Are you a canadian white? as far as I'm concerned the white race does not owe us(Dominicans)anything and we will not expect anyone to give us what we want, we will advance our country by ourselves, by doing business but not expecting anyone to give us anything(like they send food to Haiti and parts of Africa).

You are doing a good job junior but you are mistaken, I am all of the above I am not canadian by birth
let's not change the subject... I was only stating that your observation may have some flaw, no need to be defensive.

Today when I took a dump ,three Haitians came out and try to take over my house ..

What is your point ?

SCHOOL OF LUNATICS
CERTIFICATE ACHIEVEMENT
FIRST PLACE
IN HONOR OF OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE AND DEDICATION
WE GLADLY PRESENT THIS AWARD TO:
DOMINICANATION
WITH THIS ACHIEVMENT AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE IN :
ABSURDITY
DELUSION DE GRANDEUR
HYSTERY

Why Haiti is better than DR
That's true if you are standing at the DR/Haiti border drinking Cleren with empty stomach and all the sudden your twisted mind believes you are looking at Haiti; when the reality is that you are looking out the DR side.

I ran some numbers about former French colonies, today: Independent nations for their performance in GDP; PPP; HDI; Life Expectancy and Literate rate. And compared to Former Spanish colonies, today: Independent nations (I excluded Puerto Rico for obvious reasons); and the results confirm that this forum topic is totally wrong.

This is the link... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrYqOJJEzx4

My conclusion: French colonization was a total failure.

That is because spanish colonization was primarily geared to the settlement of the new lands and evangelization of native tribes (a thing that they accomplished splendidly with the natives of Mexico with their adoration of the virgin of Guadaloupe and with the natives and africans of our country with the altagracian cult), while the french settlement (with the sole exception of Canada) was geared for the accumulation of wealth through the exploitation of enslaved africans, cuz', unlike the spaniard or the north american british settler, which sought to make a home out of the new land, the only thing that a french colon of the Caribbean had in mind was to make himself wealthy enough to go back to France and live the rest of his days in luxurious relaxation, and also to relieve himself of the debts that he incurred in the installation of his plantations, debts that were the main mechanism of enrichment of the merchantile interests that financed the plantations on the metropolis (one could say that the splendour of many french cities like Bourdeaux, Nantes, La Rochelle and L'Orient had their origins on the riches acumulated through slavery). In fact, many travellers and chroniclers of the time said that the only buildings that were of note on the french exploitation colonies were the sugar mills where the slaves toiled, the colonies lacking the most basic things to make a life in the tropics barely endurable, such as a sufficient numbers of schools, churches and medical facilities. And example of this is that, unlike the case of the spanish colonies, were the population could be educated through the schools of the jesuits, if a french colon wanted to have his offspring educated, he had necessarily to send them to France. Based on these facts, it should not be a wonder then that the colonies of the respective metropolis would fare so differently after independence.

mon ami... boot of coorse you arr rite !!!

Actually, I never thought of that angle but it is interesting !1

Lau:

Would you say that teh spanish colonizers were more humane than their french counterparts?? Leavign the vox clamantis en deserto aside.....

Maybe not at the beginnings of the colonization process (as the multiple native massacres are witness to), but a later period (since the XVIIth century onwards), a thousand times YES, cuz' at least the spaniards took pains in evangelizing their enslaved populations and their offspring, while the french didn't make even that. The situation was so markedly different in the colonies from one and the other that, when some servants were too recalcitrant about their chores, the only thing that the spanish overlord had to do was to threaten them into selling them to one of the french colonies (specially the thousand times dreaded Saint Domingue francais) for the slaves to start behaving. That speaks a lot about a colony's ill reputation.

let's not only pick on the snooty Frenchmen! British attitude in the Caribbean was similar to the French. Many English colonies are just as Laut described the French, little more than traces of plantations left behind in terms of structures. Note that Jamaica within a few years after Haitian Revolution exceeded the output of Haiti at it's peak.

Brits were also the champions in transporting slaves to the New World. However, perhaps because they were the main slave traders dealing with Africans, they had a better understanding of 'divide and conquer' and they never made the massive, greedy errors of France that led to the Haitian revolution.

Nonetheless it is hard to read the French as anything but vicious bastards ... for another example both Brit and French islands made use of labor from India in mid-1800s, but on the French islands these peoples were driven into the (burial) ground and hence left much less of a mark than in Brit territories.

British also somewhat redeemed themselves by driving abolition, though this was not all for altruistic reasons.