Talk:History of Haiti
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by the Caribbean WikiProject, which provides a central approach to Caribbean-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please help us by assessing and improving articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
Graculus, can I please see reliable evidence/sources that say that MOST of the "demographic collapse" was down not to Spainish oppression but disease. If you don't have any, then I suggest you change the Holocaust artice, and describe that as a "demographic collapse" too. - AW
- It's there in the subsequent depopulation of whole swathes of Spanish America: for Hispaniola it's as absent as reliable evidence that a few thousand conquistadores went out of their way to exterminate an entire population which they saw as labour to maintain them in the lap of luxury. Las Casas is quite clear that he wasn't there when it happened, so what's your evidence? Graculus 17:19, 24 Aug 2003 (UTC)
-
- Gonna go away and re-check some of my research on this to answer your last (valid) question, but meanwhile a couple of points/questions: depopulation of "whole swathes of Spanish America" - surely this involved far more conquistadores than Columbus' inital forces in Hispaniola? Secondly, deaths as a result of being worked to death can still result in genocide. The Nazis used Jews and other as a work force before sending them off to the gas chambers. Granted, the Spanish did not have systematic eradication programmes - this accounts for the fact that depopulations took a few generations, rather than a few years. - AW
- Sorry, Asa, I missed your reply when it was posted. Indeed Spanish numbers in (for instance) Mexico or Peru would have been greater (though perhaps not much greater in relation to indigenous population size), and the horrifying rapidity of the Hispaniola phenomenon remains a puzzle. I agree that working a people to death (or, for that matter, imposing conditions for the spread of deadly disease) is genocide when it's done intentionally. But to me it's specifically the absence of clear intent to exterminate - unlike 1942-45 - that means we have to be very careful in using the term. I don't think there's sufficient evidence that the missing million (or whatever their original number) were intentionally killed or worked to death between 1492 and 1508/14, though their loss raises questions that remain unresolved to this day. My reservation is one of "not proven" rather than "innocent", and it's precisely because of its horrific connotations that I don't want to see this understandably emotive term applied without very strong qualification in circumstances where its appropriateness is subject to such doubt as is the case here. Graculus 09:26, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)
To claim many scholars feel the depopulation of hispaniola was done through 'deliberate genocide', and then use de las Casas as the sole reference to back this claim is not only not NPOV, it is intelectually bankrupt. Yes, there is evidence the native population was exploited by spanish settlers. It is equally true there is no evidence of their systematic murder. Systematic murder does not necessarily involve sophisticated methods such as concentration camps and gas chambers. It can be as simple as a placing a bounty on the head of every native killed: methods used by the english in their american and australian colonial enterprises.
There is also abundant evidence the french settlers exploited the black slaves they imported in the hundreds of thousands. Yet there is no reference to their 'deliberate genocide'.
That portion of the article needs some thorough rewording.
--Bistor92 07:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Heraldry
Somewhere in Wikipedia the exceptional heraldry of the Christophe kingdom should be discussed. --Daniel C. Boyer 01:56, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Changes to 2004 Rebellion Section
I have made some modifications and provided some external links regarding the 2004 rebellion. The section as was did not address many of the accusations that the rebellion was a foreign backed coup d'etat. I have tried to provide some information about these accusations and I have provided two references regarding them. Tyrell turing 19:23, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Regarding thriving age in late XIX century
I wonder if what is written fully neutral? It makes it seem as Haiti was among leading countries, which I guess might have been hard to achieve, knowing the required payments to France and such... How well did it economically, scientificlaly and such compared to USA, other Carribean/South American countries and European countries? Kaiser 747 06:46, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Rewrite
This article was a dreadful mess, with earlier periods ignored and a huge amount of detailed commentary about recent events, which belong in Politics of Haiti or other articles. I have done a rewrite and copyedit to fill in the gaps, reduce the last section and eliminate various opinions. Adam 10:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wrong interpretation
On the page, it is said "On May 20, 1802, Napoleon signed a law restoring slavery in Martinique, Tobago, St. Lucia and the Ile-de-France". Actually the law did not restore slavery. It did ask to maintain slavery where it has not been disappeared, which is very different. You should check the law.
Source: http://www.radiofrance.fr/franceinter/em/2000ansdhistoire/ "En 1794, la Convention avait fait de la France un des premiers pays du monde à abolir l’esclavage. 8 ans plus tard, la loi du 30 floréal an X, le 20 mai 1802, décidait de le maintenir dans les colonies où il n’avait pas disparu." Translation: in 1794 the Convention made France one of the first countries in the world to abolish slavery. 8 years after, the law of 30 floréal an X, on May 20 1802, decided to maintain it in the colonies where it has not disappeared.
