One Island, One Country.

[Vacara]

Betwixt and between all the banter and bickering happening here, there is actually a good amount of decent discussion, and some very interesting history being presented.

Perhaps we wouldn't have gotten all that good information without the acrimony, and I admit that a lively and spirited debate is always fun to observe from the sidelines.

However, regrettably, what I have witnessed here is two intelligent and informed guys, who have more in common then either would probably care to admit, going at each other talon and fang, each convinced of their own 'correctness' and the other's certain recalcitrance.

The fact is, in a more reasoned and civil dialog, each would be much more effective, and they would probably end up being very good friends, sharing a few beers, and with similar agendas to boot.

Maybe it is due to the age we live in, and the examples set forth by our so-called leaders, but it seems that the noble act of sharing ideas is greatly compromised by the overwhelming desire to turn such an enterprise into yet another a war of ideas, where the issues are less important than being declared the "winner" of a fabricated verbal battle between two subjectively "right or wrong" ideologies.

It is a shame such talent is wasted.

Having a beer with this individual?, nunca, never, jamais!!, only is he pays and swear by his (fill in the blank)'s grave that he is neither a Yankee nor a Boston Celtic fan, nothing personal but I have a reputation to protect.

On a more serious note two quick points from a previous post. Pedro you said that what Trujillo and Dessalines did was the way leaders used to deal with the opposition in those day, but you can hardly consider innocent civilians going about their business in Santiago and Moca to be any opposition to Dessalines, The same can be said about the Haitians in 1937, truth they represented a problem for Trujillos's agenda and like Balaguer said "something that needed to be dealt with" but not in that way.

Trujillo was not the "rule" of Dominicans rulers but rather the exception, in fact, of the top of my head only one more president was as depraved as Trujillo and that was Ulises Heraux (Lili). Interesting both of them had Haitians blood which might be material for some non pc jokes, but my Lakers beat Denver yesterday so I want to keep it civil.

Pedro also said that today "Dominicans are reasonable people", can you name a time when Dominicans were not reasonable?.

Finally, regarding the original question of this thread about making DR and Haiti one country, to me is not a matter of if but of when, and that will be when people on both side resolve their cultural differences, like when Haitians learn how to dance bachata and Dominicans learn to play rara.

 

[catcherintherye]

"........that he is neither a Yankee nor a Boston Celtic fan, nothing personal but I have a reputation to protect."
Vacara

I definitely see Vacara's point about the Yankee fan aspect, but, in my opinion, he is just slightly off base regarding the Celts, and, to a certain extent,Trujillo.

While Trujillo can be considered the exception in terms of the number of leaders, he certainly was not the exception in terms of number of years in power, nor on his impact on social policy.

The important consideration is the influence he had through his policies. Again, in my opinion, his policies have been far more influential (in a very negative context) than perhaps all of the other leaders combined, that the shadow of his influence still casts long ang wide.

His attitude toward Haitians and the Haitian/DR situation has directly and sadly influenced the attitude of many Dominicans today.

I will only add that throughout all these controversial debates, Red Sox fans remain quite pure and magnanimous, and as usual, they are well above reproach.

 

[mountainannie]

I come from a long line of Red Sox fans and so am pleased that we can join together to be peacemakers.

I believe that Pedrochemical is a Brit and therefore exempt, I belive, under international regulations from having to pick one team.

What are the thoughts on the appointment of Bill Clinton as special envoy from the UN for Haiti? Or of the US paying this year's debt payment for Haiti - putting it in the running for the World Bank HIPC program? Does this assure Dominicans a bit that the international community has not simply "forgotten" Haiti?

I note the recent moves by Leonel et al - to include Haiti in the IberoAmerican nations - which would be great - and the government here on the Constitutional amendment allowing the children of illegal immigrants to go to school - both very good moves.

Is anyone watching the truckers strike on the border? Looks as if all trade is halted.

There is a meeting today in Haiti, of Domincan and Haitian business leaders.

(and the one thing that I learned recently about Trujillo - from the new Dominican ambassador to Haiti was that during his era, the mention of slavery was simply omitted from the history books so that Dominicans educated in that time were taught that they were Indian and Spanish -- with little African blood. That, of course, all came from Haiti. Amazing what education or disinformation can do!)

 

[Vacara]

"........that he is neither a Yankee nor a Boston Celtic fan, nothing personal but I have a reputation to protect."
Vacara

I definitely see Vacara's point about the Yankee fan aspect, but, in my opinion, he is just slightly off base regarding the Celts, and, to a certain extent,Trujillo.

While Trujillo can be considered the exception in terms of the number of leaders, he certainly was not the exception in terms of number of years in power, nor on his impact on social policy.

Trujillo lasted 31 years, more than any other president in Dominican history so even in that regard he was unique. In a jiffy we'll look at his social policies.

The important consideration is the influence he had through his policies. Again, in my opinion, his policies have been far more influential (in a very negative context) than perhaps all of the other leaders combined, that the shadow of his influence still casts long ang wide.

We had pretty lousy presidents, if Trujillo's legacy was worse than all of the others combined you would not have people suggesting that we need another Trujillo. He was a cold blooded murderer, who would not hesitate to kill his mother to stay in power but, you can make the case that almost all his crimes had political motivations (including the massacre of Haitians). In a country where politicians had such a bad track record in terms of plundering, pillaging, stealing, where political infighting was making presidents last only months -if not days!- we were in need of a "macho" and a macho is what we got.

I could fill 10 pages of all the good things he put in place as president, he brought political stability (don't laugh I'm serious), paid the national debt, brought economic stability and built lot of infrastructure that was sorely needed.

He made possible the creation of the Dominican middle class family, initiated the industrialization of the country, built almost all the hospital facilities you see today in DR, he even built the first concrete bridge over the Ozama River joining the two sides of Santo Domingo.

I could go on and on but you got my point, he is not by a long shot what you suggest he is.

His attitude toward Haitians and the Haitian/DR situation has directly and sadly influenced the attitude of many Dominicans today.

His action also saved the country from "haitianization" which was going to be a disaster for the whole island. Surely he overdid and a lot of what he accomplished (in term of stopping the Haitian invasion) could have been done without the massacre.

Lets not forget also that everything Trujillo did wouldn't have been possible without the cooperation of the Haitian government (including the massacre), he even had a Haitian president on his payroll.

 

[catcherintherye]

Some convoluted logic there, Vacara. So much so that I don't know where to start my rebuttal. There is so much to rebut and so little time. Is your tactic to overwhelm with ridiculous assertions, or is that just a naturally occurring by-product of illogic and disinformation?

You seem to trying to validate your argument by applying terminology in a very abstract context, sort of like fitting a square peg in a round hole.

For example, yes, Trujillo was in power for 31 years, and yes, that makes him unique. However, that uniqueness is what made him common-place. In other words, his reign displaced, in theory, approximately 8 four-year term presidents. Moreover, his power increased exponentially with each passing year, which made him far more influential (again, in a very negative way) than those theoretical 8 presidents would have ever been.

You also attempt to negate, or excuse, his atrocities with a power-point presentation of his "magnanimous" program of public works, and his establishment of a so-called "stable" society. If stability that is based on the elimination of political opponents and ruling by terror and intimidation is the desired outcome, than I suppose you could include Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Franco, Castro, and a few others in your list of "great leaders".

Your last contradiction is the most absurd, if that is possible. Simply having the support of corrupt government officials in Haiti, at that time, does not justify the actions Trujillo took against Haitians. One corrupt government paying off another corrupt government is not a high-point of international diplomacy.

You are trying to make it seem as though his 31 years in power were somehow benign, when in fact it was anything but. The notion that he was doing the work of the people has been dispelled decisively by the facts. His theft of hundreds of millions of dollars of Dominican wealth (and that was back when a million dollars meant something) should have been enough to dispel that myth, and it is for most of us. To portray Trujillo as being anything but a high-functioning psychopathic thief gives historical revisionism a bad name.

 

[cibae?o75]

"To portray Trujillo as being anything but a high-functioning psychopathic thief gives historical revisionism a bad name."

Here, here!

 

[pedrochemical]

For me, ruthless, murderous psychopathic dictators are ruthless, murderous psychopathic dictators - Haitian, Dominican or whatever.
Would you prefer a cat-turd sandwich or a dog-turd sandwich?

Just because Hitler liked animals and brushed his teeth, it does not make liking animals and brushing your teeth is a bad thing.
Hitler built nice roads, reduced unemployment and really got the pre-war German economy jumping - so I have read. This would not get him an invitation to my Christmas party though!!

 

[Vacara]

Some convoluted logic there, Vacara. So much so that I don't know where to start my rebuttal. There is so much to rebut and so little time. Is your tactic to overwhelm with ridiculous assertions, or is that just a naturally occurring by-product of illogic and disinformation?

You seem to trying to validate your argument by applying terminology in a very abstract context, sort of like fitting a square peg in a round hole.

For example, yes, Trujillo was in power for 31 years, and yes, that makes him unique. However, that uniqueness is what made him common-place. In other words, his reign displaced, in theory, approximately 8 four-year term presidents. Moreover, his power increased exponentially with each passing year, which made him far more influential (again, in a very negative way) than those theoretical 8 presidents would have ever been.

I though unique & common were mutually exclusive but beat me, I'm not from the greater Massachusetts area.

You also attempt to negate, or excuse, his atrocities with a power-point presentation of his "magnanimous" program of public works, and his establishment of a so-called "stable" society.

You stated that Trujillo's influence was worse than all of the others Dominicans presidents combined, in order to rebuttal that statement I have to show you all the benefits he was able to provide the country or I'll be defeating the purpose of the post, so don't complain when you read my list of his accomplishment. Even so, that can hardly qualify as an attempt to excuse his atrocities, since when calling Trujillo a "cold blooded murderer capable of killing his mother" qualify as an "excuse" for his crimes?

If stability that is based on the elimination of political opponents and ruling by terror and intimidation is the desired outcome, than I suppose you could include Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Franco, Castro, and a few others in your list of "great leaders"

.

Please Catcherine, leave the straw man arguments outside of the discussion cuz that's not going to help anybody, again you are misquoting me, I never said Trujillo was a "great leader" but nobody can negate the fact that when it comes to infrastructure he did more than all the others presidents combined and that right outside the gate defeats your statement regarding his influence.

Trujillo did plenty of wrong, but so did the others, he treated the country as his backyard but took care of it like no other before him. In 1930, with an illiteracy rate higher than 70% DR was not the right place for democracy and the only way to create the political stability that would enable the productive sectors of the nation to start moving was with a government like his.

Regarding your list of great leaders; Hitler lasted only 12 years of which 6 witnessed the bloodiest war the world have ever seen, plus he destroyed Germany so no he didn't bring any stability. Stalin lets see..........killing more than 40 million people with famine and repression can't be called stability either. Mussolini was the "chavez" of Europe at that time, this clown had a chance of going into WWII with the allied but choose Hitler instead and you know the results, his invasion of Africa probably cost the Axis the war and I personally hate him cuz due to his policies today the catholic church has a budget of half a trillion dollars anually, so no stability there either.

Francisco Franco, I don't see how taking a country from the horrors of a civil war and putting it on the road to become one of the richest in the world and a very solid democracy can not be called stability. Try as you might but you won't be able to make a case of the contrary, and yes he was a great leader.

Fidel Castro, for the life of me I never though I'd see the day when somebody who sympathize with the Haitian cause would bash the guy who put and end to the disrespect and abuses Haitians were being subjected to by the Machados and Batistas of this world, including -but not limited to- the deportation of what some estimates 100,000 Haitians from Cuba, being put in a boat without telling them where they were going and not even providing them with water or food (the Haitian ambassador stole the money), can anybody say "gratitude"?.

A number of those Haitian deportee ended up in DR, it was 1937 so you know what happened. I wonder if you rather have Machado or Batista than Fidel?

Your last contradiction is the most absurd, if that is possible. Simply having the support of corrupt government officials in Haiti, at that time, does not justify the actions Trujillo took against Haitians. One corrupt government paying off another corrupt government is not a high-point of international diplomacy.

Do I see a pattern here? again you are making an argument for me I never intended to. The fact that Trujillo got plenty, way more than plenty political, economic support from the Haitian government does not justify his crimes against humanities, but with new evidence coming out everyday this Trujillo's legacy is a baby Haitians gonna have to pay child support for, Haitians are responsible in more ways than it is genetically possible for Trujillo's regime.

Take a careful look at this picture, can you say by the look of it that the man on the left had just ordered the massacre of thousands of countrymen of the man on the right?, Is there words to describe how much perversity is contained in this image?

Did you know that Jhonny Abbes Garcia, director of Trujillo's secret service and responsible for the death of hundreds of Dominicans was receiving money directly from the Haitian government?

Did you know that Trujillo's fortune, calculated at about 500 millions dollars probably wouldn't have been possible without the help of the Haitian government?.

Did you know that while Dominicans were risking their life to bring down the tyranny Stenio Vincent was rounding up Trujillo's political opponents and giving them to the regime at the border?. This Stenio Vincent is the same one who worked with Trujillo to cover up the massacre of 1937 and later accepted peanuts money as compensation, effectively beheading the momentum by the international community to get rid of Trujillo. Just think for a minute the benefits of having Angel Morales as president of DR in 1937, and with Balaguer and Bosch 30 years younger competing to run the country, no time for Trujillo to instigate his racial propaganda and hatred bet. the two countries.

Trujillo killed thousands of Haitians, but Stenio Vincent killed the aspirations of millions of dominicans to have a better life and better political condition.

 

[catcherintherye]

Well, you've done it. You have convinced me I was wrong.

At first I thought Pedrochemical was being somewhat unreasonable. I thought perhaps his Freudian slip with regard to Vacara's screen name might have been a trifle over-the-top. It just goes to show you anyone can make a mistake.

If long-winded statements containing little substance could serve as an example of 'vacuous' then pedrochemical wasn't very far off the mark. Of course this is an admission that comes only after a purposefully similar, but particularly vacuous mistake, by vacara.

It is obvious I have been wasting my time here, thinking that yet another "goat tender" would, or could, entire a discussion with an honest and open attitude. There is but one agenda with this lot, and that is to completely vindicate one of history's most despicable tyrants, while at the same time rationalize their desire to further marginalize Haiti and Haitians.

Good luck to you, vacara. You can always hold on to the hope that no one reads history books anymore, and that with the passing of time, people will forget all the atrocities that Trujillo was guilty of. With the illiteracy rate such as it is, you just might be successful in your quest.

For anyone who is truly interested, there are many sources of documented evidence, which shed light on the hideous nature of Trujillo and his regime. You should take the time to read them. They are very enlightening, and they will inoculate you against the type of not-so-subtle revisionist propaganda engendered by the likes of vacara and the many other goat-herders out there. The truth shall set you free.

 

[pedrochemical]

The sports team scenario is a good analogy of Vacara's attitude. People support one team and hate another team - even if the hated team is good. Quite irrational, but common. This is a tribal approach.

I think that as long as Vacara considers himself/herself Dominican he/she could never admit that there are 3 sides to every story. This is a matter of misplaced national pride.

It is a little easier for somebody who posses the faculty of critical thought to look at the problem and appreciate the history written between the lines. Perhaps this takes a little distance - emotionally and geographically?

 

[pedrochemical]

Actually, as I cannot edit the last post;
It seems to me on reflection that Dominicans do not share, as a rule, Vacara's weird view of the history of Hispaniola. They are, as I remarked, quite reasonable people by and large.
Vacara's distorted, contrived, anachronistic view of the subject feels more like that of a part time Dominican, perhaps one of the Diaspora, who is desperately trying prove to themselves that they are as Dominican as Mamajuana - to the detriment of truth.

Vacara, I am curious - how did you come to feel so passionately about this subject?

 

[Vacara]

It is obvious I have been wasting my time here, thinking that yet another "goat tender" would, or could, entire a discussion with an honest and open attitude. There is but one agenda with this lot, and that is to completely vindicate one of history's most despicable tyrants, while at the same time rationalize their desire to further marginalize Haiti and Haitians.

I couldn't agree more, you are wasting your time, my time, and everybody else's who read your post full of opinions but lacking any substance to back it up.

Do you really think anybody in his right mind is going to believe what is said in this forum without any data that would allow us to dissect those statement?

What do you know about Trujillo?, what were his accomplishment?, his crimes?, do you believe all the crap's been said about his policies?, do you think he was the one to come up with the idea of the Indian heritage?, or the lie that he was trying to "whiten" the race?. Unlike Boyer who brought thousands of black people from the State to "blacken" Dominicans, Trujillo's intentions of bringing white and Japanese inmigrants were quite different.

This is the scenario in the DR of 1930, 1.5 million people, poor as hell and a 70% illiteracy rate. Most of the population is concentrated in the Capitol and the Cibao region, which allows Haitians to "eat up" Dominican territory in a desolated border at an alarming rate, they've been doing it for years, regardless of any border agreement bet. the two countries, before the ink is dry Haitians are on the move again, always eastward, establishing small villages and plantations and threatening to cover the entire island with a subsistence economy that has already transformed the richest colony in the world into one of the poorest country of the planet.

In those small villages Haitians revert to their old habits of no mixing up with the locals, refusing to be assimilated. Instead of sending their kids to public schools and learn the language that would allow them to adavance in their new society they choose to teach them at home or in small groups with a teacher paid by the community, all in creole, a language without much use outside Haiti.

Despite using the roads, sidewalks, hospitals etc. that was built with Dominican blood and sweat those Haitians didn't pay a dime in taxes, much worse; in those small villages -in an incredible display of disrespect to the locals- the currency used by Haitian was not the Dominican peso but the Haitian gourde, which was accepted as far as Santiago de los Caballeros.

Now lets get out of the way the usual "I'm sorry" and "I feel bad for Haitians" that has allowed them throughout their history to get away with murder, destroying their country. Everybody feel sorry for them including me; but what the hell was Trujillo supposed to do (immigration policy wise) to stop the threat of haitianization? who was he supposed to bring in order to stop the advancement of Haitians?, more Haitians?, black people from Tanganika?.

I challenge you or any other Haitian apologist to make a case based in logic and rationality as to why Trujillo should have brought Haitians instead of the 40,000 Germans he had agreed on with Hitler, or the thousands of Spaniards who came running from Spain's civil war, or the Japanese, or the Finnish, or the Jews?

What use did Trujillo have for nationals of a country with a 95% illiteracy rate?. In the early 40's Trujillo made a glass factory but nobody in DR knew how to do glass, who do you think he should have brought instead of Italians, Haitians?.

He didn't need Haitians for immigration purposes but for the cane field, and for that he was getting them for pennies courtesy of the Haitian government.

Trujillo was a political genius who's legacy is still felt in the electoral battles in DR, put the massacre of Haitians aside and he would be up there with Pinochet, as a guy who although was murderous, ruthless, mercyless and cruel pushed his country forward and on the path to progress.

As for the Pedrochemical stuff, that guy is called "el quimico" for a reason, in this forum being diss'd by him is a badge of honor, is the equivalent of being made by the Italian mafia.

 

[pedrochemical]

Thanks for being magnanimous in defeat.

 

[Vacara]

Thanks for being magnanimous in defeat.

First white flag, who's next?

 

[pedrochemical]

Dude, I realise that you struggle with English - this is an international forum so that is expected to some extent.
Simple concepts should be cross-cultural however.
Read my last post again.

LMAO

 

[Vacara]

Dude, I realise that you struggle with English - this is an international forum so that is expected to some extent.
Simple concepts should be cross-cultural however.
Read my last post again.

LMAO

If you don't like my english try my spanish or my french.

 

[pedrochemical]

The board is in English, mainly, although some post in Spanish.
You are new relatively new here so I guess you could be forgiven for your inexperience.
However, your lack of cognitive dexterity seems to be a problem.
I wouldn't suppose that any language you speak would remedy this.

Bon Bagay, timoun

 

[Onions/Carrots]

Dominicans are reasonable people, these days, and will not wholesale massacre Haitians.
There are no religious tensions.
There are no serious land disputes. (the ones there are do not concern major resources or cities, although let us see how the mining companies progress along the border)
Generally these ethnic cleansings happen where there is no government or there is a civil war, or worse still when there is a tyrannical government. This is not the case in the D.R.

You'd be surprised by how suppressed racial feelings can rise to the surface when push comes to shove. Don't confuse complacency with inaction.

I think a few super nationalist Dominicans might cut the heads off a few more criminal Haitians - that is about it.
I also think the notion of 'minor ethnic cleansing' is flawed. People tend to attempt it wholesale or not at all. Racists in the Dominican Republic will beat Haitians - this is very sad. They would not have the balls (or the support) to actually attempt to 'cleanse' the whole nation.

Dominicans want Haitians to go back home. They are illegally in the DR driving down wages and further impoverishing an already POOR nation. We do not share a culture nor a language.

The D.R. is not at war with Haiti.
The D.R. has too much to lose internationally and too little to gain locally from a sustained campaign against expat Haitians. It would never get going and it would be stopped by a D.R. government seemingly more concerned with international opinion than Dominican opinion. That is where the big bucks are.

Maybe the DR gov't would be a covert facilitator while singing songs of peace and amnesty to the INTL. community. The Haitians must leave the DR and return to their native land.

So is ranting that Haitians or Dominicans are about to go to war.

If Dominicans in general feel threatened by their ever increasing numbers, you can bet the farm on that one. No majority in any nation just hands it over to an ever-increasing minority they feel threatened by.

We can keep the wealthy Haitians and a very small number of LEGAL Haitian workers.

BTW, I admire Trujillo as one who brought ORDER to the DISORDER.

 

[pedrochemical]

Well, of course you are entitled to your opinion.
But then you do not have to have your daughters/wife raped by El Jefe.
Is that a price worth paying for the 'order' you talk of?
What would you have done if you were in that situation?
Would you still admire him?

These are genuine questions to which I would like to hear genuine answers This post is not just a sideswipe at you.

Do you beleive that violent, totalitarian repression is a price worth paying for 'order'?
Ronald Reagan said, "when people are free to choose, they choose to be free."
I am not a big fan of democracy for the sake of it - that does not keep order - take a look at Iraq and Haiti!!! Nor do I beleive that people prefer to "die on their feet rather than live on their knees." People do whatever they can to have an easy life, generally.
Nor do I beleive that democracy is synonymous with freedom.
But there is a point at which I, personally, would take up arms to defend my family. Trujillo, from what I have read, would seriously have made me consider this option. Especially if he came after my wife or daughter!

 

[catcherintherye]

"Well, of course you are entitled to your opinion.
But then you do not have to have your daughters/wife raped by El Jefe.
Is that a price worth paying for the 'order' you talk of?
What would you have done if you were in that situation?
Would you still admire him?"
pedrochemical

Pedro, the people who are so eager and willing to trade their freedoms for 'order' will tell you that 'order' is worth any price. These same people are the ones who willingly abandon their collective conscience, while allowing tyrants a free hand with trampling everyone's rights, until their rights are personally affected.

Of course, by that time, it is too late to do anything about their lack of freedoms, since the people with any courage to fight have already been isolated and destroyed, and the tyrant's power has been consolidated.

What these Trujillo apologists won't do is accept any responsibility. They see themselves as part of the chosen few, and expect to be handled with kid gloves by the dictators they helped bring to power.

It is always a rude awakening for them when they finally realize they are not exempt from being swept up by the limitless greed and corruption of tyrants.

"If they come for me in the morning, they will come for you in the afternoon."