Would anarcho-syndicalism or any other anarchist economic idea have much relavence for Haiti?
Even if all the wealth of the country was shared equally, that would mean everyone would be equally hungry. And what is there to collectivize? According to the CIA, which has worked hard to install capitalist puppets there, the result is about 2/3rds of the labor force being unemployed, and about 2/3rds of the population lucky enough to be working, is doing so in agriculture, often in the subsistence variety(1).
Clearly, if we are to be concerned about poverty, an economic development strategy is needed. Obviously the neo-liberal recipe of abolishing economic independence and social security in favor of a cheap export market hasn't worked to lift the Haitian people out of poverty. Quite the opposite in fact as 20+ years has shown.
So what is the alternative? Since starting a business requires cash, capital, collateral, credit (none of which is very abundant in Haiti), how are the peasant farmers there to compete with cheap, subsidized, monocultured foods being pumped into the country by US multi-nationals? They can't. That's why the U.S. wanted access to their markets in the first place. They know that in pure capitalism it's usually the big capitalists that have the smaller ones for lunch.
And besides the low wages of Haiti, why should a factory even relocate to a country where there isn't the necessary infrastructure, or even a hardware store to buy materials to build and maintain a factory? All of that and $3/day labor can be found right next door in Mexico.
In order to industrialize, Haiti would be well served to scrap the IMF script which has no success story to boast of, and go with another model that limits competition and protects infant industries(3), just as the US did for itself when it was at a disadvantage in the market. By placing tarrifs on food products coming into Haiti, farmers can once again be in business, selling their food for a better price. By creating an economic union, perhaps with Venezuela, and tax imports coming into the zone but not goods produced within the boundaries, corporations would have an incentive to locate regional production centres there so as to have access to the regional market. This is how Brazil diversified (and strengthened )its economy, got its first automobile factory and other high wage industries. Before, as a banana republic, it would go into economic crisis any time the prices of its 1 or 2 comparative advantage commodities dropped in price on world markets. And since they were in the food market, crisis was frequent.
To implement all these reforms would require a state, a bureaucracy, and would probably entail corruption, even if every economic policy was decided by direct referendum after thorough public discussion via decentralized, worker run media. Yeah, the Haitian people don't need to hear about the problem of politicians. In 1990 80% of voters went to the polls. In 1997, after the co-optation of a social justice candidate (Aristide) by the CIA, IMF, etcetera, only 5% bothered to vote for new Senators(2).
But what else can they do? Clearly anarchism doesn't have all the answers for peasants and workers in the third world.
:red:
(1) http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ha.html
(2) http://www.zmag.org/ZMag/articles/june97james.htm
(3) http://tiss.zdv.uni-tuebingen.de/webroot/sp/barrios/themeA3c.html
Anarchism has all the answers both here and in the third world. What is there to collectivise? The land! - the single most important thing for all peasants everywhere. If the free commune of Haiti can no longer support all it's people then surely they can migrate to the free commune of Brazil or the free commune of Texas.
Capitalism *always* hives off something from the wealth of every country and smuggles it into the pockets of the rich. If only one penny or one loaf of bread goes to a capitalist it is one loaf or penny too much!