1804 Haitian Massacre or Genocide?

1804 Haitian Revolution involved the systematic extermination of whites on the island of Haiti after the rise to power of Jean-Jacques Dessalines. This was in response mostly due to fear that the white population of the recently "freed" colony would seek to escape to other white colonial nations and then reimpose slavery on the island.

Interestingly, I've tried to look extensively online and despite Dessaline's very open nature of targeting only whites—regardless if they had sympathies to the blacks' cause—most historical sources list this as a massacre rather than a genocide.

What do you think, Veeky Forums? Genocide or Massacre?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1804_Haiti_massacre
libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=1A499434B915C9339475B4E1548BCD3A
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Take this shit to /pol/

>Genocide
This.

>can't talk about a historical genocide of whites without being redirected to the neo-nazi board

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1804_Haiti_massacre

Genocide. It's no different than Rwanda or Cambodia.

The term you're looking for is "ethnic cleansing".

They spared doctors and a handful of other educated whites. If a massacre is classified as indiscriminate killing it at the very least can't be classified as a massacre. I'm leaning towards genocide over ethnic cleansing, as it seems to fit the definition more. Ethnic cleansing would imply zero white people, but they were ok with the white people they desperately needed.

>wahhh why are mean darkies killing me after I owned their whole family as slaves

lmao cry more whitey

It wasn't just doctors and other professionals, a group of Polish soldiers that defected to the Haitian cause during the war and a small colony of Germans were spared. Also foreigners were not touched.

Waaaaaaaaahhhhhh why am I being genocided! Slaves should offer me better treatment - I fed them!!!!

it was barbaric, but in his defense he probably didn't hate whites personally but did it to appease his supporters. Its also worth remembering that the Napoleonic invasion was EXTREMELY cruel.

If we want to classify it as a genocide, we'd have to establish what the definition of genocide is. If we classify it as the systematic and purposeful extermination of a people based on cultural or racial criteria, then we might say it is the case. On the other hand, the social structure of Saint Domingue was such that it was a racial hierarchy. The white planters at the top of this hierarchy did indeed want to reestablish slavery or some forced labor system using african laborers. Therefore, the killing of whites did not really have some basis in some perverse ideology akin to nazism. Maybe it was more akin to the antagonism between tutsis and hutus, though I'm not familiar with the Rwandan case. Now, it is true that the rich white planters made up the minority of whites. The majority, in fact, were known as the "petits blancs" who were small farmers, artisans, shopkeepers and managers for the whites. I'm not sure how these people fare, but if they were killed it was in retaliation from slaves who associated their suffering with the whites on top of the racial hierarchy. Anyway, iirc there were whites who continued to live in Haiti after 1805 (I think some poles and menonites and czechs), so we can't say that whites were totally exterminated.

If you're further interested OP, I know of this book of primary sources on white perspectives of the Haitian Revolution. I haven't read it myself but reading from your OP I think you'd be interested

libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=1A499434B915C9339475B4E1548BCD3A

People call it a genocide of whites, but in reality it was a genocide of Frenchmen. White people of other nationalities were spared.

It was ethnic cleansing. Genocide means you attempt to destroy the whole ethnic group worldwide. Obviously there was no chance to kill all French, only the ones on Haiti.

Geocide

These niggers deserve more sanction, and i hope more pedos use their kids
Subhuman niggers deserve no pity

>What do you think, Veeky Forums? Genocide or Massacre?
Textbook definition of a genocide

If it was a genocide, how do you explain the Polish soldiers who became citizens of the new republic?

Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Why /pol/ is so obsessed with this?

I thought it was obvious. They'll even get worked up about the black on white homicide rate and say it shows that blacks are killing them because they're white

someone has to remember the past, even the parts that don't fit in with the leftist orthodoxy that dominates and stifles academia.

>the parts that don't fit in with the leftist orthodoxy that dominates and stifles academia.
the irony, you cuck, is that its the so-called leftist orthodoxy that has produced first rate scholarship on the haitian revolution. back to /pol/.

>>/pol/ is that way

Well this should answer your question.
It helps fuel their victim complex.

By that reasoning the holocaust was not genocide because there were jews living all over the world?

It was a genocide by every modern definition, but do to the current political atmosphere about race, especially the history of whites and blacks it will never be considered one.

It was widely different than what happened in Kampuchea you retard.

>can't even spell Cambodia right

>Being this retarded
Kampuchea is what the Cambodians call Cambodia, and even westerners call the Communist period solely Kampuchea. The Khmer Rouge killed anyone who was accused of being a counter revolutionary, a spy, or a Vietnamese, but it was always a class thing, killing based on ethnicity was only the Vietnamese due to the political tensions with Vietnam.

One interesting thing about the definition of "genocide" is that it basically had to have happened after 1900.

I'm not sure why, but think about it. When Genghis Khan was slaughtering every Persian taller than a wagon wheel, we never think of it as genocide. Maybe because things like collective punishment and sacking cities was still common into the 19th century, but suddenly became very offensive to European sensibilities after the long period of peace in the late 1800s.

>being this stupid

>enslave a race of people and use their labour for enormous profit
>get mad when they rise up and slaughter you

hmmm really makes you think

>people
Pretty liberal use of that word

Don't ever leave

>yes Jamal please murder all the white people
Back to blacked.com you monumental cuck.

>reddit spacing

>P-please joint my fart right criclejerk guys we need numbers to go force the trump reigme lmao

you people have regressed to little more than whores for thoughts & minds, it's so cute watching you prostitute yourselves online to "convince" others

>if you think blacks shouldn't murder white women and children you should go to /pol/
Nah faggot fuck you.

If the roles were reversed you'd be cheering them on. You're an intellectual joke.

That's a pretty heavy assumptions you virgin cuckold.

>There are two kinds of people on Veeky Forums

>The ones that think blacks are subhuman, and the ones that defend a genocide because it was caried out by blacks.

Don't pretend matey. We all know.

No one's defending it. We're just saying it's not surprising it happened. What did you think was going to happen? The slaves would pile them on boats and say "right! Cheerio! None of that anymore! Off you go!"

>I support a genicide of children so everybody is a sick fuck like me!
Tell me mire about your fetish you projecting trash.

Go cry your crocodile tears elsewhere you sack of filth. You're not fooling anyone. Your agenda is quite clear.

>No one's defending it

That doesn't mean it was, in any way, right.

My "agenda" is being against white genocide you subhuman gutter trash. Tell me what's so reprehrnsible about that?

I didn't see it as defending it as much as it was pointing out the foolishness of expecting anything else. You want to subjugate a people group who outnumber you? You better keep it under control or you're fucked.

Haitians only killed French.

Poles, English and Germans were killed. In fact after the rightful slaying of French Haiti provided land for 3k Germans and added that Teutonic races would be enshrined as an equal people in their constitution.

I'm not even sure the average Haitian wanted to slaughter the white population (not including slave owners). Dessalines had to go from town to town with his goons to make sure the massacres happened. They weren't spontaneous explosion of violence by newly freed slaves fueled by vengeance but organized mass murder pushed by the very top of the newborn State.

It was also a big mistake that I doubt Louverture would have ever made. Haiti never recovered from the French retaliation.

Two wrongs don't make a right, the massacre was still terrible.

BUT you do need to understand the situation and appreciate how a brutal system like that could potentially cause such a backlash.

We are mainly familiar with slavery in North America / The United States, which was vastly different from the system in the Caribbean and South America. On Saint Domingue, slaves outnumbered non-slaves 100-to-1, and as a result, the plantations had to be run like fortresses, complete with watch-towers, armed guards, and brutal collective punishments for even minor infractions. Executions, starvation, and exhaustion meant that the death rate always far exceeded the birth rate, and new slaves had to be constantly shipped in to meet the demand. It's frankly astonishing that open rebellion didn't happen sooner.

And although I'm sure that this would be little consolation to the average white person living in the colony at the time, it's no surprise that organized and systematic massacres ended up being carried out. Like many fanatical revolutionaries throughout history, the leadership grew paranoid and saw the former ruling class as a political liability - a dangerous fifth column who must surely be secretly plotting to undermine them. Ironically, very similar events were unfolding in mainland France at this exact time, during the so-called "Reign of Terror".

Genocide of course. The reason I didn't give a single cent to the Hatian earthquake fund

Considering how they treated the slaves, their reaction is understandable. They had it coming tbqh.

neither
it was just a payback.

Poles were spared.

>100-to-1
it was 10 to 1 but maybe on the plantations it was 100 to 1

good riddance to those whites then tbqh

not memeing

Besides the cleansing of the Frenchmen, why didn't the blacks kill the "mixed" ones as well? The mulattoes killed and enslaved all the blacks when they had power too.

#Triggered

This, far more blacks were whipped, beaten, starved and outright slautered then all the whites combined.

It was honestly a genocide, and Haiti paid a dear price for slaughtering it's most valuable citizens.

>apologists ITT
this is all bait right?

apologists for what? The slaughter of the white french population of haiti? Sadly no, it isn't just bait, you are seeing the viciousness of the modern left on blatant and brazen display here.

Nah this is what you get when you allow 70 IQ blacks and cuckold fetishists on Veeky Forums, they want us all dead and don't even hide it.

For mulattoes it very a lot since they were many, many on both sides.

It was ethnic cleansing you tard.

>STOP IT STOP IT ONLY WHITE PEOPLE DID BAD THINGS IN HISTORY LALALALA I CANT HEAR YOU

>wahhh why are mean whiteys killing me after I made their cities into violent shitholes
cry more nigger

>implying nonwhite slaves deserve rights

Historians don't care whether an event, any event, can be categorized as a "genocide" or a "massacre," they care about what happened and what were the results, in other words, go find another board.
>Hurr was X a genocide or massacre
WHO FUCKING CARES WHAT ITS CALLED

>if I ignore a problem, it will go away!
Kids, this is a cuck

>implying ethnic cleansing and genocide isn't the same fucking thing

Everyone already knows what happened, only /pol/ cares about how to label it to fit their political agenda

This, calling the systematic murder of white French people in Haiti a "genocide" is just a Neo-Nazi distortion of the facts. I prefer to call it a "nonviolent protest".

Call it what you want, over in /pol/ that is.
Also I like the fact that you're only concerned about the whites that were killed, and ignore the whites that were spared, and ignore the black French sympathizers that were killed, you ignore the whole slavery thing aswell, its almost as if you're trying to interpret historical events in such a way that they fit your political view...
>'I prefer to call it a "nonviolent protest"'
You also seem to have to put words into peoples mouths so that you have an argument aswell.

>Also I like the fact that you're only concerned about the whites that were killed, and ignore the Jews that were spared, and ignore the white Jewish sympathizers that were killed, you ignore the whole ursury thing aswell, its almost as if you're trying to interpret historical events in such a way that they fit your political view...
wow, the Holocaust wasn't a genocide, who knew

The haitian massacre was not a genoicde.

You cannot be racist towards white people since the definition of racism is power + prejudice.

>Being this retarded
"Jew" is genetic (according to Hitler)
"Slave-owning ruling class and/or sympathizers" is not

THIS 100% it wasn't genocide since white people were the oppressors and racism is prejudice + power.

Fuck fascism and fuck white people. They deserved all of it especially after voting in the orange man baby drumpf.

>He has resort to samefagging and boogeyman arguments

Lmao little drumpflebabby /pol/cuck whiteboi is mad as hell. The Haitian Revolution was not a genocide, the dictionary and academia are on my side.

is pic related racism?

blacks voted for Trump too.

Yes because he is siding with his white oppressors against his own interest. He is an uncle tom and effectively white. Most blacks didn't vote for Drumpf and you know it.

You're either retarded or this is some next level trolling.
If you're arguing whether or not it was genocide, you're retarded. Read a history book and learn what happened, don't debate with niggers or stormnigger about whether or not the event fits your political views.

>"ruling class"
Dividing people into classes is no different than dividing them into races. It singles them out based on some group allegiance rather than actual crimes. The small children and women who got massacred in Haiti weren't the ones beating up the slaves and their only "crime" was being related to people who did. This is textbook the same logic as Hitler had about the Jews.

It wasn't genocide or racism. Racism is prejudice + power read the fucking definition drumpfkin.

They were still part of an oppressive race so it isn't racism or genocide. Go worship Drumpf on /pol/.

Is the person saying "power+prejudice" a sarcastic poltard or an actual person using that argument?
I guess that doesn't really matter cause either way their retarded.

Fuck off falseflagger, we are trying to have an actual debate.

It's a /pol/ falseflag.

Lmao /pol/cucks trying to deflect me as one of their own because i'm BTFOing them right now.

Face it /pol/, when you actually face someone in a debate you get BTFO. All you can do is circlejerk about drumpf.

Also read a fucking dictionary and go to college to learn what actual racism is. No shit drumpf voters are so uneducated.

The "ruling class" wasn't the only part of the people who were killed. There were slave owners that were killed for...well...being slave owners, and then there were members of the ruling class (there is some overlap obviously) and by that I mean the authorities on the island, and then there were the allies/business partners, friends of the slave-owners and such. "Ruling class" doesn't necessarily some obvious monolith that was specifically targeted by the revolt. By you definition of "genocide" you might aswell say Hannibal commited genocide when he killed a bunch of Romans at Cannae because they had different political views than him.

Pretty much but on a much smaller scale.

Over a million died in Rwanda and Cambodia.

Barely 5000 died in Haiti

They desperately need to find an example of white genocide done by blacks

>the closest thing they can find happened over 200 years with less than 6000 deaths

yeah i also don't really care that the holocaust was a genocide

Honestly had France hadn't sided with poor white trash none of this would have happened.

>some Jews were spared in the holocaust so it's not a genocide
wewo

I dunno man, depending on how you define it the stuff that Mugabe and his supporters did in Zimbabwe definitely counts too, the main difference aside from scale is that nobody with a functioning brain is going to defend Mugabe.

Yeah,

That scumbag Mugabe might qualifies as well.

Don't get why White nationalists are against the man, though.

Isn't it Europe for Europeans Africa for Africans?

>mfw I hear my black coworkers defending Mugabe and claiming his failures are the result of the white man sabotaging African development

White nationalists wouldn't mind so much if they were allowed to kick the Africans out of Europe but what we have instead is a situation where anti-white policies are tacitly encourage while pro-white policies are actively combatted.

Its a troll you goddamn idiot

Not really.