While he was absent, Pierre-Charles was responsible for turning the Lavalas movement into an organised and disciplined political party, Organisation Politique Lavalas (OPL). That was as close to holding public office as Pierre-Charles ever came. Aristide returned to Haiti in 1994, after the military regime was removed by a United Nations force headed by the United States, and served out the remainder of his term of office. But Pierre-Charles soon fell out with him, and the OPL split: Pierre-Charles kept the initials but renamed his party Organisation du Peuple en Lutte (Struggling People's Organisation), while Aristide formed a movement fiercely loyal to him, known (in Creole) as Fanmi Lavalas, or the Lavalas Family. As Aristide became increasingly reliant on armed thugs to underpin his regime, and his re-election in 2000 was surrounded by allegations of fraud, Pierre-Charles became one of his most implacable critics. He accused the former priest of betraying his democratic ideals and becoming both a dictator. Aristide's supporters responded by burning down Pierre-Charles' house, research centre and party offices.
But Pierre-Charles soon fell out with him, and the OPL split: Pierre-Charles kept the initials but renamed his party Organisation du Peuple en Lutte (Struggling People's Organisation), while Aristide formed a movement fiercely loyal to him, known (in Creole) as Fanmi Lavalas, or the Lavalas Family.
As Aristide became increasingly reliant on armed thugs to underpin his regime, and his re-election in 2000 was surrounded by allegations of fraud, Pierre-Charles became one of his most implacable critics. He accused the former priest of betraying his democratic ideals and becoming both a dictator. Aristide's supporters responded by burning down Pierre-Charles' house, research centre and party offices.
. . . his restoration in 1994 on condition he impose neoliberalist "plan of death" on Haiti, a brutal U.S. economic embargo and Aristide's eventual ouster in 2004 -- featuring U.S.-backed death squads that still roam free today -- because he was not neoliberal enough . . .
Notice I am not dismissing what you way; there is just more to it than you have indicated. For example, I think this is a good depiction:
Whatever the political differences between the Lavalas factions, Fatton writes, they were largely overshadowed by personal rivalries driven by what he terms la politique du ventre (the politics of the belly)--the struggle for the acquisition of personal wealth through the conquest and plundering of state offices. Fatton sees the FL-OPL split as the predictable consequence of the Haitian government's inability, in the face of an aid embargo and a stagnant economy, to continue supporting the growing class of new political claimants. By the winter of 1997, corruption in the Préval administration had become so blatant that at carnival in Port-au-Prince, the crowds, weary of partisan squabbling and disdainful of Haiti's politicians of all stripes, devoted much of the festivities to lampooning Lavalas bigwigs as grands mangeurs, or "big eaters," so named because of their propensity for lining up at the public trough. The struggle for money and a foothold in the Haitian bourgeoisie is unquestionably one of the principal forces shaping Haiti's authoritarian politics. Moreover, as Fatton says, in the absence of economic growth, this pattern will replicate itself indefinitely. However, to maintain that in this instance the politique du ventre was the determining factor in the FL- OPL split would be to fail to reckon with Jean-Bertrand Aristide himself.
The struggle for money and a foothold in the Haitian bourgeoisie is unquestionably one of the principal forces shaping Haiti's authoritarian politics. Moreover, as Fatton says, in the absence of economic growth, this pattern will replicate itself indefinitely. However, to maintain that in this instance the politique du ventre was the determining factor in the FL- OPL split would be to fail to reckon with Jean-Bertrand Aristide himself.
I don't think we disagree in general, just on the use of Aristideism. I defined it very clearly for this diary's purposes, but it nonetheless and reasonably carries connotations I didn't intend. fairleft
