Haiti's Gang Politics Problem Is Not as Weird as It Seems
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 июн 2024
- Haiti is facing another political crisis, this time with various gangs wanting to enter the arena of state-building. From an outsider's perspective, this seems bizarre. And it is ... but only by modern standards. In fact, the origins of the states as political entities traces back to a time when roving bandits decided to become stationary, protecting their territory and extracting payments from their farmers. This video explores the origin of sovereign entities and connects it to the crisis Haiti is currently facing.
0:00 Haiti's Colonial Past
3:37 Haiti's Current Instability
4:24 Why States Are Like Stationary Bandits
8:28 Why Solving Haiti's Problem Is Difficult
11:38 Outro
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
Media licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...
By Prensa Presidencia, Gobierno de Chile:
prensa.presidencia.cl/fotonot...
Media licensed under CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...
By Kremlin.ru:
en.kremlin.ru/catalog/persons/...
“Reliable electricity”
Hello from South Africa
F
South Africa will be like Haiti soon enough.
@@0816M3RCand they’ll still blame the past despite making their future in the present.
@@0816M3RC eh I don't think thats physically possible.
Well at least you have still only one group of bandits.
The problem with Ancaps is not that they see that the state is a form of gang, but that they think corporations aren't gangs too. The state is the gang with the last say in a territory and if a corporation doesn't have anyone to answer to, it becomes the de facto state.
Yes. Dutch East India Company comes to mind.
The more I get into anarchy the crazier ancaps seem to be, it's the most schizophrenic political ideology
It all comes full circle doesn't it...
would have loved a "THIS IS WHAT POLITICAL SCIENTISTS ACTUALLY BELIEVE" banner across the bottom of the screen south park style
Especially since it's pretty damning if this garbage is actually what political scientists believe. Why listen to people who are so wrong?
@@CedarHunt How was the basic parts of this wrong? In what way does a state and a protection racket substantially differ?
@@CedarHunt I'm assuming it isn't meant to be 100% historically accurate description of how first state-like structure formed, but rather a simplified allegory of all the incentives that led to it. In case that was your issue with it.
@@CedarHunt What is your point, or argument?
@@Xazamas exactly, but that level of generalization is above the attention span of some viewers...
This would make a great series, perhaps a little more in depth, but covering various other conflicts and crisis's around the globe, its important to be aware of things in the world that don't necessarily effect us in the west. Keep up the work Mr. Spaniel.
I don’t usually correct grammar, but “crisis’s” is such a good example of why English is a terrible language. I think I should
For some reason, we keep the Latin plural for this word, so you have to say “crises” (pronounced “cry-seas”)
Then maybe next Projects might be...the situation of Socotra and Yemen? Or the situation of Papuans in Indonesia? Or...?
@@james-cucumber its literally how google corrected it for me so :/
@@gawelszczytkowski1991 exactly!
@@yellowcarpet265 I’m a little confused. Crisis’s is a word in English, but it means “belonging to [the] crisis”., adding the “‘s” makes it possessive. “Crises” is the plural of crisis.
Again, not trying to be a grammar Nazi, or even to imply the meaning wasn’t clear. I just wanted to lament how bad a language English is with you, given how difficult some pluralisations can be.
I always thought of gangs as unregulated corporations myself.
That more than anything makes me dislike gangs. Regulations are a good thing
Corporations are the product of states and were often given access to state armies for the sake of advancing state interests and acted like states when governing colonies. The distinction between the three is a product of who has the monopoly of force and that distinction gets fuzzy when the state is weak.
I see them more as illegitimate parallel structures of state violence. They emerge where the state either can’t (in the case of lacking centralized control) or won’t (for example when dealing with black markets) enforce their monopoly on violence.
I think this is a common view though and maybe the video says this, haven’t watched it yet.
@@smallfox8623Who gets to make something legitimate?
@@TombaFanaticSo without states there will be no corporation? That sounds stupid
As a Haitian subscriber and someone who recently did a video on this, I clicked super fast. Hoping you explained it fairly.
Edit after watching: Yes he explained it fairly. The conflict trap has been an issue in Haiti since the US Occupation of 1915. Here’s a piece that was that explains why the society gets poorer: the people who control the economy really are gangs. That protection racket he mentioned? That’s the elites of Haiti. Haiti actually does have industries in tobacco, sugar, rice, etc. But it’s not ran by companies and firms like America. It’s ran by elite families who also fund gangs, drug running and gun smuggling. If you ever wondered how exactly do Haitian gangs get all their guns, that’s how. You ever wonder why gangs kidnap? It’s the elites who pay them to do so. Every time a politician wants to arrest these elites for causing chaos, they pay the gangs to kidnap their family members and the warrant goes away. This has been an issue since Duvalier.
So yes, Haiti’s gang problem is actually normal because the county is actually an oligarchy ran by several mafia families who descended from
German, Syrian and Israeli immigrants. It’s not a real democracy. And American companies that exist there know this is the case too and don’t care. Hell, the last time Haitian workers wanted to unionize, they used the elites connections to crush it. This is also why I’ve told people dozens of times: DO NOT let billionaires control your country’s economy and polity because Haiti is the result.
report back how you found it
Are you living there
@@davisdelp8131I live in the states but I have family still there
@@ravener96update edited. He’s absolutely correct.
We all live in different flavors of oligarchy. I am sorry yours is as painful as it is.
Just like the samurai domains of Japan, they were highly structured and organized, and when in 1868 the restoration of the emperor took place, the domains were grouped into prefectures and the local domain overlords became governors.
Can we just take a moment to recognize Kenya has a super awesome flag?
No? By far one of the ugliest flags out there.
@@2hotflavored666 hater lol
I love Kenya’s flag wym?
@@AL-lh2ht Don’t worry. He was at Isandlwana and is still a little butt hurt
It's acceptable. But I figure it's kind of difficult to get any better than the first known flag, the Danish. Just red with a white cross. Doesn't get much simpler, does it? (In all likeliehood the Swedish - blue with a yellow cross - and Finnish - white with a blue cross, are as old as the Danish one.) I'm not sure, but I think the offset crossmember symbolizes Christianity.
One also has to envy the Swiss flag. The Japanese flag though, is perhaps the ultimate design.
Any flag that isn't symetrical, so that it can be viewed front and back, is a design disaster. So anything with writing really sucks. The Kenyan design does not have such problems, and isn't too elaborate to work at a little distance. So it's OK!
P.S. Swedish children learn a surprising thing about mixing colours, when they paint the Swedish flag, and invirably, some of the blue and yellow paint mixes - and produces GREEEN?!?! Surprise, surprise...😂
You might note that your description of bandit relations with farmers is basically the plot of the film "The Seven Samurai", as well as "The Magnificent Seven" and all its various remakes. Also worth noting is the most recent thugs to government transition: the one that occurred in Russia in the 1990s when ex-KGB and Russian mafia protection gangs replaced the police, and then got themselves into power by rigging elections with Putin at their head.
I don't think this is an appropriate comparison.
The Mafia didn't replace the police, just their heads.
The police organisations are the same as they always were, just with mafia bosses at the top. They're still functionally separate institutions.
@@moritamikamikara3879 The fish rots from the head down, as they say. Russian police has always been somewhat on the corrupt side, and then there was a staff churn which did the rest. Eventually people go, either due to age or because they don't feel at home in the organisation, and get replaced by ones more fitting the role so to say. It actually started this transformation in the 80s if not earlier, but in the 90s, things just clicked into place.
You'll notice this in entirely different contexts as well. Like when say Electronic Arts got underrun by the Clorox Gang, the mental poison of it gradually dripped down into the studios and people started noticing pervasive changes and a resulting churn there at the lower levels as well.
Thanks. The class subplot of "The Seven Samurai" (i.e. Kikuchiyo's rant about samurai exploiting peasants) felt inscrutable to me, but the context this political theory ties it to the main plot.
"Laws are just structured threats by an institution that claims a monopoly on violence" In Democracies it only just happens that the institution with the monopoly (claims to) represents the majority of it's Members consent
Not really. Laws are agreed codes that denote accepted penalties for conduct that society deems undesirable or harmful.
@@CedarHunt The only way the rules are able to be enforced are fulfilling the threats against misconduct
This usually (in democracies) is in way of a monetary penalty or a temporary restriction of freedoms
Not all Laws/Structured Threats are bad after all, for instance Laws against Murder or Theft are reasonable things to punish
Not all laws are necessarily moral or immoral, but Democracies tend to stick to what, the majority considers, ethical/moral rules/laws
@@CedarHunt Not really. Laws are decided on by a government.
Agreed codes that denote accepted penalties for conduct that society deems undesirable or harmful still exist outside of government approval. It's called extra-judicial punishment.
@@moritamikamikara3879 Governments have no power if nobody recognises them. So no, laws HAVE to be agreed upon by enough people to go into effect. The difference between an autocrat and a megalomaniac is how many people listen to them.
@@dojelnotmyrealname4018
Recognition isn't necessary as such, but it helps a lot. As Boris Jeltsin pointed out, you can build a throne of bayonets, but you can't sit on it for long. (before he had tanks shell the parliament because the communists inside continued insisting the Soviet Union really really still existed in 1993)
Wild Bill Spaniel with the fire content as always.
Make an series of this William. It’s a hot topic and one need the clear mind of a methodical working through professor.
100% agree! I'd be here for that with bells on!
@@mbe102 same here! 👍
But Haiti is a geopolitical backwater, who cares
Cheers William! Top-notch as always!
as always, very informative piece. Thank you
I do feel it's a shame that you did not have more time to talk about some of the nuances, such as how the dynamics actually change a lot in the real world when you are operating at the "literally a farmer trying to grow a surplus" level and how human group dynamics and families play into it- we have natural tendencies towards forming cooperative tribes, but this does not scale beyond a certain point and the dynamic begins to fundamentally shift
a 10 min video quickly becomes an hour long essay at that point, and you are better off just reading a book on anthropology and history.
I disliked the farmers vs bandits false dichotomy. It would have been more accurate to say the bandits were also farmers. It wasn't so much that there were roaming bands of bandits who did nothing but rob other groups of their harvest. Rather, humans have always been tribal and territorial, and the men of the tribe were hunters and warriors. Long before agriculture. So when such a group starts farming... their men would still defend the village, just like they did in the hunter-gatherer era.
There were no professional armies or anything. But farming enabled a small part of the population to become a separate warrior caste that spent most of their time getting better at fighting. And those warriors would then raid neighbouring villages, or conquer them and absorb them into the tribe. Because if you have a group of men good at fighting just sitting around defending, then they drain the tribe's resources. But if they go to other villages and take their food, then they're a bigger benefit than just protection.
It's more apt to say that "once humans became sedentary it became more important who the land belongs to.". That's why the size of communities started snowballing. Absorbing more tribes into the hierarchy, warriors gaining prestige for their feats in these conflicts. And that's how the first political systems started forming, usually from a mix of the spiritual caste and warrior caste. both specializations which weren't possible before agriculture. It's the increase in caloric production that allows for a small part of the group to focus on something other than "not starving".
It's a learning point in human geography that human societies have a tipping point of size where they go from a cooperative model of people who feel as a tightly-knit group, to a more anonymous society that creates its identity in different ways (such as nation).
In German this is perfectly explained by gesellschaft vs gemeinschaft.
Jared Diamond tried to explain that with an anecdote from New Guinea of a society just past that tribal tipping point where two dudes get angry at eachother, then began exploring their family tree in a heated debate to see if they're somehow related or if they should kill eachother.
@@nvelsen1975 And to this days wars are started because a couple of dudes don't like each other.
One of my favorite ever breakdowns from you, both in terms of the topic and what occurred at 11:20
The history of bandits and agriculture was really interesting. As the whole video. As the whole channel. Can't say THANK YOU enough times. Keep it up, Political Will! :)
William Spaniel Thank you for posting.
Super unbiased love it such a breath of fresh air
I am quite curious, who is this Bulgarian who first taught you about lines on maps?
Many thanks
Loved your commentary and analysis as always. However, left out of the vicious cycle, was as more the "humanitarian aid" pours in, the more the population swells to provide more youth for gangs.
It would be interesting to have a video on examples of country which manage to get away from the trap
"RealLifeLore did a good 1h video on the comparison between Haiti and the DR". Dominican Republic is example of a country that got away from the trap.
I live in Nigeria you are wrong about the having "reliable" electricity Part
Good stuff
Congratulations! You made me laugh within the first six seconds with this realistic analogy. Well done and accurate. 😄
Thanks William
Why Haiti began and remains poor (pt 1 of 3).
During its colonial days, Haiti’s slave plantations supplied over half of the world’s sugar.
But after the slaves gained their freedom from the brutal regime and the country declared independence in 1804, sugar disappeared from the economy as small farms produced coffee, subsistence agriculture, and food for local markets.
In 1950, when Haiti was at least producing some sugar, its exports were far behind comparable countries: sugar exports in Puerto Rico were 35 times higher, and in the Dominican Republic exports were 14 times higher.
A common explanation for Haiti’s resistance to producing sugar is that Haitian culture rejected the industry because of the associated historical traumas. However Haitians went to the DR, Cuba, even Puerto Rico to harvest sugar cane so there was not much of a cultural stigma towards the sugar industry.
A major contributor to Haiti’s failure to restore its sugar economy was historical property rights institutions that created significant transaction costs to starting large-scale farms.
3 post-Independence property rights institutions: (1) a large redistribution of the former French plantations; (2) inheritance patterns on peasant land that gave every family member a veto right to selling it; and (3) a constitutional ban on foreigners owning land in Haiti.
But the property rights institutions in Haiti are important because they were not established by colonists; instead, they were created by a newly independent nation in reaction to colonists. These are post-colonial institutions.
From 1900 to 1960, sugar accounted for 76 percent of Cuba’s export value, 51 percent of the Dominican Republic’s, 46 percent of Puerto Rico’s, and 26 percent of Jamaica’s. Sugar contributed only 5 percent to Haiti’s exports. Less than 10% of Haiti's sugar production was exported whereas for the other Caribbean countries about 90% was exported. Since 1987 (demise of HASCO) sugar in Haiti was a cash crop raised by peasants rather than by large-scale plantations.
Sugar Exported (Million lbs)
..............Haiti........Dom.Rep......P.Rico.......Jamaica......Cuba
1900______1_______150________200_________2_______1,000
1910______1_______250________500_________3_______2,000
1920______2_______300________700________10_______5,000
1930______3_______550______1,000________50_______2,000
1940______4_______700______1,500_______200_______4,500
1950______5_______900______1,600_______400_______7,000
In 2014, on coffee:
Country__________________Haiti______Dom.Rep.____Cuba______Jamaica
Production (tonnes)______19,500_____13,500______9,000_____1,620
Export (tonnes)_________120______1,020________660_____1,320
Export/Production (%)_______0.6________7.6________7.3______81.5
Population (M)_____________10.4_______10.3_______11.3_______2.8
Area (1000 km^2)___________27.8_______48.7______110.9______11.0
After the independence even if Haiti produces sugar he wouldn’t be able to sell it cause there’s no country that would accept to buy it . Because , well , the great country based their system on slavery and doing business with a slave free country would not seen good.
@@stefl9467 Incorrect in many ways. First, Great Britain abolished slave trade in 1807 and there was no stigma in Great Britain to trade with Haiti (if Haiti had anything to trade). Second, the French were fighting England so England would just LOVE to poke France's eyes by buying haitian sugar (if there were any sugar to sell). Yes there was a French blockade of Haiti and both American and British merchantships broke the blockade. Even the French blockade was a joke. During all these years of turmoil, Haitian elites (white, mulatto, black) sent their children to schools in France and it was above board and the children came back to Haiti. You seem blind to the fact that in the 1900's (decades after 1804) Haiti performed very badly economically compared to other Caribbean Nations. And slavery was long gone. You drank too much Marxist Kool-Aid.
I think its worth pointing the sugar industry didn’t totally die after 1804 and multiple different governments would attempt to keep the plantation economy alive post-independence with various Labour codes that were meant to force the newly ‘free’ slaves back onto plantations with various incentives and threats of punishments.
@@deeznoots6241 Haiti was even top seller of coffee , Haiti was not always in the mess as all of you seems thinking the country was even abble to "conquer" the east ( actual Dominican republic ). The country was still livable till the 90 , it really begin to collapse after that mostly due to corruption boycott from other country
I feel like the gang analogy breaks down after a certain point. People are motivated by more than mere greed or lust, but by love and a thirst for wisdom and knowledge.
Do you think gangs are merely motivated by greed and lust? Sometimes people need a source of income, or they need a community to identify with
If you're saying governments aren't organized gangs, then what are they? They control area, they use force to impose their will, they wear team colors lol. A gang can be a very professional operation, up to running a country.
Weren't the founding fathers a bit of a gang? They illegally organized and committed some terrorism against the Crown
It stops being a “gang” in the same way after a point, but given the conflict theory focus of this channel’s discussions it isn’t inappropriate to characterize a region’s sovereign as the entity who most effectively creates or maintains a monopoly on legitimized violence. A state is more than its capacity for violence, but outside of civil interactions it will ultimately lose its legitimacy over time if it cannot be the one to litigate or hit back harder when another presence escalates to violence. That doesn’t reflect the motives of the individuals who make up a state, but unless one can cultivate an environment where conflict is entirely avoidable, a sovereign’s legitimacy is only as strong as its ability to demonstrate how someone with a weapon and a disagreeable outlook isn’t above its dictates. This makes me more of a misanthrope about sovereignty as a position than an avid militarist or somesuch, and I think it’s a demonstration of why a state as an institution isn’t a value-neutral body.
Lines on grains!!! Love it
States are legitimized versions of gangs. I've been saying this for years and it's great hearing you say the same. Thanks.
I think maybe a way of framing it that doesn't sound so edgy might be "states are legitimised gangs, but they are gangs which everyone is a member of."
The reason that the gang analogy is so terrifying is that most people are not members of a gang, so they think of gangs of something that threatens them with violence. But if you're a gang member yourself then the gang protects you.
Thanks for making this video. I remember putting in a request for Haiti a bit ago, and I'm glad you got to make one. My request was only on 'Why the US isn't intervening directly this time around' part, which you did answer. Glad you covered more than just that, I enjoy history lessons. Do you know what else is a history lesson? 2 books by William Spaniel on the War in Ukraine and the causes of it, links are in the description.
I remember that comment, and thinking to myself that it was unlikely I would. But I found an angle worth talking about, so here we are.
Also, you boomed me with the book pivot. Did not see that one coming at all.
Kenya didnt say they need to wait for Elections. The PM resigned and they need a new government in any form in place. Just yesterday a transistional council was formally and legally oublished, with members to be published next week
4:43 William's doppelganger replaces William
You missed something pretty big when discussing Haiti's past
the first is that Haiti's economy was much more based on slavery and plantations than in the Dominican Republic, and that the Haitian Revolution was a slave revolt.
The reason they agreed to the terms presented by France is not because they feared France was going to take back Haiti, it was already established that France especially one weakened by 2 decades of war isn't going to get it backed.
The reason recognition was so important is because Haiti was internationally isolated, as powers like the US, the UK and Spain refrained from recognition due to the fear it would be seen as an endorsement of the revolution and inspire slaves in their own territories to do the same.
Without international recognition, they couldn't trade with anyone. they were making no money anyways, so they resolved that making money and giving most of it to France is better than making none at all
I'm Haitian and you're on point with the reason why Boyer agreed to the debt. We really had no choice from an economical standpoint
>not because they feared France was going to take it back
This is untrue, the Haitians very much did fear a potential French return and massive amounts of wealth was spent post-independence on establishing a series of fortifications inland to act as bases of resistance against any future invasion, though the only use these forts would ever get is some use in the early 20th century by Haitians resisting the American occupation of Haiti
Are the data for GDP per capita in 0:52 correct. For Dominican Republic it's closer to 10k USD. The value in the video is way off.
It is accurate. The mix up may be between nominal figures and purchasing power parity.
@@Gametheory101 I see, thanks the explanation! :)
I might have missed the PPP there.
I really liked this video because it parts from the Western-centric IR topics that we usually tend to "over"cover... How about a video on the civil wars in Africa?
I wish you explained how other countries have avoided or escaped the conflict-trap/vicious cycle that you described for Haiti!
i like the way you overlaid lines on the map of hispaniola at various parts through the video
Thx 🇭🇹🇭🇹🙏🏾🙏🏾
Liking this for lines on debts and lines on grains
For years I have described local police forces as "community-funded gangs". I would describe their goal as wishing to be stronger than any other gang, and their use of fear to coerce communities into funding them. So, this struck a note.
8:04 how long before we "evolve" back to kings?
If I were tasked with resolving the Haiti situation I would invite the leaders of the gangs to a summit and get them to form stationary bandit state.
If I may. If one day you feel inclined to start a podcast. I would encourage the experiment. And if you do step in direction. You will have to keep in mind that many viewers will request that you also continue the actual presentation format going.
Hey this 12 minute video has only been uploaded for 6 minutes, let me make a 'deep' and 'insightful' comment about why this video is completely wrong before I could have watched the whole thing... 🤔
Insert here: Simplistic, reductive, angry-Facebook-boomer take on your comment that has little to do with you're saying but is just an opportunity to insert an opinion on a topical, news-cycle issue °Д° !!
Also, it's so Clear and Obvious™that it's just an AI voiceover reading from an AI script while AI-selected footage happens in the background!
@@General12thwhy you watching then?
What's that weird tone of voice starting from 4:44
Probably different mic or he recorded on a day with the sniffles.
@@raumfahreturschutze I was wondering if it was his AI voice he has
Maybe a lil COVID voice 😅
I split recording over two days. Before the break was my voice from Friday. After, it was this morning.
@@Gametheory101 missed opportunity to make some kind of pun about lines on tests
I loved this video. It’s really too bad that people will willingly ignore facts in favor or their skin deep observations
I'm not a fan of the portrayal that bandits became protectors. Humans have lived in a tribal configuration for thousands of years, even during hunter-gatherer times. A multi-familial group that had its own warriors, It would be more likely that men within the farming communities would take up arms and learn to fight to protect everyone, because their increased caloric production made it possible for people to be occupied with producing food less of the time. Sure, farming was still labour intensive so it's not like the modern day when only a fraction of us need to farm. But it was still a huge leap forward compared to 100% of the population hunting for food and harvesting fruits and mushrooms.
If we look at the first city states and empires, then it becomes even clearer. Humans have always been territorial, when hunter-gatherer groups that didn't know each other met, there was often a conflict for who had to leave. These conflicts could be as minor as mere posturing, but also as severe as multiple homicides. But when agriculture became a thing, owning the fertile land became even more important. So all these little farming communities (each with their own warriors) started trying to conquer other groups. This would generally not be a massacre. The people were needed to work the fields. So it's more accurate to say that after finding out who was stronger, after one group submitting to the dominance of the other, the weaker group would be absorbed into the stronger group. The only real difference caused by who won and who lost, was seen in the hierarchy of the merged group.
We even see this in later empires, such as the Roman Republic. It started as a single settlement, but they conquered neighbouring villages and spread their culture to them.
The "farmers vs bandits" analogy creates a false dichotomy. There was no professional military yet, it even took quite a while for separate warrior castes to develop. The strongest men of the tribe would fight whatever threat, animal or human. And some of those communities started raiding their heighbours. A group of exclusive bandits would have no means of providing for themselves if they ever lost they would all starve. Any such group wouldn't live long.
I agree with you.
I overall appreciate William's analyses, including in this video, but the idea that government as protective power came as an evolution from banditry really does miss a lot of other significant options.
You describe it well. Basically, the men of a community who were good at fighting could be given that responsibility full time because of the benefits of preventing or mitigating raids. Then you could get even more smart about it and join forces with nearby villages.... etc etc....
@@steelytemplar Yes, the social nature of these interactions regarding domination and submission is really interesting and we still see it in posturing today. It wasn't about one village slaughtering the other and taking their land. It was more a show of strength followed by submissiveness of the losers. Not to say it was never lethal.
But there were times when it was co-operative, like you said.
Tribes were multi-familial groups, Tribes that knew eachother would exchange young adults for pairbonding. So tribes that had strong familial bonds between them, would be more inclined to co-operate than fight each other. There's no point in killing your own uncle when there are far more tribes you aren't related to that pose a threat to both of your tribes.
0:24 As a 16-year-old, it is absolutely wild to see my age group comprising such an aproportionally low % of the total viewers (0.5%) compared to right about every other yt channel I've seen the demographics of. I have no life so that prob explains why I watch this channel lol
You are probably much smarter than others in your age group.
Good video as always.....as an American I have always laughed at Lord this and Lady that etc...all descended from brigands...
Nice touch putting in a picture of Mars when talking about the god of war...
6:24 literaly how i, as an anarchist explain the origin of the state: in coercitive gang action against peasants. But gansters create religions to legitimize them, mitologies where their ancestors were heros and they become an aristocracy, and sometimes, their leader became the king. But history is not a straight line: people in general revolts, and in some places, people made revolutions against aristocrats or against kings and instaure democracy. People can organize collectively against the ruling class and the state (the gang and their coercitive hierarchy) to gain freedom.
Law enforcement officers sometimes engage in actions that resemble the behavior of criminal gangs, such as using excessive or deadly force in situations that do not warrant it, planting evidence, physically abusing or mocking detained individuals, and making arrests or using force based on questionable grounds. While such unethical and potentially illegal conduct by police can occur in various contexts, it tends to be particularly egregious and high-profile in certain environments like Haiti. Fundamentally, these types of incidents illustrate how elements of lawlessness and abuse of power can manifest within institutions meant to uphold the law, albeit to varying degrees across different societies. (Haiti's gangs are remnants of its disbanded army)
Gang, government, what's the difference?
Is this channel all wiki research?
The bandet and the farmer alliance feel like the first time mitochondria situation that grants the ability of multicellular organism to exist.
Only issue here is, that this only works with relatively high yield farming, in regions where this was not the case, but farming was still viable enough something else emerged.
Study the "Thing"(folkmoot) of ancient germanics, they lacked a warrior/bandit/government caste separate from farmers, instead decided to vote on things (fighting age males that is), the shift towards centralisation of power happened later to a larger degree with increasing agricultural productivity and the emergence of "knighthood" (horseback warriors with expenisive armor) as technological innovation necessitating high-intensity training and a relatively high defense budget in contrast to the original germanic militia model.
Is two diffrent country like mexico abd usa have border between no mix dominican with haity
As a government employee, this makes my job seem way more hardcore than it is. Now I’m wondering if Haitian gangs have a Data Team.
Where did you get your dr gdp per capita number? 25k is not right
6:52 thus *taxation* was born.
First you had the big steal. Were farmers "owned" the land commonly, you had the introduction of private property. so land was stolen, people on it enslaved and in return you paid a modest tax.
we did do away with some of that practice, but at its core, states still are built on having more (US) or less successfully (most of the rest of the world) stolen are large amount of resources and land and now renting it out for taxation. and wars are essentially fought for that. they may say "historical claim" or "bringing democracy"... but it's about control of the property rights and the taxation you can levy for stealing resources and making them into someone property which pays taxes to you.
A simplistic view, even if partially correct. Larger groups have usually much more complex power structures.
Power leads always somewhen to power abuse - political systems can, sometimes do limit efficiently power abuse.
For many historical "states" it took too long to establish law-based power structures, often enough some power-balance was destroyed by one of the parties, to keep power until a [new] revolution from inside or outside. Or power shifted to more than one party, leading to even civil wars.
Other point is military occupations of "foreign" territories, or even major migrations (such as at the end of the Western Roman Empire
Haiti had for much too long political structures based on power abuse or simply terror by occupying powers followed by "national" dictatorships, no real attempt to change for some law based or even democratic structures.
Yeah that said ‘rule by gang’ is actually pretty new for Haiti, but its obviously the result of the dissolution of the Haitian army which had previously been the singular institution both keeping Haiti together… and the singular institution to blame for Haitian politics being a long string of military dictatorships.
Long after Haiti had won independence the army was kept strong and maintained power due to a fear that there would be an attempt to recolonise Haiti.
The first year I begin to expand my business oversea, I share that sentiment. States are gangs with recognized law.
Why Vercingetorix?
I think going back to France takes it way too far. By 1945, Haiti was free from debt, both Haiti and the Dominican republic were a decade removed from US occupation and were the same developmentally. The difference is much more modern
Are you interested in making a podcast? That would be great.
If anyone is wondering about the history and economics, RealLifeLore did a good 1h video on the comparison between Haiti and the DR.
That was the best opening line ever
Are gangs/mafias micro governments or are governments macro gangs/mafias?
Ukraine brought me to your channel. Also I do like how your the cool dad of college assistant professors. But my favorite part of you is that you feel like an unbiased news channel because any info on here is too boring to be biased.
Thank you for explaining the real reason politics forced their way into power
Hi Dr. Spaniel!
I hope you watch this video's comment section in particular. I fear it might get particularly vile.
Lines on wheat... Just amaizing!!! 😂
Start a podcast! I’d listen to it repeatedly
Why does the flag of Haiti have an angry-looking red face at the centre?
“You’re probably not in Haiti”
Me an Haitian living in Haiti:😮
Port-au-Prince ? 👀
@@mixtapemania6769 exactly , i mean it's as bad as it seem but we're not all dead
@@stefl9467 oui sa vre. M wè anpil ayisyen ki sòti lòt bò Ayiti yo gade Potoprens kon yon vil mechan ki sanble on lobby GTA men se la gen plis moun plis opòtinite anplwaman ak plis richès (nan sèten katye)
@@mixtapemania6769 if you live there ,for now it’s really like a GTA lobby just stay in your home and go out only for food
States also evolved as a solution to other game theoretical problems like the prisoner's dilemma and the tragedy of the commons. Even without protectionism, groups with institutions capable of solving these problems will outcompete those without.
Great video, but I don't agree with the "This is how we got Kings" line. The divine right of Kings is not related to their ability to organise resources to fight (although that ability is related to their success 😅)
Next week: the end of the world is normal ish
Showing mars when mentioning the gods of war, I noticed
Was hoping someone would notice!
Something that might make a good video, the military of Zaire. Zaire's military under Mobutu didn't get salaries. They instead had to get their money by extorting regular citizens. The military ended up becoming more and more corrupt, and less and less competent, until when Rwanda invaded in the First Congo War, the Zaire military put up almost no resistance. It was an institution that ended up specializing in doing the exact opposite of what it was created to do: protect the country vs. being a useless parasite on the country.
if you have to go back in time hundreds of years then you don't have a very good argument TODAY.
You do understand that societies and cultures change with time and there's a historical context for everything we do.
@@chrisriverata1917 but it’s just story and attachment to things that don’t exist, maybe they did in the past but they don’t now. this is an example of a buddhist principle of attachment leading to self inflicted suffering.
Any videos on mexican cartels?
The best part is when your stationary bandit has beef with another stationary bandit, and they then come to your farms and raze the food you had and you then get mad at your stationary bandit for not being as good as the other stationary bandit and then rebel and maybe get the other stationary bandit to help them take out the stationary bandit from the beginning...
P.s. Stationary bandit, felt like it needed to be said one more time
The wheels on the debt trap bus goes 'round and 'round.
also; a very black and white way of thinking, there were semi-nomadic groups, many nomadic groups managed to get many more calories than settled people (depending on the part in the world) and they near always had a much higher chances of surviving famines (or not even being affected by it)
1:08 The unbelievable irony of you comparing Haiti vs DR to North Korea vs South Korea and Gaza vs Isreal, yet still not getting it. Just a complete woosh, right over the head moment
0:51 gdp per capita of the DR is $10000 per capita not $25000
In the abstraction it is implied that groups of people that are good at farming cannot fight well and can't defend themselves. This seems nonsensical, the roving bandits in the example aren't a necessary factor since farmers can support a larger population and can defend themselves.
Oh, being great at violence but poor at agriculture exchange. Makes me think of the classic film The Seven Samurai.
I saw peanutbutter for the first time in shops 2021 on the shelf for weird american foods. Also that stuff would likely be extremely unpleasant for me thanks to allergies.
He will find a way to put lines on the map, right?
0:29 proud to be part of the 0.5% :)
Yup, a state is fundamentally the biggest gang, with a few ceremonial trappings such as flags, a nice building or two, an anthem and an army.
Except at least western governments at least have some accountability compared to gangs.
@@therabidsquid432nerf9 they don't have merely some more accountability, they have dramatically more accountability compared to criminal gangs, and they are worlds more benign of course too, even though they may screw up and make policy errors.
I didn't put my original comment to suggest that states are inherently illegitimate or bad, rather to point out without being answerable to the public (and at the very least trying) to act in the interest of the public, then they are little better than the biggest gang.
Or at least they are the biggest gang, but also the most good gang, hopefully.
What makes the vicious cycle unstable? While most countries went through such cycles, they still usually get out. Why?
Pretty sure it usually involves one of the sides definitively winning, or at least have the sides that more or less win agree on borders.
Pretty much what Gimme said. This is why Civil Wars last longer. With international war, for the most part, there is a clear and decisive beginning and end. A Civil War may fester for years, becoming super intense for a couple of years then slowly die down over the next decade.
mwen renmen li
whats up with the voice change? at 4:43
We the people want a podcast Spaniel 👀