Haiti’s suffering is world’s responsibility
Recent stories on Haiti have suggested that tragedy is a natural part of what it means to be Haitian.
Are Haitians somehow “naturally” prone to suffering? It’s easy to say, but a closer look reveals circumstances that are more complex.
The first is the corruption of the Haitian state and the rampant poverty that corruption breeds. If people are poor, if there is crowding in the capital and if infrastructure is weak, a 7.0 earthquake will kill in a big way. Nature doesn’t construct shoddy buildings that collapse like pancakes; people do.
The second is the way corruption in Haiti was bred in part by ties of dependency with outside powers. This included the United States, which tolerated the brutal rule of the Duvalier father-son regime from 1957-1986. Nature doesn’t fund dictators; people do.
The third is the utter ruin of what in 1804 was the world’s first independent black republic following a slave revolt that defeated three Western armies. Nature doesn’t halt national progress; people do via colonial rule, violent political factionalism and the plundering of resources.
The suffering we see in Haiti today is no mystery, nor is it natural. It is the result of centuries of usury, neglect and opportunism. If the world is really going to help Haiti at this time, we need to stop framing the tragedy as though it were inevitable. It is going to take resolve, real human-made policy, as opposed to some vague reference to nature, to help set the country on a path toward genuine democracy and security.
JENNIFER ABBASSI
Lynchburg
Promises, promises
There has been a lot written lately about the state of our education and the roads here in Virginia.
I am against raising taxes generally as it usually means more government programs and more waste. If, on the other hand, I could be guaranteed that an increase in state taxes would go for education, and an increase in the price of a of gallon of gasoline would go for improving our roads, I would be for it.
Problem is, promises by the General Assembly don’t mean much. More than likely, the new money would go for its intended purpose but then the money that was already going there would be pulled out and go elsewhere. So the end result would be no increased spending for the intended projects.
I give you the state lottery as an example. From the get-go, that program was intended to support education and nothing but education. Then a year or two later, where was it going? To the general fund.
GEORGE F. SHIPP
Gladys
Email
Facebook
Google
Twitter
Favorites
More
Advertisement