Junto Boys

ARISTIDE CRIES FOUL

A lot is being made about whether Aristide left Haiti on his own free will. The media seems to be resting the controversy on his being freely elected as if that guaranteed an A+ rating on human rights. Don't forget that Adolf Hitler was popularly elected too before he systematically took over the entire country by limiting freedoms. Without a constitution and an executive that support individual rights, a free election is just a smokescreen. What good is an election if criticizing the government will put you in jail? Does anybody think that Aristide would have ever allowed the kind of election that would have put a rival into power?

It's easy to have one election, but the question is whether that leader is willing to concede that the people have rights that reach higher than the whim of the ruler. The big election in this country happened not in 1788, 1792 or 1796, but in 1800. The first three elections were more or less continuations of current policy. But the election of 1800 brought an entirely new set of leaders and opposite ideas into power. It's sometimes called the bloodless revolution of 1800, because no other established government had ever been able to relinquish power without an armed conflict. That Adams was able to step aside for his bitter rival Jefferson seems like nothing today, because it happens all the time. In my lifetime it's happened in 1976, 1980, 1992, and 2000. The majority of the countries in the world have never experienced it.

If we’re going to question the legitimacy of Aristide, we must ask ourselves how he ruled concerning individual freedom and whether it was within the spirit of the election that put him there. If all it takes to be legitimate is one election then a victory at the ballot box would seem to justify any horrid act that came next. The media doesn't seem to ask these tough questions.