France urged to repay Haiti billions paid for its independence

After the USA won its independence in 1783, a strange thing happened. Our founding fathers met in Philadelphia in secret, and surrendered!

They wrote a document called a Constitution, making us "constitutors" for the debts of the old colonies to England and to France. Under the pre-existing Articles of Confederation, those creditors were free to try to collect debts from the individual States (formerly Colonies), and those States were successfully telling those creditors which orifice to stick their head up. Now our Founding Fathers wrote a document saying that we would be legally responsible for those debts.

I don't entirely know why they did it, but the fact that they wrote this magnificent document in secret, with doors locked and guarded and the window shades pulled down, suggests it would not have met with universal acclaim among the populace. Because it gave away a large part of the independence we had just won.

There are those who say we've never cleared that debt, and that's why England owns us in some material way.

Well I want England (and France, and anyone else) to pay us back for that. We have just as good a claim as Haiti. And I expect it's a lot more money.

Originally posted by ChrisF231
Haiti should become an overseas region of France much like French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Martinique, Reunion, Guadalupe, St. Martin, etc.

Hmm thanks but no thanks.We're happy as is, we've got more than needed "overseas territories"... living at the continental taxpayer's expenses, dare i mention (i suppose they were smarter than haitians at the time, not the rebelious / bite the hand type, eh?).

Originally posted by Gorman91
I honestly beg to question what is justice. Is it not agreed upon revenge? Revenge has no place. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Far better it be to admit they were wrong than pay what is simply a revenge payment for the actions of men from several generations before.

This isn't revenge, though.

Look at the average standard of living in France, and compare that to the average standard of living in Haiti.

While $20 billion is not going to turn Haiti into a utopia, if it's spent wisely - and not siphoned off by corrupt officials - then it will help improve conditions and quality of life for many Haitians.

reply to post by circuitsports


Why do you have to turn this into a racial issue ?

Are you so myopic, as to ignore the actual subject matter, and attempt to twist this into something that it isn't ?

Poor show.

Originally posted by themaster1
(i suppose they were smarter than haitians at the time, not the rebelious / bite the hand type, eh?).

How on earth is overthrowing your tyrannical oppressors that kidnapped you, shipped you thousands of miles away, beat, raped and worked you to death; ''biting the hand that feeds you''.

Words fail me.

I only assume a similar thing didn't happen in Martinique, Guadeloupe and French Guiana, due to lack of numbers.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by Gorman91
I honestly beg to question what is justice. Is it not agreed upon revenge? Revenge has no place. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Far better it be to admit they were wrong than pay what is simply a revenge payment for the actions of men from several generations before.

This isn't revenge, though.

If that's not the reason, then there is no reason ...

Look at the average standard of living in France, and compare that to the average standard of living in Haiti.

Pre-earthquake (nobody is saying the earthquake is France's fault) how many hours per week did the average French work? Haitian? And doing what sort of work? The French standard of living was earned.

While $20 billion is not going to turn Haiti into a utopia, if it's spent wisely - and not siphoned off by corrupt officials - then it will help improve conditions and quality of life for many Haitians.

Has money ever been spent wisely there? Serious question: who could be trusted to spend the money "wisely"?

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


That's great. But I don't care. Because it's still using a 200 year old grievance for what amounts to basically revenge. If a kid who screwed up comes back to his abusive father and blames the son for what the father did, it's retarded. That's basically what this issue is.

Also. France has it's own poverty and problems. Haiti can go find another nipple to beg milk from. It's a dumb excuse for money. Sure they deserve aid. But to go and say "your father beat my father, so I want money" is retarded on the highest order.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


The subject matter is what the people of Haiti want - and they only want that because of how things are now, how they made it - they can't blame anyone else for there situation but themselves.

You will see them in the streets begging for there families, or crying over there loss in the earthquake because they lived knowingly in unsafe homes.

But which one of them has said this - If I really cared about my family I wouldn't bring new people into this world I live it - a world of starvation, disease, and danger that every new child adds to.

When people talk about child endangerment - there is nothing worse than a family well below any level considered poverty birthing 8 new children. You see this everywhere in Haiti and other black majority countries all over the world. I'm sorry for you if you think it isn't a race issue - it is, and trying to cover up for it because you think it's shameful to think so is your bad not mine.

I have many hard working educated and beautiful black friends that I have the utmost respect for and none of them I am aware of want to go back and live in any of there native lands. That if nothing else should tell you something.

reply to post by circuitsports


And we heard many stories from people who went to Haiti to help after the earthquake, that the Haitians were standing around and letting them do all the work.

If the Haitians won't pitch in and do as much as they can, I am not interested in getting involved.

Originally posted by Gorman91
That's great. But I don't care. Because it's still using a 200 year old grievance for what amounts to basically revenge. If a kid who screwed up comes back to his abusive father and blames the son for what the father did, it's retarded. That's basically what this issue is.

It's not revenge.

It's money that was extorted by the French.
France still has $20 billion dollars that should belong to Haiti.

They should pay it back. ( Although I realise there's little chance of this actually happening ).

Originally posted by Gorman91
Also. France has it's own poverty and problems. Haiti can go find another nipple to beg milk from. It's a dumb excuse for money. Sure they deserve aid. But to go and say "your father beat my father, so I want money" is retarded on the highest order.

France doesn't have ''poverty'' in the third-world sense.

It's not akin to "your father beat my father, so I want money".

The French government is the continuation of the same entity that instigated this.

Originally posted by oniongrass
Pre-earthquake (nobody is saying the earthquake is France's fault) how many hours per week did the average French work? Haitian? And doing what sort of work? The French standard of living was earned.

I don't know how many hours per week the average French person worked, compared to the average Haitian. Do you ?

The French ''earned'' their lifestyle, partially on the back of exploiting their colonies and slave labour.

France, along with other colonial nations, owe their former colonies a redistribution of their wealth.

Originally posted by oniongrass
Has money ever been spent wisely there? Serious question: who could be trusted to spend the money "wisely"?

International aid agencies would be the best choice, in my opinion.

You certainly can't trust any politicians or local officials with it.

Originally posted by circuitsports
The subject matter is what the people of Haiti want - and they only want that because of how things are now, how they made it - they can't blame anyone else for there situation but themselves.

Of course they can.

The fault lies with uncaring, compassionless first-world countries, who have absolutely no interest in any kind of fairness.

It's all very well saying that people in third-world countries should ''do something about it'', but if it were that easy, then they wouldn't still be third-world, would they ?

Originally posted by circuitsports
You will see them in the streets begging for there families, or crying over there loss in the earthquake because they lived knowingly in unsafe homes.

Do you think they had a choice of living in a ''safe'' home, and deliberately opted to live in a tin shack ?

Originally posted by circuitsports
But which one of them has said this - If I really cared about my family I wouldn't bring new people into this world I live it - a world of starvation, disease, and danger that every new child adds to.

The same can be said for people bringing children into the world in any country.

A lack of available contraception is one of the many reasons for the high birth rate in many countries ( especially as Haiti is Catholic ).

Why do you begrudge poor people having children ?

Originally posted by circuitsports
When people talk about child endangerment - there is nothing worse than a family well below any level considered poverty birthing 8 new children. You see this everywhere in Haiti and other black majority countries all over the world. I'm sorry for you if you think it isn't a race issue - it is, and trying to cover up for it because you think it's shameful to think so is your bad not mine.

Yes, and you have high birth rates in poor countries that have a ''yellow'' or ''brown'' majority in Asia, and countries with a ''white'' majority in South and Central America.

So why just single out ''black'' dominated countries ?

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


200 years ago. If you can't get over it, then you really must not have much of a life to make for yourself. If I inherit 200 dollars from my great grandfather who stole it, I don't have the blood on that money. I have that money, not the blood. Poor chaps whom it was stolen from are all dead as well. For that man's great grand son to ask me for his great grandfather's money is nothing short of dumb. Yes it is in bad taste but I have every right to that money for all the people involved in the crime are now dead.

And the European Union is a direct descendant from the Roman Empire. Should it pay Egypt for the crimes of Rome? Nope.

Sorry, it is akin to your father beat my father so I want money. And to look at it any way is desperation, You can't just say it is not. You have to define your terms. Why is it not.

Originally posted by Gorman91Sorry, it is akin to your father beat my father so I want money. And to look at it any way is desperation, You can't just say it is not. You have to define your terms. Why is it not.

Because the French government and treasury are the same entities as they were then.

The French government still has $20 billion dollars that rightfully should belong to Haiti.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by Gorman91Sorry, it is akin to your father beat my father so I want money. And to look at it any way is desperation, You can't just say it is not. You have to define your terms. Why is it not.

Because the French government and treasury are the same entities as they were then.

The French government still has $20 billion dollars that rightfully should belong to Haiti.

And you have $30 billion that should belong to me. Pay up!

Which living Frenchman took it from Haiti? Chirac? de Villepin? Sarkozy?

Which living Haitian did he take it from? The guy running for President who grew up in Dominican Republic?

Gimme a break.

Originally posted by oniongrass
And you have $30 billion that should belong to me. Pay up!

Which living Frenchman took it from Haiti? Chirac? de Villepin? Sarkozy?

Which living Haitian did he take it from? The guy running for President who grew up in Dominican Republic?

Gimme a break.

Why are so many people confusing the entity of the French government with people who have represented or worked for that government ?

It's simple:

The French government extorted $20 billion from the government of Haiti.

The French treasury still holds and owns that $20 billion dollars.

Therefore, it's logical that the French government ( yes, the same one that impoverated Haiti ) should repay the money that they wrongfully extorted from them.

How can anyone dispute this ( without some tenuous analogy about grandfathers ) ?

[edit on 23-8-2010 by Sherlock Holmes]

OK Sherlock, I think your idea is vacuous because even if the French government is deemed to be continuous over that time, the Haitian government certainly is not.

And to the victors go the spoils of war. To the extent that the French were able to "extort" some money from Haiti, then a free state, by means of international cartels or other tricks, the normal reaction would be ... them's the breaks.

But how was this extortion anyway? Wasn't it just plain old economic warfare? France used its strength to make a trade embargo against Haiti. Now Haiti is a fertile place with a wonderful climate and good fishing. Why did Haiti need foreign trade at all?

I guess Haiti freely made a bad decision to go into debt like that rather than live within their means. Same as the USA made a bad decision to write a Constitution that made the prewar debts enforceable. Internal political problems caused a corrupt government to violate the will of the people or the best interests of the people, in both cases.

Do you think the USA should be able to demand all its pre-Revolutionary creditors pay back the debts it agreed to pay in the Treaty of 1783?

Originally posted by oniongrass
OK Sherlock, I think your idea is vacuous because even if the French government is deemed to be continuous over that time, the Haitian government certainly is not.

In what way isn't the present day government of Haiti a de facto continuation of the Republic of Haiti of 1825 ?

Originally posted by oniongrassAnd to the victors go the spoils of war. To the extent that the French were able to "extort" some money from Haiti, then a free state, by means of international cartels or other tricks, the normal reaction would be ... them's the breaks.

They extorted money from people who were, or were descended from, slaves, that were captured and abused by the French in the first place.

Anybody looking back on those shameful antics today, can clearly see that Haiti needs to be reimbursed by the French.

Originally posted by oniongrassBut how was this extortion anyway? Wasn't it just plain old economic warfare? France used its strength to make a trade embargo against Haiti. Now Haiti is a fertile place with a wonderful climate and good fishing. Why did Haiti need foreign trade at all?

It was extortion, because they came back, fully armed, several years later to hold Haiti to ransom.

Need it be pointed out again, that the people of Haiti at the time were slaves, who by definition, had nothing.

How else were a bunch of people in a seemingly ''foreign'' land going to make ends meet ?

Originally posted by oniongrass
I guess Haiti freely made a bad decision to go into debt like that rather than live within their means.

I guess the Haitians made a decision to go into debt, rather than be enslaved again by the heavily armed and ruthless French colonialists.

It was a no-brainer.
A trans-national protection-racket.

Originally posted by oniongrass
Do you think the USA should be able to demand all its pre-Revolutionary creditors pay back the debts it agreed to pay in the Treaty of 1783?

I don't know.

I'll have to research that one.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


There was a coup d'etat in 1950. It's probably not the only discontinuity in the Haitian government during the relevant period, but it's enough to dismiss your thesis.

Need it be pointed out again, that the people of Haiti at the time were slaves, who by definition, had nothing.

If the people of Haiti in 1825 were still slaves, then how were they free? If they were still slaves, they had not won independence, and it was just a new chapter in French control.

As for shameful -- almost everything that goes on in warfare is shameful.

Get back to me when you have some insights about our own situation with respect to the colonies' pre-revolutionary debts. Show how you would apply your principles there.

Originally posted by oniongrass
There was a coup d'etat in 1950. It's probably not the only discontinuity in the Haitian government during the relevant period, but it's enough to dismiss your thesis.

A coup d'etat doesn't invalidate the continuity of a country, or their government.

The Republic of Haiti existed before and during 1950, and continues after 1950.

The players and protagonists do not change the entity that they are part of.

Originally posted by oniongrass
If the people of Haiti in 1825 were still slaves, then how were they free? If they were still slaves, they had not won independence, and it was just a new chapter in French control.

I meant that the people at the time of independence ''were'', as in ''had been'', slaves, which is why they may not have taken advantage of their supposed crop and fishing wealth.

Originally posted by oniongrass
As for shameful -- almost everything that goes on in warfare is shameful.

Yes, and when the guilty parties for these atrocities are still in power, and accountable, then it makes sense for them to readdress the inequalities and atrocities of the past.

Originally posted by oniongrass
Get back to me when you have some insights about our own situation with respect to the colonies' pre-revolutionary debts. Show how you would apply your principles there.

What pre-revolutionary debts ?

Are you talking about the USA ?

I'm not from around those parts.

[edit on 23-8-2010 by Sherlock Holmes]