Written By: - Date published: 3:31 pm, January 13th, 2018 - 89 comments
Categories: Donald Trump, International, liberalism, politicans, Politics, racism, Social issues, the praiseworthy and the pitiful - Tags: haiti, liberalism, trump
Anyone want to lay out what the essential difference might be between picking and choosing between broad categories of migrants and picking and choosing between broad categories of migrants?
What’s the difference at play in preferring “skilled” migrants over supposedly “unskilled” ones or Norwegian migrants over Haitian ones; moneyed ones over poor ones? Liberals might argue that the former and latter are nuanced and better targeting for economic exploitation than the middle one. And some might point out that the middle is informed by racism while the former and latter aren’t. But then, that last point is just to argue that some forms of discrimination are okay while others aren’t.
Anyone inclined to get on a high horse over Trump splabbing shit about preferring Norwegian migration to Haitian migration should, surely, get all fired up over preferring those who might be considered economically exploitable to those who might be considered economic liabilities. It’s the same shit afterall – born of discrimination.
And while we’re here, Haiti is a shit-hole. Would you live there? Or would you want to bring up a family there? I wouldn’t.
I mean, fuck. The country sits at number 168 of 187 on a UN Human Development index. 59% of the population lives on less than US$2 per day and 24.7% on less than US$1.25. Two thirds of the labour force do not have formal jobs, literacy rates are down around 60% and infant mortality runs at a whopping 55 per 1000 births ,while 59 of 1000 babies who survive that hurdle never reach their first birthday. And so it goes on and on.
To slam Trump for his bullshit as though it’s such a terrible thing to refer to a place as a shit-hole (who hasn’t referred to some place as a shit-hole?) and ignore why Haiti and other places on Trump’s list are “places polite society would never refer to in that way”, isn’t just facile – it’s the height of cold fucking hypocrisy.
You want racism? Read Johnathan M. Katz’s opinion piece in The Washington Post about how it is Haiti has become the place it is today (He covers most of it).
There are very specific and traceable reasons as to why Haiti, El Salvador and however many African states might be referred to as ‘shit-holes’. And every single one traces back to liberal capitalism. And liberal capitalism, in case you missed it, is the thing all these voices speaking from their institutional places and high places are in the business of protecting and perpetuating.
You give a shit about Haiti and the people living there? Do you? Really!? Or is indulging in a bit of excited monkey spanking over successfully identifying with those who would deem themselves superior to a guy you don’t like, on the basis they’d never (apparently) refer to a place with predominantly black or brown populations by way of Trump’s uncouth terminology – is that all that matters?