Blog author: rsirico
Monday, January 18, 2010
By

Published today on National Review Online:

When I first heard the news from Haiti and watched the horrible stories on television, I had the same impulse I imagine millions around the world experienced: I found myself thinking of catching the next plane to Port-au-Prince to help in whatever way I could.

What was the basis of this impulse? It is our moral intuition, sometimes called the principle of solidarity. This is the recognition of ourselves in the other. We feel pain when others feel pain and joy when they experience joy; we slow down on the freeway when we pass an accident not merely for some macabre or prurient interest, but because we recognize that “there but for the grace of God go I.” We help others who are suffering because we would like to be helped in a similar situation.

And yet I had to ask myself the practical question: What would I actually do when I got off the plane in Haiti? I do not know how to set broken bones. I can’t fix mudslides. I cannot operate on limbs and eyes. Only after all these things were done would I be able to fit into the division of labor to authentically serve people.

I am deeply grateful for those who can do these things, and I am inspired that they are there. In fact, aid workers have been emphatic that the last thing Haiti needs right now is a massive influx of people bringing only their good intentions. Such a run on the country right now would increase the need for food, shelter, transportation, and more.

The impulse to help, to do anything — largely and understandably based on our emotions — is exactly what confuses our thinking about charity and economics. It is the confusion between sentiment and practicality, between emotion and reason, between piety and technique.

On the other hand, it would be a cold and spiritually dead person who sat back without any sense of emotion over this Haitian calamity. If we merely said, “We should just forget this place. It is a poor country, the infrastructure is not in place, they have been unable to accumulate capital . . .” — if we said only these things, we would be callous. And yet, we know that what has compounded the suffering in Haiti is not only the earthquake as such but the poverty that hindered the necessary preparation and at all levels of society.

The practical and the emotional are at war right now.

More generally, the fundamental problem in Haiti is not bad weather or natural disasters. It is a problem of economics. Haiti has suffered from various forms of dictatorship for many decades, which has eviscerated from Haitian culture a general sense of entrepreneurship and enterprise.

This is not to say that Haitians aren’t entrepreneurial. One need only observe Haitian immigrants selling goods on the streets of New York to be convinced of their entrepreneurial spirit. Rather, what has made Haiti as a culture resistant to entrepreneurship has been the inability of Haitians themselves to gain control their own lives by ridding themselves of government policies that have made the country dependent on foreign aid and powerful dictators.

We like to imagine that we could send our favorite things — such as cars, computers, and the best medical equipment — to help. But when there is no electricity and few sources for fuel, and when the roads can’t be used for heavy transportation, all our gizmos and products and conveniences become useless.

Nor is it the case that piles of paper money are going to be a magic cure-all. When there is nothing to buy, and when replacement parts are not available, and the retail- and wholesale-trading sectors cannot support an advanced economy, money alone cannot do much good.

Haiti needs practical help and generous charity right now — implemented intelligently, and with a keen eye for existing conditions. We need to support aid agencies that provide water and medicine. In the long run, we have to look at what Haiti needs to prevent such disasters and minimize their impact. What the country needs is economic development and a culture that can support such development.

We are a very long way from that, and this catastrophe has set Haiti back even further. However, this is an opportunity to build a society that is prosperous, industrious, virtuous, and free. The unromantic truth is that charity does not really ameliorate poverty. Rather, it provides a necessary and temporary fix for an unusual problem. What Haiti needs are the institutions that provide protection and cushioning in cases of emergency. Most of all, it needs to develop economically.

No matter how many of us leave tonight for Haiti, that process will take a very long time, and it can only be carried out by the Haitians themselves.


  • http://commentarius-ioannis.blogspot.com/ Paul Primavera

    The Haitians haven’t been capable of self-government since the French deserted them with the rise of Robespierre in the 1790s. 400,000 Negroes were enslaved and dumped off the western part of San Domingo (or Hispanolia – whatever term you prefer), and Haiti itself has been the victim of foreign intrigue even with US occupation from 1915 to 1934.

    When the French government was in shambles under Robespierre, the 40 thousand white Frenchmen on the island were murdered wholesale by the 400 thousand slaves. Perhaps the French got their just deserts and perhaps not (I’m never one to favor murder), but the people who were left (the formerly enslaved Negroes) were incapable of self-government, NOT because of the color of their skin or their race, but because of what had been done to them: people ripped from their homeland in Africa in the 1600s, enslaved under a foreign power (France), dumped on a small island, and then deserted except whenever the fickle hand of international intrigue demanded otherwise.

    Haiti has now been the victim of fate for the past 200 years and the poorest country in the western hemisphere. People are suddenly concerned about Haiti in the aftermath of this terrible earthquake. But I have to wonder: where was our concern before this physical disaster when Haitians were already living (for 200 YEARS!) in abject squalor, filth, dirt and disease?

    Oh, some say the Haitians made a pact with the devil in 1791. But if anything is the truth, America did that in November, 2008 when we elected the most pro-abortion President ever into the Oval Office. We surely are no better than they (and perhaps, since we KNOW better, a whole lot worse).

    Pray for Haiti. Donate where you can. Volunteer if it’s possible to do so. But at least dedicate a recitation of the Holy Rosary (or the pray or your choice) for Haiti. Maybe now we will straighten out the mess we created 200 years ago, though sadly it takes an earthquake to do so.

  • Neal Lang

    “The Haitians haven’t been capable of self-government since the French deserted them with the rise of Robespierre in the 1790s.”

    The single justification for govenmental (state) intervention into God-ordained creational “sphere sovereignty” is in cases like Haiti, when some castastrophy has overwhelmed the ability of those sphere’s (the family, the culture, and the church) to provide the basic necessities for people. These rare interventions should provide the needed relief as quickly as possible, while rapidly building those proper spheres which are closest to the people so that may again fulfill the necessary role. Unfornately, as has happened over and over again, especially in the case of Haiti, when the relief effort is done, little will have been done to reinforce those spheres closest to the needs to the people so that they might efffectively handle their necessary societal roles.

  • A.J.

    “But I have to wonder: where was our concern before this physical disaster when Haitians were already living (for 200 YEARS!) in abject squalor, filth, dirt and disease?”

    It seems that these tiny section of this Island, DM included, has been a focus of many nations including France. However, Haiti has always wanted to be “independent” from every other nation since their revolution. Even President Reagen sent millions of dollars of aid to,and even visited. However, all the money and aid went righ tinto the pockets of a very corrupt family that ran the nation. The people did not benefit directly.
    What will be different about this attempt at help?