Why
Haiti Has Never Been Allowed to Prosper - The Anything And
Everything
20 January 2010
Aside from the racism that the
people of European descent and white majority
countries have exhibited towards Haiti, Haiti, has not
been allowed to prosper, because a country like Haiti
(extremely poor, that has ‘never really had it
together’) cannot be seen (by other impoverished
nations) to be successful. It’s similar to Nicaragua
and the revolution led there against the U.S. backed
dictator Somoza; Nicaragua is the second poorest
country, in the hemisphere. The abominable Ronald
Reagan had to kill a socialist country like Nicaragua,
because you cannot give any hope to such countries as
Haiti and Nicaragua. If you give these nations and
peoples ‘dignified poverty’ as Aristide has called for
in Haiti, others like them will get the same idea!
It’s the same reason that the United States had to
support insurrection against the government of
Bolivia, and even support violent neo-fascist
marauding gangs in that country. These vigilante
groups beat up and even murdered dozens of indigenous
Evo Morales supporters. Obama’s equivalent in Bolivia,
Morales, the first indigenous president of that
country; wanted to ’share the wealth’ of some of the
more resource rich provinces with the rest of the
nation. At the time he was the most popular president
in the history of the country, but provinces run by
the Bolivian white elite, could not stomach the will
of the majority indigenous country being asserted
there. A right-wing insurrection, in which U.S.
ambassador Philip Goldberg was instrumental, was
launched against the popular president. Thanks to the
backing of leftist and center-left leaders in the
region, and Morales expelling the U.S. ambassador and
DEA authorities that were ostensibly fighting coca
production in the country (but were at least as
interested in aiding and abetting anti-Morales
efforts); Morales was able to get past the U.S. backed
violent insurrection against his hold on power.
Another recent instance of this same sort of
practice occurred in the (now formerly) ALBA nation of
Honduras. The Honduran president, Manuel Zelaya, had
been so bold as to align his nation with Cuba,
Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua. The U.S.
has an important military base in that country, that
it used during Reagan’s support of the terrorist
Contras, who targeted schools, hospitals and innocent
civilians in their efforts at Central American
‘democracy promotion’. A key staging ground for U.S.
interventionism, could not be ‘allowed to fall’,
concrete connections between the U.S. and the
overthrow of Zelaya are still elusive at this stage,
to my knowledge; but what is clear, is how jovial the
U.S. government was to condone sham elections, to
replace the ousted democratically elected leader of
Honduras.
Honduras, in addition to Haiti, Bolivia and
Nicaragua, lies towards the bottom of the scale of
wealthier to poorer countries in the region. The
United States, acting as a typical bully, seems to be
a little more hesitant with countries (of course the
U.S. tries to destabilize somewhat more powerful
countries whose leaders/governments that it does not
agree with as well, but the U.S. often uses more cloak
and dagger type methods in those cases) that could put
up a fight, but those that cannot are not allowed to
chose a non-U.S. sponsored direction. Autonomy from
the blueprints and dictates of what the U.S. has in
mind for vassal countries, is not possible for some of
the least materially wealthy countries. Of course,
nations like Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran have been
‘pariahs’ in the eyes of the United States government
for some time. But countries like Haiti, Nicaragua,
and Bolivia, will often be come down upon even harder,
than nations who have more means at their disposable
to resist U.S. neocolonial efforts.
Add Comments