Father and Son

Taking Haiti by Mary Renda focused on the reactions caused by the United States taking occupation in Haiti. Paternalism took on a meaning of the United States taking on the role as “father” to Haiti treating them as though they were our “son” and needed our guidance to lead them to a more productive state. This was very significant to me because I find it to be a reoccurring thing for the United States and its citizens to find wrong in things that are not like or familiar to them. The text states, “We were all embued with the fact that we were the trustees of a huge estate that belonged to minors. That was a viewpoint I personally took, that the Haitians were our wards and that we were endeavoring to make for them a rich and productive property, to be turned over to them at such a time as our government saw fit.” stated by General Smedley Butler. With this being the way that most marines accounted for their time being in Haiti, it explains the paternal discourse that many of them had. Although, many mainly will not the violence that occurred while the occupation was in place, Renda made note of the information that the marines did that was positive and productive for the Haitian community such as attempting to bring hospitals, roads, bridges, public buildings, telecommunications to give them a sense of community.

            The U.S. occupation of Haiti contributed to the reshaping of the concept of the national identity of a marine and U.S. citizens between 1915 and 1940. It was interesting to learn that this is what put forth the vision of “American greatness” it allowed for the U.S. military to alter the way in which it was structured and allowed hegemonic conceptions to be somewhat erased. Although, it is ideal that the U.S. is picked to be the country to be paternal to Haiti in an effort to put them on a more productive path, it leaves me with a question as to why is this information not shared within the history? Whenever there is a volatile incident that the U.S. has part in that is without hesitation to be shared. The U.S.’s position in the occupation with Haiti is something that has not always been magnified for reasons most do not know. I am interested to know why do most think the U.S. took this paternistic position in Haiti, it is not the only time that the military has gone in and tried to help restore community in other countries, so what is it about Haiti or any of these countries that make the U.S. feel the need to play “father”?