Haiti Debate

January 14, 2014 Hunter Wallace History, Slavery 30

Caribbean Sea

Over at Crossroads, I am explaining in the comment section why Haiti evolved into Haiti, and why Haiti is so much worse off today than any other Caribbean country, particularly its sister colonies in the French Empire, Guadeloupe and Martinique, and why this is due to the legacy of freedom and black power.

Note: Yesterday, there was a 6.4 earthquake off the coast of Puerto Rico. It damaged a few buildings, but caused no injuries.

About Hunter Wallace 12392 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

30 Comments

  1. Some thoughts on the debate:

    You make well reasoned, factually and historically supported arguments.

    Your opponents rely largely on invective and unsupported claims.

    An objective observer would give you victory in the debate on that alone.

    Of course, your opponents are not objective. They appear to be white (?) liberal ideologues for whom reason and evidence must take backseat to collective self-delusion. They crank up their noise machine because they have nothing to say.

    Your arguments show the importance of solid historical research. One thing that has attracted me to Occidental Dissent has been the historical articles, which provide the evidence for the race realist/white nationalist case.

    To take this a step further: if there is a case for racial equality, then where is it (outside the realm of ideology)? Can modern liberalism provide examples of black majority polities which have attained the level of civic order, educational achievement, cultural advance and economic progress as similar White polities? Whether we are talking Haiti, Zimbabwe, Detroit or a Parisian banalieu we see a similar record of black dysfunction.

    If such black failures represented only a minority of cases, they might be rationalized away. But when virtually all black run polities show similar trends in corruption, violent crime, infrastructure collapse and economic debacle, one has to look at underlying genetic (i.e., racial) factors.

  2. One of your opponents on there claims to be a history professor.

    He can’t string a logical argument together. Very disturbing.

    The only thing the negrophiles can argue is that white oppression was such a violation that it derailed the Congolese Apollo programme. They have to ladle on the gravy of whites massacring blacks to such an extent that intervene rational trauma is a real thing and can reverb through their societies for 200 years in the case of Haiti, 150 years in the case of the US!

    It’s preposterous. The most advanced state in Africa is the one longest ruled by whites: South Africa. This was the state ruled by Apartheid with millions of whites manning the technical and scientific posts. The least advanced had barely seen whites.

  3. George Fitzhugh: ‘At the slaveholding South all is peace, quiet, plenty and contentment. We have no mobs, no trades unions, no strikes for higher wages, no armed resistance to the law, but little jealousy of the rich by the poor. We have but few in our jails, and fewer in our poor houses. We produce enough of the comforts and necessaries of life for a population three or four times as numerous as ours. We are wholly exempt from the torrent of pauperism, crime, agrarianism, and infidelity which Europe is pouring from her jails and alms houses on the already crowded North. Population increases slowly, wealth rapidly.’

    http://facweb.furman.edu/~bensonlloyd/fitzhugh.htm

  5. Hunter, congratulations for sticking it to those fools at Crossroads. It’s a joy to see you infuriate them with sound logic and true history. All they can do is rant and rave inside their ideological boxes. Meanwhile, their “diversity” and “equality” is falling into ruins all around them. Michael Savage is right: Liberalism is a mental illness. How else can you explain the inability of fools like these to comprehend the reality around them?

  6. http://www.contrasoma.com/writing/lovecraft.html

    If you read through this, nowhere does the author ask, why might a sensitive brilliant genius be legitimately racist? Even as a thought experiment. Why was Degas antisemitic? Why was Shakespeare a racist? I wonder why they can’t accept that there might be something to it all.

  7. Brett Easton Ellis in American Psycho barely manages to keep his own inner being contained in the text. He’s quite clearly inside Patrick Bateman’s mind and vice versa. Why is Ellis so conversant with racist tropes and capable of such brilliant prose? Why is that? No connection I suppose.

  8. “Of course, your opponents are not objective.”
    ^^^

    This is why debating anti-Whites is a waste of time.

  9. “Basically what you have typed here is white ignorance and I really hope that no one falls for your lies.
    Thank God I have classes starting Monday and I can teach actual history to students instead of these lies from white supremacists like you.” – You are not debating a human being, this appears to be some manner of chinese box.

  10. And RE: New York, NY is exactly an example of a white supremacist system, the blacks and browns have not had political power there, are aggressively policed, and gentrified out of the best living area. Citing that as the shining example of diversity speaks for itself.

  11. I assume they believe mostly in evolution. I assume that they believe man first evolved within Africa. Then why can’t they reason that the longest evolved humans should be superior? Can’t they see the numerous inconsistencies and flaws within their on attempts at logic?

    Obviously, Dick the one calling himself a historian, actually knows little of history or rejects the facts as they demonstrate by that history.

  12. Hunter/Brad (what do you prefer?), you did outstanding work over there. Their responses were so rote that anyone here could have penned them in anticipation without believing a word. They have a prescribed inventory of terms and are little motivated to deviate. The most amusing aspect is their ceaseless almost robotic incantation of silencing terms. Why are you still talking? I said RACIST! SUPREMACIST! Goddamn it, why isn’t this working??

    I left a comment that’s been lounging for hours in moderation. I’ll post it here for the hell of it.

    The racist BParks snidely said: Some even believe the native Americans were gifted salvation by the white man in regards to the taking of their land and the destruction of their culture.

    Of course they were gifted salvation. Diversity is a strength. Whites brought the native Americans diversity and multiculturalism. And as progressive Barbara Spectre stated, “Without transformation (to a multicultural society) Europe will not survive.” So to for the native Americans. We whites helped them to survive. Just as Ms. Spectre and her kind is now trying to to help us.

    Any who talk of native Americans and the alleged “Taking of ‘their’ land
    and destruction of ‘their’ culture” is nothing more than a bigoted supremacist.

  13. I went and took a look at the “debate” this morning, and was struck by the degree to which you were providing facts, statistics, and logical argumentation, while your primary opponent, evidently a teacher of some sort, never addressed the points at hand and only sputtered insults (“racist scum”, etc.)

    I find it sad that such a man could be teaching students of any age, and can only imagine that he bullies them into parroting back whatever politically correct bilge they need to spout to pass the tests. Still, I suspect that, if this is all the intellectual ammunition he can muster, they probably laugh at him, and most likely his positions, behind his back. (I likewise suspect that they’d be very open to the points you made in your postings, if they ever had the chance to hear them.)

    Whether debating such types on internet sites is a worthwhile effort I leave to you to decide, but regardless of whether or not you convinced anyone in this particular foray, you were clearly taking the more grownup approach by arguing facts rather than stereotypes, and that should be obvious to anyone reading through the discussion. Well done!

  15. HW (=BG):

    I read as much of the discussion as I could stand, and I am impressed. The next time you are in T-town, (the first several rounds of) drinks are on me. I would have said, I’ll buy, but your command of history suggests you may be able to drink more than I can afford to pay for.

  16. They have a new post up now about Brad and the Rainbow Confederates or something of sort. It’s pretty lulz.

  23. It’s good to know that such people still exist…

    Did I detect a hint of killer in Brooks Jackson’s statement? Lulz indeed.

  24. “I assume they believe mostly in evolution. I assume that they believe man first evolved within Africa. Then why can’t they reason that the longest evolved humans should be superior? Can’t they see the numerous inconsistencies and flaws within their on attempts at logic?”

    Douglas- This is not science, it is THEOLOGY. It was the desire of Darwin to ‘atone’ for the sins of whites, being white, and very little else. “Darwin’s starting point,” they write, “was the abolitionist belief in blood kinship, a ‘common descent’ ” of all human beings.” – http://www.nytimes.com/2009/ quoted in my article: http://thewhitechrist.wordpress.com/2009/04/06/charles-and-harriet-sittin-in-a-tree/

    As Cambria has noted, the NIGGER IS THE NEW RELIGIOUS IDOL for Western Men, who have given up Jesus Christ as their sole savior. It’s a RELIGION, it’s not science…. Of course, the Huxley’s used Darwin’s theories, merely to excuse their sexual degeneracy, but that’s not something different:

    http://thewhitechrist.wordpress.com/2009/04/21/where-angels-fear-to-tread…/

    YHWH God always was dealing with the compounding of Adultery (adulterating the “Chosen Race” of White Adamites) with the sin of Idolatry (worshiping a created thing, instead of the Creator). Look at almost every sin in the O.T. It was often a mixing of ‘fornication’ or ‘adultery’ (the first, among like race folks, the second, among non-like race hominids) with ‘bowing down to idols.’ Nothing has changed in the responses of the fools [Ps. 14;1] to Hunter’s amassing of facts. They are like Roman Catholics before Luther- they cannot see their error, for their eyes are blinded.

    Huxley, along with the modern race-smutters, are merely the flip side of that same coin. They are merely worshiping the Nigger, while using his Phallus in their perverted sex rites- from Seal and Heidi Klum, to ‘rainbow adoptions’ among Evanjellygoos, to Gay’s doing the ‘down low’ with every thing that moves, to the Obamanation- a gay, pot-smoking communist. It’s all related. It all stinks to high Heaven.

    And it’s all heresy.

  25. Fascinating debate, all thanks to you of course! The liberal responses have more the tone of reproof from unlettered deans of students, furious that some sensitive “policy” has been trespassed, than replies from contrary scholars. Can’t wait for that Golden Circle book!

  26. Thanks Lands.

    Well the hirsute simpson has packed up his hair gel and went home. I made a few parting comments, to which he responded as a peeved 6th grader. And while I admire Hunter’s tireless arguments over there, and will grant that some few readers may be swayed, it’s plain that those who want us off a Earth now are not going to be diverted by mere words from their programmed task.

  28. There is a reason to debate anti-Whites. Obviously, you will rarely convince them of the pro-White position. But!…there is a wider audience which follows these debates. And you can reach that wider audience.

    You do so by making reasoned arguments backed up by facts. Let the other side resort to invective and obviously ideological ranting. That way you expose their intellectual bankruptcy and convince the fence sitters that you are correct. Obviously, Hunter is succeeding at this in the Great Haiti Debate. Think of the people who are reading the website on which the debate is occurring and, while they may never post a comment, are nodding their heads in agreement.

    These debates are also useful for developing lines of argument that can be used in other forums. We are seeing more pro-White arguments showing up all over the Internet. It’s in part due to the development of a large body of evidence and reasoned approaches for pro-white causes.

    Slowly but surely, the Internet Insurgency is growing.

  29. Hunter :

    I have been reading through the debate and it is just so obviously that you blow that simple-minded anti-white right out of the water.

    I posted a comment in your defense but in case it gets deleted I will repost it here :

    Sir :

    Your retorts to Brad Griffin’s fact-based arguments are vapid and childlike.

    Where Brad educates you and the readers of this thread with fact after fact after easily cross-referenceable fact, you resort to name-calling and foul language.

    Clearly Brad is right and you are wrong on just about every metric here.

    We are going to contact the school where you teach to recommend that you be outed for your irresponsible, injurious and anti-academic online behaviour.

    No student should have to sit through a class taught by someone as close-minded and opposed to logical reasoning as you.

Comments are closed.