ::)http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8468211.stm
The last paragraph of that article sums up my thoughts exactly:
However most French people are far less hostile - recognising that Haiti is in America's backyard, and that America alone has the resources to react on the scale required.
Most egregious thus far have been the comments by Hugo Chavez in regard to the American role in helping Haiti through the crisis.
TMO, the problem comes from Napoleon first, Haitians themselves then the Pope ::)
Why the Pope?
From the CIA World factbook:Roman Catholic 80%, Protestant 16% (Baptist 10%, Pentecostal 4%, Adventist 1%, other 1%), none 1%, other 3%note: roughly half of the population practices voodooIf the Pope says: "Things must change here." What do you think the 80% Roman Catholics will do ?
From the CIA World factbook:Roman Catholic 80%, Protestant 16% (Baptist 10%, Pentecostal 4%, Adventist 1%, other 1%), none 1%, other 3%note: roughly half of the population practices voodooIf the Pope says: "Things must change here." What do you think the 80% Roman Catholics will do ?
I think that if 80% is Catholic, but 50% of the population practices Voodoo, we have evidence that the people there haven't really been following the pope to begin with. I really do not think that one can be both Christian and practice Voodoo since the latter holds to multiple deities.
I didnt know the Pope had so much temporal power anymore.
Still, especially in poor countries or with zealots.
I think that if 80% is Catholic, but 50% of the population practices Voodoo, we have evidence that the people there haven't really been following the pope to begin with. I really do not think that one can be both Christian and practice Voodoo since the latter holds to multiple deities.
About Voodoo and Catholicism, there is no antagonism as voodoo is a religion syncretized from Roman Catholic ritual elements and the animism and magic of slaves from West Africa, in which a supreme God rules a large pantheon of local and tutelary deities, deified ancestors, and saints, who communicate with believers in dreams, trances, and ritual possessions.
About Voodoo and Catholicism, there is no antagonism as voodoo is a religion syncretized from Roman Catholic ritual elements and the animism and magic of slaves from West Africa, in which a supreme God rules a large pantheon of local and tutelary deities, deified ancestors, and saints, who communicate with believers in dreams, trances, and ritual possessions.
Even with what you write here, I have no doubt that voodoo is condemned by the Catholic Church and that those who practice it and practice Catholicism are doing something that is not permitted under the latter. Quite simply, Catholicism is a monotheistic religion, not a polytheistic one.
About Voodoo and Catholicism, there is no antagonism as voodoo is a religion syncretized from Roman Catholic ritual elements and the animism and magic of slaves from West Africa, in which a supreme God rules a large pantheon of local and tutelary deities, deified ancestors, and saints, who communicate with believers in dreams, trances, and ritual possessions.
Even with what you write here, I have no doubt that voodoo is condemned by the Catholic Church and that those who practice it and practice Catholicism are doing something that is not permitted under the latter. Quite simply, Catholicism is a monotheistic religion, not a polytheistic one.
Christianity is a monotheistic religion, with many Churches tho...
Even with what you write here, I have no doubt that voodoo is condemned by the Catholic Church and that those who practice it and practice Catholicism are doing something that is not permitted under the latter. Quite simply, Catholicism is a monotheistic religion, not a polytheistic one.
Today... during the Age of Exploration the Church was very active in attempts at saving souls of heathens, often showing them how similar their native beliefs were to the teaching of the church (like lots of saints that were similar to the lesser gods of the native pantheon, etc.). Yes, condemn voodoo and the like but turn their practitioners by showing how their needs are met by the new religion. Best of all one all powerful God to ride herd on the rest.
