Haiti’s democracy crushed by a coup

Haiti’s revolutionary origins are unparalleled in modern history. In 1804, enslaved Africans led the only successful slave revolt in history, defeating the French empire to establish the first black republic and becoming the first nation to abolish slavery. But Haiti’s defiance of global racial and colonial hierarchies provoked unrelenting hostility from Western powers. As historian Peter James Hudson observes, “Haiti’s independence was seen as a threat to the racial and economic order of the Americas, and it has been punished for it ever since.” 

The Duvaliers, François “Papa Doc” Duvalier and his son Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier, ruled Haiti from 1957 to 1986 with a combination of brutal repression, personality cults and deep corruption. François Duvalier solidified his control by fostering an atmosphere of terror and installing loyal enforcers to eliminate dissent. His son continued this brutality, maintaining the family’s grip on power until a popular uprising forced Jean-Claude into exile. Like the kleptocratic dictatorship of Mobutu Sese-Seko in Zaire, the dictatorship of the Duvaliers, which ruled Haiti for almost 30 years, was strongly backed by the United States.

The infamous paramilitary force known as the Tonton Macoutes, created by François “Papa Doc” Duvalier in 1959, operated as personal enforcers of the Duvaliers, instilling fear and maintaining control through terror. The Tonton Macoutes were responsible for tens of thousands of deaths, tortures and disappearances over three decades. They targeted political opponents, activists and anyone suspected of disloyalty to the regime. Their methods of intimidation often included public beatings, rape and assassinations.

The Lavalas movement emerged from the long history of resistance to this repression. Lavalas, meaning “the flood” in Haitian Creole, emerged from a confluence of liberation theology, peasant organising and urban popular movements in the 1980s. Led by Jean-Bertrand Aristide, a Catholic priest, the movement sought to remove the dictatorship and transform Haiti’s political and economic systems.

At its core, Lavalas advocated for a “preferential option for the poor”, seeking to dismantle the entrenched inequalities that had historically defined Haitian society. Its vision was deeply tied to the notion of popular political empowerment, emphasising that governance should serve the needs of the majority rather than a privileged elite. Aristide often described Lavalas as a movement rather than just a political party, underscoring its focus on collective action and social transformation. He famously declared that “We must end the cycle where the rich are too rich and the poor are too poor. True democracy begins with justice for the majority.”

The urban poor, particularly in Port-au-Prince’s densely populated neighbourhoods, were critical to Lavalas’s strength. These communities, long excluded from political decision-making, became the backbone of the movement, mobilising en masse to demand their rights and actively participating in protests, elections, and grassroots organising. For many among the urban poor, Lavalas was the first time their voices were heard and their needs placed at the centre of national politics. 

The movement’s policies prioritised access to education, healthcare and housing, alongside efforts to redistribute land and nationalise resources for public benefit. Lavalas also drew heavily from Haiti’s revolutionary history, positioning itself as a continuation of the struggle for independence and sovereignty, while rejecting the neoliberal economic models imposed by foreign powers. 

Aristide’s sermons fused the language of the Bible with potent critiques of inequality, corruption and foreign domination, electrifying Haiti’s poor. As his  popularity grew, so did the opposition against him. In 1988, armed forces attacked St Jean Bosco, Aristide’s church in Port-au-Prince, during a Sunday mass. Parishioners were massacred as they sought refuge in the pews, while Aristide narrowly escaped with his life. This attack exemplified the lengths to which the Haitian elite and military were willing to go to suppress a movement that dared to challenge their power. Shortly afterward, Aristide was defrocked by the Catholic Church, a move widely interpreted as an attempt to silence his growing influence among the poor.

Despite these efforts, Aristide’s message only gained traction. He remained resolute, declaring, “The rich have their money, their guns, their foreign friends, but the poor have something stronger: their spirit, their numbers, their dignity.” His defiance made him a target for repression but also a symbol of hope for Haiti’s impoverished majority.

Academic Jeb Sprague has provided a searing account of the systemic violence Lavalas faced during this period: “Paramilitary forces and political elites worked in tandem to crush Haiti’s most popular movement, revealing the lengths to which reactionary forces will go to maintain the status quo.”

In 1990, Aristide ran for president under the Lavalas banner, pledging to bring the poor into the centre of Haitian politics. His landslide victory was a watershed moment: for the first time since Haiti’s revolution, the country had a democratically elected leader who represented the will of the majority. 

The backlash was swift. In 1991, just eight months into his term, Aristide was overthrown in a military coup supported by Haiti’s elite and backed by the US. The coup unleashed a wave of violence against Lavalas supporters, but the movement endured.

Aristide’s eventual return to power in 1994, under intense international pressure, marked a triumph for Haiti’s poor. But his reinstatement came with conditions. The US demanded neoliberal reforms that undercut Lavalas’s redistributive agenda, forcing Aristide into difficult compromises.

Despite these constraints, Lavalas achieved significant gains during Aristide’s presidencies. The government expanded access to education and healthcare, increased the minimum wage, and launched literacy campaigns. Perhaps most symbolically, it dismantled the hated Haitian army, which had long been a tool of repression.

Paul Farmer, the renowned physician and anthropologist, observed that Lavalas’s efforts were deeply connected to the everyday struggles of Haiti’s poor. He wrote, “For the first time in Haiti’s history, there was a government that sought to serve the majority, not the tiny elite. Lavalas wasn’t perfect, but its commitment to social justice was real.”

Inevitably Aristide’s radical vision and efforts to empower the poor made him a target. His opponents, including sectors of Haiti’s elite and foreign powers, painted him as an authoritarian demagogue. This narrative, legitimated by Western funded NGOs, gained traction in the Western media, even as Lavalas remained overwhelmingly popular among Haiti’s poor.

As academic Peter Hallward has written, “Aristide’s administration was the first in Haiti’s history to seek to reverse the flows of wealth and power. For this, it earned the unrelenting enmity of Haiti’s ruling class and its international allies.”

In 2004, Aristide was forcibly removed from office for the second time, in a coup directedly orchestrated by the US, France, and Canada. US marines entered Aristide’s home and took him into exile, most of which was spent in Pretoria. After the coup, Lavalas was excluded from participating in subsequent elections, effectively silencing Haiti’s most popular political force. Again the local Western funded NGOs presented a coup as a democratic development, and were largely taken as the legitimate representatives of the Haitian people in the Western media.

This Haitian experience offers important lessons for the international left. It demonstrates the power of grassroots organising and the potential for transformative change when the oppressed take the reins of history. Lavalas was a movement of the poor, of people systemically derided by elites across the political spectrum. 

The Haitian experience also highlights the vulnerabilities of such movements as a result of alliances between local elites and imperialism. In Bolivia the local elites that collaborated with imperialism were largely white. In Haiti they were mostly light skinned people but the same model for coups is evident: racially differentiated local elites collaborate with US imperialism while Western funded NGOs and media welcome attacks on democratically elected governments as democratic developments.

Aristide famously said that “Poverty is not a curse; it is a political choice.” The movement that he led showed that this understanding can come to be widely understood. It also showed that the poorest people in society can build potent forms of political power. The backlash it experienced was swift and unforgiving and the lesson here is that many of the forces that proclaim their commitment to democracy will respond with severe hostility when the poor use democratic mechanisms to take power.

Dr Imraan Buccus is senior research associate at ASRI.