5 ms·

Sure is interesting how they begin to diverge around the time the US-backed Paul Magloire coup'd the sitting president and prioritized tourism via cruise ships

Sure is interesting how they begin to diverge around the time the US-backed Paul Magloire coup'd the sitting president and prioritized tourism via cruise ships over education.

JuniperMesos 1y ago
Yeah, if you're trying to explain the difference in outcomes between Haiti and the Dominican Republic today, appealing to poltical events in Haiti in the 1950s when that economic divergence began to happen has a lot more explanatory power than appealing to poltical events in Haiti in the early 19th century (including the two decades or so when Haiti itself had colonized the DR). My own understanding of 20th century Haitian poltics is fairly limited. I don't know if "prioritized tourism via cruise ships over education" is a fair characterization of Magliore's policies in Haiti, or, assuming it is, that this constitutes a good casual explanation of the Haiti/DR economic divergence. I'm frankly skeptical - lots of places that are not Haiti have tourism as a major, government-supported component of the economy, and nonetheless are capable of providing some kind of useful formal education to their populace and have better economic outcomes than Haiti. I suspect the story in Haiti is a lot more complicated than this. But sure, if there's a specific education policy that the DR did implement in the 1950s and that Haiti under Magliore did not, that explains DR's greater economic development today, feel free to make the case.
- MSFT_Edging 1y ago
  I'm generally a fan of Cuba so take whatever I say with that in mind, but to me the big difference was Cuba was able to make a cleanish break from the big neighbor to the north while Haiti always had a US hand reaching in, possibly to avoid Cuba II. While Cuba is pretty poor(and we can talk about embargo in those respects), they generally met their revolutionary goals. They got the mobsters out of Havana, who previously had massive sway in the government alongside the American ambassador. They massively improved literacy, put tons of effort into health for their citizens(prior to the revolution, a majority of cuban children suffered from foot parasites among other things), and did a relatively forgiving land reform to remove the big land-owners from power(ie Land reform in Japan post WWII by the US was considerably harsher policy wise iirc). As far as a country with a huge trade embargo against it, they've done pretty well and built up allies around the world. If Haiti followed a similar path, we'd see just as many complaints over their governance, but from a totally different angle. As for DR, I think its still debatable. From the 30s to the early 60s, DR was under a dictatorship that was fairly brutal. After that, a democratically elected president was couped with US support, then essentially a man described as a puppet for the previous dictator was put into power for another 12 years. Perhaps the relative stability + having a ruler with US approval is enough to explain the relative success. I think any time a country is kicked in the shins for being a little too democratic, there's going to be a period of rebuilding. That period gets longer each time they get kicked in the shins, with the more intelligent folks leaving each time, until they're left with the people you don't want leading a country. A self fulfilling prophecy of sorts.
  - JuniperMesos 1y ago
    I'm not sure why you're talking about Cuba. But since you bring Cuba up the fact that the Cuban economy is doing better than the Haitian one and quality of life is better in Cuba than in Haiti, despite the American trade embargo on them for the entirely of the late 20th century, is evidence against the proposition that Haiti's contemporary problems are primarily a result of the 19th century French impositions. > As for DR, I think its still debatable. From the 30s to the early 60s, DR was under a dictatorship that was fairly brutal. After that, a democratically elected president was couped with US support, then essentially a man described as a puppet for the previous dictator was put into power for another 12 years. Perhaps the relative stability + having a ruler with US approval is enough to explain the relative success. Haiti was also ruled by brutal dictators in the mid-20th century, and was receiving aid from the United States for much of this time. So this can't in and of itself be an explanatory factor for why Haiti is so much worse off than the Dominican Republic.

Sure is interesting how they begin to diverge around the time the US-backed Paul Magloire coup'd the sitting president and prioritized tourism via cruise ships over education.

JuniperMesos 1y ago

Yeah, if you're trying to explain the difference in outcomes between Haiti and the Dominican Republic today, appealing to poltical events in Haiti in the 1950s when that economic divergence began to happen has a lot more explanatory power than appealing to poltical events in Haiti in the early 19th century (including the two decades or so when Haiti itself had colonized the DR). My own understanding of 20th century Haitian poltics is fairly limited. I don't know if "prioritized tourism via cruise ships over education" is a fair characterization of Magliore's policies in Haiti, or, assuming it is, that this constitutes a good casual explanation of the Haiti/DR economic divergence. I'm frankly skeptical - lots of places that are not Haiti have tourism as a major, government-supported component of the economy, and nonetheless are capable of providing some kind of useful formal education to their populace and have better economic outcomes than Haiti. I suspect the story in Haiti is a lot more complicated than this. But sure, if there's a specific education policy that the DR did implement in the 1950s and that Haiti under Magliore did not, that explains DR's greater economic development today, feel free to make the case.

MSFT_Edging 1y ago
I'm generally a fan of Cuba so take whatever I say with that in mind, but to me the big difference was Cuba was able to make a cleanish break from the big neighbor to the north while Haiti always had a US hand reaching in, possibly to avoid Cuba II. While Cuba is pretty poor(and we can talk about embargo in those respects), they generally met their revolutionary goals. They got the mobsters out of Havana, who previously had massive sway in the government alongside the American ambassador. They massively improved literacy, put tons of effort into health for their citizens(prior to the revolution, a majority of cuban children suffered from foot parasites among other things), and did a relatively forgiving land reform to remove the big land-owners from power(ie Land reform in Japan post WWII by the US was considerably harsher policy wise iirc). As far as a country with a huge trade embargo against it, they've done pretty well and built up allies around the world. If Haiti followed a similar path, we'd see just as many complaints over their governance, but from a totally different angle. As for DR, I think its still debatable. From the 30s to the early 60s, DR was under a dictatorship that was fairly brutal. After that, a democratically elected president was couped with US support, then essentially a man described as a puppet for the previous dictator was put into power for another 12 years. Perhaps the relative stability + having a ruler with US approval is enough to explain the relative success. I think any time a country is kicked in the shins for being a little too democratic, there's going to be a period of rebuilding. That period gets longer each time they get kicked in the shins, with the more intelligent folks leaving each time, until they're left with the people you don't want leading a country. A self fulfilling prophecy of sorts.
- JuniperMesos 1y ago
  I'm not sure why you're talking about Cuba. But since you bring Cuba up the fact that the Cuban economy is doing better than the Haitian one and quality of life is better in Cuba than in Haiti, despite the American trade embargo on them for the entirely of the late 20th century, is evidence against the proposition that Haiti's contemporary problems are primarily a result of the 19th century French impositions. > As for DR, I think its still debatable. From the 30s to the early 60s, DR was under a dictatorship that was fairly brutal. After that, a democratically elected president was couped with US support, then essentially a man described as a puppet for the previous dictator was put into power for another 12 years. Perhaps the relative stability + having a ruler with US approval is enough to explain the relative success. Haiti was also ruled by brutal dictators in the mid-20th century, and was receiving aid from the United States for much of this time. So this can't in and of itself be an explanatory factor for why Haiti is so much worse off than the Dominican Republic.