The Road Ahead

I have been reading some of Walter Russell Mead's works on Beyond Blue (part one here, others at the same site) which is looking at the decay of the old Blue Model of Society, which is the Progressive model that started out in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.  This model had some features to it that were driven by social change, the largest of which is the productivity of farmers in the Midwest and Western US that led to a growing abundance of food.  With higher productivity rates the individual farmer could feed more people per acre and, thusly, fewer farmers were needed to feed not just the Nation but, increasingly, the world.  At the same time the Industrial Revolution's ongoing expansion meant a centralization of production at urban centers and these required a workforce to man them.  The break-up of the old farming economy was due to factors of increased productivity and increased need for workers, which meant a displacement of individuals from rural environs to urban ones.  The effect of this is to concentrate economic and political power in cities and urban environments.

Prior to the post-WWII era the traditional nuclear family transitioned from farm life, where involvement of children in the farm work was a necessity, and this also meant that learning what is necessary for a good life also was taught more at home than in school.  Education was highly valued and rare in the pre-19th century and the migration to cities and increasingly urban jobs meant that children began to be cut off from hands-on knowledge of what it takes to lead a good life and that more time was spent learning in school than learning at home.  The institution of child labor laws, one of the Blue Model's successes, came at the price of distancing children from work and learning how to make a living.  Still, prior to the post-WWII generation a child with a 6th grade education was considered to have more than enough schooling to join an adult workforce.  The Blue Model that grew up for this was also characterized by the Progressive concept of centralizing life in the urban areas and continuing to expand government authority to 'help' these new people living in this environment.  This was a process to acculturate the post-migration generation into a more highly structured life modeled, in large part, on the industries upon which it depended.

This Blue Model faced problems after the post-WWII era due to the withdrawal of government size from its war years and the tax breaks that also arrived with that.  Businesses that expanded or absorbed other businesses during the WWII years now had relatively well equipped factories that saw women leaving them to marry and create families, while men who had a good military work knowledge came home looking for employment.  Higher wages than meager government military pay meant social mobility upwards and the expansion of automobile industry started by Ford, meant actual physical mobility was also available at a low cost.  The migration to the suburban environs became, as Mead attributes to Kenneth Jackson, the "crabgrass frontier" and the suburban home became the new homestead.  To socially centralized political organizations this was a disaster as the very Blue Model they had developed required a centralized workforce that had little mobility.  The answer to this, politically, was to expand education requirements and inculcate an even further distancing from the nuclear family through requirements for higher education for jobs.  Still this was not something that every individual sought and the old industrial society continued onwards as it was at the heart of the new prosperity and supported the social model to a large degree.

In response to changing economic and social mobility women re-entered the workforce utilizing their knowledge of their ability to do that from the WWII years, and were often in entirely different career paths than their husbands.  This did not, of necessity, change society or even business models as the family run or sole proprietor business world continued to expand throughout the post-war era.  In fact it was the small business world that had always had a predominating part of the economy that came into its own in the post-war era and started breaking up the private union system which, like the Blue Model, depended on centralized workforces for survival.  This also started to remove the other part of the Blue Model support system which was the expectation you would only be employed at one business for your life and expect to get compensation from that business via a pension.

At home the expansion of technical jobs ramped up educational needs from that of the pre-war generation and a gradual move to require more than high school education became a factor in decisions made by children and families for what was necessary to actually continue on a socially upward path from generation to generation.  Sociologically American children were now spending more time in the first 20 years of their lives learning about making a life at school than at home, and as no expansion of small business start-ups could range wide enough to become all families, the experience of running a life for oneself also became a more distant phenomena.  The early Blue Model educators had given way to their successors raised totally in the Blue Model in the late 1970's and early 1980's.  A generation of educators who took part in WWII was being supplanted by those who only knew of war by what stories they heard, what they saw on television and the movies, and what their teachers taught them.  An idealized society that the very first Blue Model educators had (Dewey, et. al.) and their Progressive Dream had no viable alternatives when the post-war raised children joined the ranks of education.  The family moved from being a central part of life, with shared activities, to one in which children were increasingly separated from parents and they were taught by children who had grown up this way, as well, often with no other job experience than that of wanting to be a teacher.

By the mid-1980's, however, the Blue Model was starting to decay as the old centralized industrial sector collapsed due to lower price and often higher quality foreign goods, and industries having few incentives to stay with a high cost, high overhead workforce, went overseas as well.  Centralized urban planning of the 1930's dream became the centralized urban decay of the 1980's due, in large part, to the very inflexibility of politics that was supposed to be a buffer against social change.  It is in this timeframe that Social Security was found not to be something that could be supported and that it would have a final date of going red sometime around 2050.  And, in a few short years, that moved back to 2030.  By 2000 that was at going red in 2020, and it finally went red in 2010.  Social services supported by government taxation, supposedly to help the poor and elderly, were joined with new regulatory regimes that began to add cost overhead to the entire way medicine was done.  Educationally the stiff requirements were those expected for any high level engineer as medicine was, indeed, learning the very basics of biology and the intricacies of biochemistry and bodily mechanics.  A doctor trained in 1990 was far superior to any of his or her counter-parts a century earlier.  Government, in doing the regulation of what could and could not be done also began to regulate how much it paid out for goods and services in medicine, and found that this was not the full fare necessary to sustain the system.  The unmet cost got moved over to everyone else, so that beyond taxation and government overhead there was cost shifting and price increases due to government being unwilling to pay the full price for costly services.  Before the last hurrah! of the Great Society and the Blue Model was to come, the cost of treatment and medicine remained relatively stable, although on an inflationary price increase it was to meet inflation, only.  Post-Medicare and Medicaid the price of medicine undergoes a rapid increase that, like all bubbles, is to this day, unsustainable.

To inject the Blue Model further via government expansion in the 1970's was folly and yet done under both Democrats and Republican Administrations, so that modest programs set up to help Veterans get loans for home mortgages required a revamping and liquidation of the entire banking system so that everyone could take part in this.  It was not, of necessity, done at a conscious level, but the moves by government to not only allow commercial banks into the mortgage business and then have a government agency securitize them, meant that the old fashioned and localized S&L was put into direct competition against far larger institutions with far deeper pockets and political clout.  Within 15 years of the new regulatory regime, the S&L system had been largely obliterated at very high cost to all concerned.

Government also tried to 'help' individuals in creating IRA accounts that were protected from bankruptcy, and this meant that investments in IRA's were safer than your home.  Until the invention of the IRA in the 1970's, the family home grew only slowly in value and the expectation was that it would be worth about the same as it was when it was purchased, adjusted for inflation.  To compensate for the death of the S&L's, government at the federal level stepped in with the Community Reinvestment Act which brought yet more regulatory control to this area which, as happens with any area with more such control over the mechanisms at the lowest level, raised the cost of getting a loan.  Luckily the government was also grading the security of that loan so individuals had raised expectations of what they could afford and sellers adjusted accordingly.  By the second set of regulations in the 1990's, the government had fully stepped in to require banks to give loans to those who had no income, no job or assets and then turned around and graded and backed the grading of those loans as secure.

At this point actually having a job in a productive sector was something that was being actively discouraged not just by regulation but by cost overhead for that regulatory regime.  Sociologically the children of the 1960's had now trained their replacements in the old Blue Model regime of centralized planning and teachers were often twice removed from ever knowing a household that had anyone who did a job that actually produced a product or provided a service directly.  It is this generation that began to think of itself not in terms of children of parents who worked at productive jobs, but as consumers of items and creators of a 'lifestyle', not a life.  Automation is only to blame in part for these shifts, while other factors include such things as crony capitalism, where favored Blue Model big businesses (and they are ALL big businesses that support this model) and the barrier to competition they can get via influencing regulations at the lowest level not just at the legislative level but at the inner workings of the machinery via a revolving door between the governed and the regulators.  These businesses established yet more educational requirements (be they needed or not) and government got into the business of backing those loans, as well.  As with all such interventions, this has created yet another bubble in the economy in the name of 'helping' individuals.

Cumulatively the bubbles coming up from the Blue Model are those of a ship already underwater and the first big bubbles should have been a warning sign: S&L's and the housing market.  Next up are Social Security, the M&Ms, and the education bubble.  Additional bubbles in commercial property and environmental areas (like energy) are also appearing and nothing done to patch up the Blue Model can work as it is now putting society on a course for insolvency from the Nation State to the Individual.

This is horrific, of course.

That is, however, not how I see the trendlines now in motion.

As I've described in other pieces there are countervailing forces also at work which are, at one stroke, destroying the last of the Blue Model and giving a pathway out of this mess.  Not all of it is decentralized, but all of the solutions are competition based or based on small groups or individuals willing to take a hand and pick up a new way of life.

Of the semi-structured systems coming to the forefront are those of biotechnology, offering solutions to ending some of the most endemic viral diseases seen in mankind's history.  Also from this semi-structured area are advances in biotechnology offering ways to treat diseases that have been challenges to every change in our knowledge as they have been sitting in a realm that no one could easily address: auto-immune diseases.  With these also comes the genetic portion of understanding which is offering the promise of treating aging as a disease and possibly even arresting it and reversing it.  That is if the regulatory regimes let them, and as the regimes are old Blue Model ones meant to exist on relatively early deaths after a productive life, the fight to remove the regulations will increasingly involve a larger segment of society that is also hemmed in by laws on working age and retirement.  A continued and energetic life obviates the need for a Blue Model plan to 'help' people as they may retain physical function and capability well beyond normal life expectancy and keep right on going.  In these areas, as we are seeing now, the concept is that for you to be convenient to government you must die soon after your working life is over by government diktat.  When you can live to be 100 and have the body and energy of a 30 year old, then government is seen as an impediment, not a 'help'.

These technologies rely upon larger firms, but also upon new startups leveraging high tech to gain a foothold in new areas of medicine.  Basic physics, long thought to be something only geared to rocket scientists, is about to make a come-back as new space start-ups finally begin to cash in on the economics of a new frontier and more efficient systems to get to space (not just rockets but by other means as well) that will open up the 1960's promised 'Final Frontier'.  This is already beginning today as the current Administration, in an attempt to kill off spaceflight under government control, has now opened up the field to everyone willing to try and get to space on their own.  This includes the last wave of high-tech financiers and backers who are taking part in this dream to deliver it not just for themselves but for everyone with a will to use it.  What is forming up is a new generation of manned, autonomous and semi-autonomous space exploration working in harmony (although not via plan) that will play upon the positive aspects each can deliver.  This High Frontier will serve as the final drainage point for those willing to make a new life with all the risks involved that any frontiersman has ever had, just delivered with the finality of the vacuum of space.

Back on earth the prior generation of machining at factories is now delivering new, low cost, machine tools that anyone with a decent job of any sort can afford.  If you can afford a high end computer, you can afford a low-end lathe or mill.  Unlike the Maoist 'Great Leap Forward' this will not be done via a centralized plan but upon individuals finally wanting to make things themselves.  There has always been a hand-craft segment of society and that will not include metalworkers, who can now custom make smaller items and even afford to automate their rigs to make a lot of them for businesses.  On the personal freedom front this means that all manufacturing laws for things like firearms will be moot: when you can construct your own devices, not made for sale, you are then out of the realm of any law and able to back it up with your own tooled mechanisms.  Already States like MT, WY and UT are seeking to remove in-state firearms sales restrictions from federal purview as no sale will cross State lines.  Of all the challenges to the Blue State Model, this one is probably one of the most lethal as it pits the old and failing centralized government concept against the even older federalist doctrine upon which the States exist.  What is even better is that these same individual or small businesses that start up (and have been for nearly a decade) will begin to supply other businesses and firms with parts.  Like the new space industry.

Education is also in the cross-hairs of new technology and the harbinger of free courses offered by high name recognition institutions (like MIT) are now offering a new venue for self-education.  When basic courses can be instructed once, and offered at a self-paced and self-determined course, then the need for centralized education declines.  The 14th century model of an educator at an institution with a roomful of students will be supplanted  by one of a distributed, self-paced system that has no centralized theme to it.  The idea of home schooling currently offers not just a system for interaction between parents and children, but amongst parents and children who are home schooled.  It is possible to cooperate with other parents on getting lab and science time from instructors at low cost or to share costs amongst a group of parents for children so as to learn about scientific subjects at a more personal level and get hands-on experience.  Increasing use of networks of parents not just locally but regionally and nationally will become a new theme of this era that is coming, and educational institutions that want to exist past the first decades of this century will begin to decentralize to meet them.  Boutique and cloistered teaching systems of the old style will continue for those backwards enough to want them, of course, but that old Blue Model cannot even begin to understand the way this new model will work.

Unlike the views ahead of the cybernetics community that have given us such visions as Colossus, Skynet and the Singularity, there is no direction towards greater centralization to attempt to abolish individuality through a communal consciousness or movement towards a centralized cybernetic consciousness.  A decentralized set of cybernetic beings, however, is within the scope of this and that will grow out of the individualized wants and needs from within the human spirit, not dictated by a government bureaucracy or some 'inevitable' outcome of technology.  Prior generations of futurists had the Blue Model to deal with and they either incorporated it (in full or at least in general theme) or moved from it to utilize older paradigms and recast them into the future utilizing future recursion concepts based on past history.  This playing out of themes in human history, dominated for most of human history by centralized authority, is playing out yet again.  The long and epic history of failure of centralized systems from hydraulic Empires to the USSR, demonstrates a lack of capacity and flexibility necessary to deal with an unknown future.  Today that future is neither assured nor even possible if we do not, as a species, survive the next two decades.  To survive these new times requires the very flexibility and capacity to adapt that is lacking in centralized visions of society (be they only human or some cybernetic amalgam).  To put it more clearly: a collective state is not only a short term loser in history (for all the fact it keeps coming back), but a long term dead end as it is not a guarantee of success but of failure.

Is the old Blue Model of society, economics, and politics dying? Yes and without question, it is not just bankrupt of cash but of morality as well.

Is what will follow a guarantee of success? No, it offers a possibility for success and our chance to make of ourselves better individuals and, from that, a better society as a whole by recognizing that not only our rights but responsibilities and accountability for them start within us and do not rest in any collective organization we create.  Government, at its best, only has power to remove those who exercise negative liberties against society that is the only set of morality type that government knows and it is power.  To create a better society requires far, far more than government and each and every time government tries to 'help' it absorbs liberty it isn't designed to deal with and lessens our responsibilities and liberty, both, to the benefit of none and the detriment of all.  The future belongs to those willing to step into this future and its unknowns with open eyes and a willing soul to experience the joys and horrors of it as they go together when we exercise our liberty and freedom.  Tyranny and repression awaits on this other path we are on that ends at the abyss.  Many are trying to shove us over this edge by lying to us about it and what happens on that next step over it... and they are the dinosaurs who are already dead as the shockwaves of the impact of the next Great Awakening are already on the move and that will sweep all in its path if we aren't all killed, first. 

That is our simple choice, to live free or die. 

It always has been no matter what your Blue Model teachers have taught you, because they cannot live thinking it is true and will gladly end your liberty to deny it.

They are always willing to sacrifice others to their ends, never themselves.

Are you willing to sacrifice yourself from this comfortable Blue Model coffin to gain a better world for all of us by choosing a different path?  Will you stop the lid from coming down on your liberty or not?

One path offers opportunity and the hope of a better life, the other assured misery for generations... which do you choose?

Because if you don't make a choice, it will be made for you by those who seek power and only end up with ashes.

Survival - Pack Concepts - 1

When examining emergency preparedness and if you are pre-planning JIC (Just In Case) you have to 'bug out' (leave home with whatever you can carry) I have found one of the most contentious areas to be that of the backpack/rucksack area as it has numerous supporters of different ideas of what to have, but also why you want it. This is, however, one of the more personal decisions as it depends on your ability to carry much of anything. And the variables in that will, naturally, lead to different final end-goals and what can and will fit those end goals. I have hiked with various types of packs, depending on situations, but most of that was pre-1990 and I needed to update my views and expectations in the packing realm.

That realm started with a mammoth sized Duluth pack, that included a forehead strap to help you 'lean into' the load. I've hiked with one of those fully loaded in my younger days and, at one point, had that and a medium ALICE pack plus canoe on my shoulders. Really, as the ALICE pack went in front and the canoe was up top, I had a reasonable center of mass, and I have no estimation as to final weight of all that, save the canoe was 50 lbs. all on its lonesome.

What did I learn from that experience?

Pack sparingly.

At that point I was carrying the load for myself (a young teen) and five children aged 9-12. For a week's outing I brought all of two changes of clothes: one for the camp and one to hike back in if I couldn't get my first day's set dry. Which I couldn't. Out of the 10 miles, I would estimate that 7 of them were with that large load, and I did take breaks and sucked down water at a phenomenal rate. Mind you getting to the camping site was then a few miles of canoe trip, a portage and then a mile or so hike in from the disembarking point.

So, pack sparingly.

Really!

As a geologist and recreational packer I used a Kelty pack that was lightweight and had decent cargo space, and an internal frame. At Field Camp the base camp would handle food and cooking, so all I had to do was handle myself, tent, sleeping bag, ground cloth, clothing, medical supplies and miscellaneous supplies necessary for highland desert camping. A 1 Gal. canteen also found its way into the kit during a 'clean yourself and your clothes' break at a small town. Add in good Swiss hiking boots and I was set. For personal hiking, that would only be for a day or two, and for those it was usually a smaller pack that was actually just a 'day pack' that I could wedge my tent and stuff into. The Kelty was more an Alpine pack (long and less than shoulder width) which suited the few places I actually did have to rock climb with the thing.

Thus my experience has been with commercial 1970-80's and 1970's vintage military packs.

Today, the updating of my expectation and knowledge has taken some time and the design idea of 'modular pack loading' has come into being. That is not just the concept of similar sizing and mass for certain loads, but an entirely new system to allow the easy placement of pouches and other equipment on to packs or less than packs. I will start with the older system and work to the newer one on the military side.

ALICE - All-purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment

ALICE, from what I can read on it, is an outgrowth of the Viet Nam war experience, and the problems faced with the older Model series of packs (M.1956, M.1944, M.1936, M.1922). I have, actually, picked up an M-1936 pack/haversack and it is an unfolding affair that, if you have all the interior equipment, then allows for the nestling of said equipment compactly into the pack once you wrap it all up. Plus it has a strap arrangement for a bedroll, and an internal ammo belt for storing extra rounds for your rifle. That series also had a backboard added to it in WWII so that bulkier containers (gasoline, ammo, etc) in cans could be lashed to it. The board, itself, was normally plywood and used the canvas strap arrangement of whatever the pack system was at the time. Unfortunately those were designed with a series of supply depots in mind, and moving supplies constantly forward so that one was never far away from a depot. At Bastogne that would see major problems when US forces were cut off from their supply lines during the Battle of the Bulge. Similarly, in Korea, when the front line collapsed, the entire supply system then became a 'use it or lose it' affair as the amount of troops from China could not be handled by then modern mechanized warfare until their supply lines were cut.

Airpower was making a difference in how we fought on the ground and Viet Nam would be the first conflict to see many older ideas of supply lines had to be re-thought. Additionally the older weapons systems for soldiers (M-1, M-14, M-1A1) were getting replaced by more modern weapons (M-16) that were more lightweight. Finally, jungle warfare is not open ground, flatland warfare and while there was still a 'front line' the fighting often took place where there was no 'front', no overland supply routes and where jungle conditions often made air-resupply problematical. Air Cavalry meant that a new way of approaching the entire system of what you took and how you took it had to move from an essential design dating back to the first armies and reformulate them for the modern age. If you have no supply lines, then you are stuck with what you have with you and the type of mission then drives what you have to carry. Even though ammo in magazines had been around for a long time, Viet Nam was the first war of lightweight, fully automatic weapons with selective fire and they ate up ammo at a fast rate. No longer was it possible to sit down and unpack some loose ammo or from belt loop ammo in your pack into a clip or magazine... especially when you were waist deep in water. What came out of that, starting in the early 1960's, was the idea of a 'sustainment pack' and a 'patrol pack'. If you were going out on a day or two patrol, you needed one set of equipment for a given time in the field between drop-off and pick-up, and if you were moving from one forward base to another or being put on a long mission of a week or more, you needed to carry everything you needed with you for that time period.

How you fought also required a change in the idea of how you carried things. This meant that larger magazine/clip storage containers needed to be 'handy'. 'Handy' being right at your hand where you could easily reach it without digging into your pack. Clothes and cooking supplies don't need to be handy, ammo, medical supplies, water, entrenching tool (e-tool) and things like bug spray did need to be handy, and so must migrate from inside the pack to outside the pack to an easy to reach position. As the pack load, itself, would increase, the entire system required an external frame that was lightweight yet sturdy, and that would be aluminum. Packs would come in a variety of materials, but nylon would slowly replace canvas. Finally light patrols, long patrols, and sustainment based missions would each gather their own pack size (small, medium, large) but only after the Viet Nam conflict had ended. The Medium Pack was one that could do without the frame, in a pinch, if you packed it well, and the Small Pack (mostly civilian use) was likewise so endowed. In theory you could do that with the Large Pack... in theory.

ALICE modularized things to an extent and the place to attach 'handy' materials was on to your belt. Thus the ALICE belt clip became the fasten-all way of adapting anything (military or civilian) to the ALICE pack/belt/load bearing system. Georgia Outfitters has a nice scan of the 1973 year of issue manual for the ALICE equipment system and I will use here:

The belt clips are spring metal clips, normally in a three piece affair, that slide one piece up and down into a hole for the tab of the piece being slid up and down. And a load carrier looks like this:

Even better is that the ALICE packs come with nylon strap webbing sewn at a few places on the outside that allow you to put equipment on the outside of the pack, along with grommets in case you need to do some lashing with paracord or carabiners. Additionally the ALICE frame can have two shelves for those bulky items (like ammo cans or gas cans) and still have room for a small pack or you can just haul a lot of ammo or other bulky goods on base:

The lower shelf, all on its own, helps get the ALICE pack out of its primordial state by giving it a foundation: it is no longer without shape nor without form. That last is the truth as ALICE has one, central, huge compartment. How big? I've seen other 'large' packs from the Swiss, Swedes and even Germans that can fit INSIDE a large ALICE pack. The thing is huge.

Photo: J and A Discount Military, LLC

So, an integrated load-bearing system with huge pack (at the Large size, at least) and a number of outside pockets plus a handy-dandy way to keep handy goods at hand! What could go wrong?

If you need to carry a lot on a budget, it is the way to go, but there are some things that need serious updating on the pack.

First the outer pockets of the pack, itself, are not easy to get at when you are wearing them, which is why all the really handy stuff needs to be on your belt or side panels of the pack. The pack has no side panel pockets.

Second, the webbing system is straight out of the early days of packing, without an easy buckle or quiet zipper to be seen, and noisy velcro for the map pocket at the top (which lacks a clear plastic window to see the map without opening the pocket.

Third, those small pockets are small and really too small to carry all but bare essentials.

Fourth, the frame is not adjustable, which is a popular aftermarket DIY thing to do if you like drilling out rivets and putting in bolts and then getting the frame anodized.

Fifth, the pack lacks side-to-side stability that a couple of easy straps could have solved at the start, but become an aftermarket thing for you to do.

Sixth, ALICE clips work can work free with the rubbing of the metal tab on fabric as you hike, thus making re-adjustment necessary.

There are, actually, a lot of quibbling problems with what is, essentially, a low cost pack. That rig from J&A up there is $25, and you can't go wrong for that if all you want is to haul a lot of stuff around. And if you don't have a tailor that can do modifications locally, there is always Tactical Tailor who can do a number of modifications for you that are standard and are able to do some non-standard ones as well. Once I found them, I knew that there really were a number of things that needed to be done to make the ALICE concept 'user friendly'.

I will skip ahead a couple of decades to the next pack system.

MOLLE - MOdular Lightweight Load-carrying Equipment

MOLLE is all about keeping the handy stuff handy and doing so in an extremely modularized way. The MOLLE system, like the ALICE system, has its own way of integrating equipment, and the MOLLE way is via webbing of set size and spacing with a strap/clip that then weaves between the webbing of the equipment you wear and the equipment you carry. There are also ALICE to MOLLE (and vice-versa) adapters so that the two equipment systems cross-integrate with each other. The MOLLE frame is polycarbonate with set spacing openings so that MOLLE and even ALICE packs can be secured to it, and that system eliminates precious weight from the frame. MOLLE starts out with coated ripstop nylon (aka. cordura) as its preferred cloth both for its rain shedding capacity and tear resistance, which tends to add some weight back to the system. A number of MOLLE packs don't need the frame, however, and civilian versions will use aluminum stays inside packs to form an internal frame while keeping MOLLE attachment loops all over the outside of the pack to add on to it.

For me trying out the MOLLE system was an experience and I went with a milsurp MOLLE II Rifleman's Pack:

Photo courtesy: LoadUp.com

I will give you the idea of scaling and sizing in a bit, but the main point of the MOLLE system are those horizontal lines of webbing that are evenly stitched onto the back of the pack, and the sides which have sustainment pouches on them. to give a better idea of this, here is a High Speed Gear Inc. T.R.A.S.H. Bag Pack that is nearly all MOLLE loops:

Photo courtesy: HSGI

Yes that is a MOLLE pack attached to an ALICE frame. And the HSGI TRASH Bag pack starts to hit into the ALICE realm of hauling...

The milsurp Rifleman's set is about $60, tax and shipping not included, and the HSGI one is $220, tax and shipping not included.

Now there are newer military MOLLE packs, most notably if you can get your hands on the ones the 10MD orders, you will get a truly awesome pack that holds a ton of stuff right into the ALICE range of things. But I don't have that sort of cash for either the HSGI or newer 10MD milsurp if you can find it.

I have bulky materials for two, plus standard survival equipment and need weapons carrying capability with a pack... but hauling is first and foremost, and I may still spring for the HSGI TRASH Bag at some future point in time for its true adaptability. Hauling is the key, and that means cubic inches of space which can, actually, be somewhat divided and apportioned out. That led me to a little item on the cheap which is the Mounted Crewman Compartmented Equipment Bag (MCCEB):

Photo courtesy: Gunnys Surplus

That is actually a huge pack, clocking in at over 6,000 ci (if you count the pockets you are well and away over 6,000 ci), and available suplus used from Gunnys for $25 in the Bag section. This bag was designed for the tankers of the M1 Abrams and falls between the ALICE and MOLLE period.

Its features are many: reinforced lower compartment good for tools or (as intended) for your sleep carrier system, a good sized central compartment that would easily fit a daypack into it, and a drawstring top compartment just a bit smaller than the central compartment. The top main pocket is large, I've packed 6 MRE entrees along with some emergency supplies in it, and the smaller pockets on the central compartment are hefty affairs for those smaller things you may need in the way of tools or ammo carrying. It has the standard velcro map pocket on top. The added feature is the reinforced bottom compartment has outside tool pockets for your wrenches, screwdrivers, hammers or pistol of choice.

Its lacks are killer: miniscule carrying harness, not fit for a day pack, no MOLLE or ALICE loop rigging, no waist pad. Its not made for hauling a rifle or shotgun and the internal compartment dividers are permanent: if you take them out they are out forever.

One weirdness is that the truly huge zippers go all the way to the back so you can easily set the thing on its side, open each compartment and pull back on top and bottom to get at all compartments simultaneously. Also it is trapezoidal so your largest compartment is at the bottom, the smallest at the top though only by a few inches... its 16" wide at the middle, 19" wide at the bottom and about 14" wide at the top. If there were a $200 MOLLE version of this to go with the frame, I would buy it at a shot: put fully MOLLE webbing along the sides, attachment points for a frame along the front, put a hydration system on the inside and sacrifice half the size of the top pocket and it would be awesome.

Instead I sent it to Tactical Tailors, paid more but it was worth it to get something adaptable to the modern era.

Its a beast, but a primitive one.

So what do the packs look like with my stuff in them? The first batch of ALICE and MOLLE ones are from my old camera, so you will suffer with poor quality images, but should be able to get the idea. First is the ALICE pack with MOLLE sleep system carrier which I found to be necessary for what I wanted to carry:

Front/frame side. Rear.

Chock-a-block loaded to the gills, including the sleep carrier (MSSC). That is one loaded pack.

The problems with it are that it needed lashing every which way to keep things secure. A 1.5" cotton webbing strap goes around the entire pack between the top and bottom pockets to give it lateral stability and to get a better attachment to the frame (which is that big strap draped over the back of the pack). The MSSC needed lashing straps on the sides to pull it up and give it lateral stability, as it bounced up and down and from side-to-side. Not pictured is the ALICE shelf between the main pack and the MSSC to allow for lashing of the main pack and MSSC to the shelf and, thusly, the frame. At this point there were three additional pouches/pockets/waist pack added to the pack: a long ACU pocket, an olive drab pouch, plus a woodlands camo MOLLE waist pack done vertically along the side of the pack. With those extras I was able to get some excess cargo space for small items which was a first in my pack journeys. ALICE Large packs are for pure haulage and it shows.

Note the upgraded waist belt, that is damned necessary as the standard one is not padded enough to be worth anything. It added some nice MOLLE tabs on the waist, but not enough to actually make a difference. I was also seriously thinking of upgraded shoulder straps but the lack of weapons capability finally dissuaded me from further investment in the ALICE system.

ALICE systems lack any easy attachment system for weapons carriers, and lashing straps with your creativity is the order of the day. No matter how I tried it I could never integrate an Eberlestock Tactical Weapon Scabbard with the ALICE pack:

Photo courtesy: Eberlestock

To be seen in a bit in ACU.

That is meant to be a centerline part of a pack system, inboard of the pack. ALICE with shelf doesn't like that. ALICE without shelf has too much stuff flopping around. I did try a verticle lashing down the back of the pack, but it left a lot to be desired and shifted the center of balance back when two guns were put in the scabbard and nothing would actually get the top of the scabbard to where I could grab anything and still have the scabbard be secure.

What is really needed is a carbon fiber rod frame to attach to either a MOLLE or ALICE frame to leave room for the scabbard and impede the area of the pack a bit, if you are doing a buy a piece here and there deal. I do not have the time or skill necessary to make one.

Thus for all the cargo hauling ability I love for ALICE packs, if you have to do an add-on for it for weapon hauling, it had better be just for hauling and not ready access. I do not have short long guns that really permit the use of the smaller scabbards.

So on to a MOLLE II Rifleman's pack:

Front/frame side Rear

Yes these are sitting on a large trash can!

By this point I had unpacked the the Rifleman's pack as it was just too damned small, even without the scabbard inboard of the pack and MSSC. If I was going solo, then this would be the pack I want... then the scabbard and the rest do a good job working together. But packing for two means that no matter how lovely the pack is, it just isn't up to the job. It now has a nice home with a family member. I had added the MOLLE waistpack and was barely able to fit the majority of equipment, and with lashing straps it held together. It could be made about as stable as the ALICE pack, but it was meant as a one person general base change pack not a full haul everything pack. It is interesting that the 5 quart water bladder I picked up fit easily into the MOLLE radio pouch but only with difficulty into the ALICE top flap pouch.

All original straps. This one was just close enough that it convinced me the Tanker's Pack was worth getting MOLLEfied by Tactical Tailors.

I needed a new frame and pads so I went to ArmyGear.net for those in Desert camo/tan. They proved to be even cheaper than an Ebay buy, which amazed me no end. So what you will see is woodland camo on desert camo/tan, and the slow disappearance of that as more and more stuff is put on it.

As I had to do a bit of re-packing I decided to take pictures so you could get an idea of how it all fits together. I took out a rifle case with the Mosin-Nagant opposite the scabbard, but they both do fit and balance relatively well. With that said here is the first set:

Frame side top right. Frame side, left.

Now that's a pack!

The folks at Tactical Tailors did a great job on the attachment points, as well as you can do for a pack never made to be on a frame, at least. I utilized the existing pads and straps from the pack and attached them around and through the frame, itself, which is critical for dampening side-to-side sway. Most of the frame has disappeared under all the straps and the additional couple of pads I've made for it to help distribute the weight a bit better on my hips and back. Note the Eberlestock scabbard on the pack. Still not perfectly situated but it is adjustable via lashing straps so that it can be shifted forward for easier access. Note that I've removed one lashing strap normally used to keep it in place so as to look more closely at other work

Back right. Back, center. Back, left.

Here you get a good back view of the modified pack. Note the three MOLLE panels, one per side and one over the top pocket flap. The garish green camo is a Czech e-tool which needs a better pouch. Inside the scabbard is a Browning Auto-5 that comes in about 48" long, and it goes a bit into the top cover area.

When I noted previously that those pockets on the pack were large, I meant it. When you consider I can get at least 6 MREs plus extras into the top pocket and could put 2-3 e-tools per pocket in the bottom ones, you have a lot of capacity on the outside of the pack beyond just the internal areas. The top cover also has a zipper to replace the velcro that was there on the original.

I am particularly pleased that from the direct back and low angle sides you cannot see the desert camo and tan of the frame: a MOLLE frame and its straps disappear completely from view. I do need to make a woodland camo shroud for the scabbard, but that is minor compared to the benefits of actually being able to carry it. I have had it centerline, inboard of the pack, but then it is nearly impossible to get anything out of it, and there is no how, no way, that it fits between the frame and the straps.

Now a close-up or two fo the Tactical Tailor work:

MOLLE panel, left. Top pocket, MOLLE half panel. Top compartment, rain cover.

Excellent work!

For the rifle case, I just slip it between the sustainment pouch and the pack on the right side and use a lashing strap between the frame and the MOLLE loops. That makes it fixed position, but it balances out the A-5 nearly perfectly.

Beyond the MOLLE panels the rain cover allows for even more material to be stuffed into the upper compartment. I pulled it up a bit to expose it, normally it sits under the map flap.

Some final close-ups:

Back, lower pockets. Side tool pocket, with scabbard. Bottom compartment unzipped. Bottom with unit marking.

So is this a Bug Out Bag?

If you use the traditional sense of 'Dear God I only have 10 minutes to get everything I need to survive and high tail it out of here' sort of Bug Out Bag... well, yes, but a damned heavy one. This is not a grab'n'go bag.. it is a get your boots on with a decent shirt and heft the bag to the car and rush back to get any other important items sort of bag. If it came to no transportation available beyond feet, then this is the 5 mile bag: with a good morning start I can get 5 miles to somewhere to think about what to do next. If I can get a car journey in, then that widens many options as to destination, plus the car has its own emergency supplies.

This is the 'Staged Regrouping Bag'. By geography and climate there are very, very few things that will make a Bug Out necessary where I live... yes I can think of what they are, and those that could make it necessary also remove the infrastructure of the region. A slower, longer term set of problems, however, are more likely and this is the sort of thing that is necessary to prepare for that. For that you must prepare seasonal adjustments which require a second bag per major season, save Summer which you pack for to have some clothes in the bag.

As a pack, however, its wonderful. And if we can get past the major problems ahead of us, then this is the sort of pack well suited to carrying a full camping suite for 3 or 4 people, while they carry their own clothes and food.

From this experience I can say that the modular concept of equipment and how one packs is a far, far change from my early packing and hiking days. The hard work done by the military to regularize and adjust equipment types to fit in with carrying systems has brought great benefits to civilian life, if not civilian packs. While a sleek alpine pack is perfect for alpine conditions, most people aren't packing into such conditions and require a somewhat more varied pack load and system to allow them to adjust to different climate regimes over multiple trips. Polyurethane coated cordura is not a modernistic, lightweight fabric, but a rugged one made to resist rips, tears and weather simultaneously. MOLLE webbing is extra weight, but it adds versatility and makes equipment secure and handy at the same time, which means you don't carry the sleekest of outlines but do have a wide array of options of what you can do with the pack still on your back. That trade-off between weight and versatility will be with us for awhile yet as carbon nanotube technology hasn't gotten into the fabric industry to offer low weight, weather durability and tear resistance.

When it comes to internal vs. external frame, I'm an agnostic. I will say that if you are to have an external frame, then it really should be able to do more than just support a pack. The MOLLE frame is perfect for that as it allows a wide array of attachment options for more than just packs. What it isn't good for, and what the ALICE frame is good for, is changing regimes from pack to heavy gear hauling: without a shelf the MOLLE system does less well with gas cans or ammo cans than the ALICE frame. Thus while the MOLLE frame is good for things made to be packed and lashed, the ALICE frame is adaptable to those that aren't made that way and are bulky and oblong without web attachment points. MOLLE is more rugged and ergonomic, ALICE is more suited to the really heavy stuff and just getting it there, don't mind some chafing along the way. Internal frame packs are excellent for low visibility and not having a frame to catch on things as you hike, while offering lightweight stability and lateral mass control. Internal frames don't give you great external options if you have to go from a pack to hauling 5 gallon fuel cans around.

Thus what you choose is based on what you expect to need and designing your equipment type around your needs. The benefits of one way of doing things at the start then determine the types, kinds and amount of choices you have to deal with later. Yet the concepts of economizing your load and packing efficiently are as important as the style and type of pack you get, and what you expect to need and the types of events you expect to encounter then starts to point out which way you should go. Economics then limits your purchase decisions, and those are prioritized by your expected needs.

For myself, at some point, I will probably end up constructing a pack to suit my needs. But that will be awhile.

The things I do waste time on

Another of those rare postings on what I am doing to take away from my time seated in front of the computer glazing my eyes out looking at historical documents.

Or... how I make sure I can still feel my feet!

One of the things that I've been doing is getting a lovely Thompson rig together.  Really if one is to have a Tommy Gun the least you can do is get a few things for it so it doesn't feel so lonely.  Thus my dissatisfaction with the first digital camera came to the forefront as it took awful pictures close-up in what should be a macro-mode.  They didn't have that when I first bought a camera, so I did the best possible I could with what I had.  So when one of the first major acquisitions for the Thompson came through I was less than satisfied with the pictures, but they did serve the purpose.  Luckily the folks at storeplay.net took a few of the first shots:

You see to me a violin case is... well... a violin case.  Here it is to an era toy gun, at least I assume that, which was made, in that era, full-size.

How do I know it was made full size?

Well its obvious:

This and the rest of the pics courtesy your host.

A full size Thompson fits in it, plus if it was one with a stock there is more than enough room for that, too.  Plus a drum magazine and a few stick magazines.  Now mine is a M1927 not an M1921, but a good case is a good case, and if I need to go somewhere and not take the big, hulking modern padded plastic case, I can take this one and go in style.  Still, I'm not much for a Zoot Suit.

Now my ill time spent doing other things has included sewing, on a lovely White 565:

Its a real champ!  I have had problems with it going through rigger's webbing and coated cordura at the same time and will take it into the shop to have it looked at and, if necessary, worked on.  Still its gone through a few projects, chowing down MOLLE webbing and structural webbing, cordura, fleece and all sorts of material that would choke a lesser machine.  At this rate I will need something a bit sturdier at the industrial level, but the amount I've learned from the White 565 is worth the money I paid for it.  The equipment I've made certainly paid for the cost of it and the raw materials involved.

So on to more of the time wasting stuff I've done using that, and I'll put the major project up next.

That is the main case with the barrel portion, the top part is a separate MOLLE magazine carrier for the 30 round stick magazines.  All things done in digital tigerstripe cordura are prototypes and leave a lot to be desired on fit and finish, but are functional.  I could not find, anywhere, a Thompson MOLLE case and I've looked.  Now I could find MOLLE stick magazine carriers but for something like what I have it would cost what the sewing machine cost.  Plus I made an extra singleton you can see in each of the pics as it swaps out top to bottom.  I still have to make the drum magazine carriers, but have found the 2 qt. carriers for water bottles to fit them quite nicely.  When I get the 565 back up and going I need to make those into full MOLLE carriers to attach next to the barrel and square out the case, as I would much rather have them on the outside of the case than the inside.

Now for what I pack in that case:

What you have there is the Thompson plus two 50 round drum mags, three 30 round stick mags and five 20 round stick mags.  That last is in a WWII original magazine carrier.  Also included are two Thompson spare part bags from WWII, a WWII brass cleaning rod, plus oiler and pull-through.  Basically the only thing missing would be a 100 round magazine, but that isn't in the cards until the economy improves.  I have more 30 round stick mags... those I can find on the cheap still.

Loose ammo is Federal Blazer and Aguila.  I've had some issues with Aguila ammo both in 45 ACP and 22 lr in the FTF arena.  It seems that there is just something a little off on the specs... either that or the guns are damned finicky.

I'm pretty happy with the rig to-date!  I got the mag catch modified at a local gunsmith's so I can use the original USGI magazines and not have to go drilling into historical pieces to get them to meet the minor mag catch change done in the '70s to the design when Numrich had it.

My other great time eater has been scrounging parts for the Vz.61 Skorpion build which is now complete, but not test fired.

I've put snap-caps through it and am not impressed with the tiny indentation being made, but it could be that the snap-caps aren't behaving like actual rounds for recording the impact of the firing pin.  So a test-fire is in order.  No one seems to make a testing rig so this means yet another DIY project.  Something simple would be best, and its looking like the articulated arm with clamp and piece of string will be in order.  Even though its only 32 ACP, I will not be holding it for a test fire or even the first magazine's worth of firing.  Fire and inspect thoroughly is the order of the day with this.

Its been a great time-waster, getting the parts for it.  Its part kit and a large number of parts from Czech-Point USA, like the SA frame and trigger group.  Had to get rid of a few parts from the kit to make it compliant, and I couldn't pass up a deal on the full SA trigger from CPUSA.  Still some of the stuff, like decent priced 20 round mags and a carrier for them, just couldn't be found easily.  Getting the barrel in was a real PITA and finally took some dremel work to make sure it got a snug fit.  Its a fascinating piece, and the only screw parts on it are for the handle.  The rest is all springs, plates, ends on springs, indentations and the barrel pin.  I finally used a small screw for the trigger guard, but that is due to me not being able to figure out how to get the tiny rivet put in.

There you have just a couple of the things I've been putting time into.  I won't even start on the emergency supplies, but should have a post on backpacks up soon.  Really!  They can be a great time waster...

Survival, DIYism and Haiti

I have written multiple times on survival of disasters and how you can cope with disaster through preparation. Here is what I have said in the first of a series of articles on survival, although I had written about the same topic before that in much the same way:

The #1 thing I learned while hiking, camping, driving and so on is that you keep necessities with you so you don't waste time and energy on worrying.  The moment you sit to worry, or sit to think, or sit to do anything but rest for a few minutes, then you are no longer thinking about surviving what life is handing you.  The act of worrying when you need to be surviving is to not be surviving and that ends up in a very bad place for you... and whoever has to come and get your carcass out from where you worried yourself to death.

Nor can you think your way to surviving.  You can only DO your way to surviving and when you do something wrong you admit it and then change what you are doing to account for it.  If you aren't doing, you aren't actually thinking about what you need to do to survive.  Plenty of time for self-recrimination when you get back out of your situation to whatever passes for civilization.

This describes a mind-set, a way of approaching life and problems.  I recognize it as such and it works for me rather well, YMMV.

When disaster strikes I look at those caught in the midst of it and ask myself: 'Did that person plan on surviving?'

It may seem rough, crude, nasty but life is all those things and mother nature is not kind to you.  Disasters can and do strike at the most inopportune times, namely when you least expect them to.  That is why they are called 'disasters' and not 'carnival rides'.  In a disaster that strikes anyone, your chances of 'being saved' depends completely on your ability to survive past the disaster.  Getting through a major earthquake, aircraft falling out of the sky, being shipwrecked, stranded by the roadside when your car skids off into a ditch... all of these requires a mode of thought to kick in which puts your survival first and foremost.  If you have others with you, then you cannot help them if you do not survive.  I'm sorry if this is a shock to you, but if you love someone, dearly, your best way to save them (save in lovely  circumstances of 'its either them or me' often seen in works of fiction and less often in real life) is to ensure that you can survive.  A man trapped with a boulder crushing his forearm and being alone had one choice and took it: he cut off his forearm.  And survived.  Family units that break up for a father to go out and bravely seek assistance often finds either the father or the family dead.  Sticking together to share resources and skills is a damned good idea, but circumstances can dictate that staying where you are is lethal.

Looking at the disaster in Haiti, we see a Nation that has not prepared its infrastructure for an earthquake there, and they are not unknown on the island.  With so many collapsed buildings it is safe to say that the building codes were not up to snuff or, if they were, that the companies doing the construction did not adhere to them and they passed inspection anyway.  Emergency services are lacking and absent on the ground in a real sort of way with police stations, fire houses and even hospitals collapsing due to the quake.  Nor are there indications that the power infrastructure, potable water lines and sewage infrastructure were in any way prepared for this sort of event.  The main harbor to the Nation at Port au Prince is a mess and it is safe to say that it was not built up to codes to resist earthquakes as now the US Sea Bees are on the job to clear the harbor for shipping.  The finger-pointing by most commentators is to a lackluster government, full of corruption and creating more poverty as they do not return any essential services in a concrete way for the money taxed from the citizenry.  That impoverishment means the average Haitian is dependant upon the government for any largesse that can be dispensed, and becomes an electable kleptocracy where past governors take the money and run, when they do not situate themselves in for a permanent life term.

This is a Nation that can not do on its own, and at the slightest disaster the entire Nation needs 'saving'.  Yet, sharing the island with Haiti, is the Dominican Republic that appears, even while poor, to be doing a bit better job of running itself in the exact same climate, geography and geophysical circumstances as their poor neighbor.  Thus what is seen is not a lack in natural resources, not a lack in personal fortitude and not a  lack capability as all men are created equal.  What is seen is an outgrowth of a lack in society and its organ called government.  If there is something wrong with the organ then that is a reflection of the society: as night follows day, a corrupt government is indicative of a society that is corruptible.  You cannot get the government like that without assent from the people of the Nation for it.  That assent may be coerced, yes, as it is with dictators the world over willing to kill their way to power and threaten their own citizens and make them subjects, so too that may be the case with Haiti.  If that is the case then our past experience will tell us this is so.

Past experience, you ask?

For what I have heard from a limited portion of commentators in the media wanting the US to 'take over' Haiti for a few months and get things running, there is a deep and extreme caution flag that they are missing.  America has been there and done that before.  And not just for a few months, either.

One of the seminal papers on US Counter-Insurgency (COIN) was done by Peter L. Bunce with a work published on 05 JUN 1995 in Foundations On Sand: An Analysis Of The First United States Occupation Of Haiti 1915-1934.  As COIN is something we have gotten to experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as Colombia, Philippines and elsewhere, it behooves us to understand the goals, execution and results of a COIN operation that was done in our past in the exact, same Nation by the United States.  The Executive Summary of the paper is telling:

Thesis: The first United States Occupation of Haiti, after a slow start, made a great variety of capital improvements for Haiti, made changes in the Haitian political system, and refinanced the Haitian economy, none of which had much lasting impact on the Haiti people once the occupation was terminated.

Background: The United States occupied Haiti originally to restore public order in 1915. It's self-imposed mandate quickly expanded to reestablishing Haitian credit in the international credit system, establishing good government and public order, and promoting investment in Haitian agriculture and industry. After a slow start, marred by a brutal revolt in 1918-20, the United States Occupation of Haiti was reorganized and began to address many of the perceived shortcomings of Haitian society. Its international and internal debt was refinanced, substantial public works projects completed, a comprehensive hospital system established, a national constabulary (the Gendarmerie [later Garde] d'Haiti) officered and trained by Marines, and several peaceful transitions of national authority were accomplished under American tutelage. After new civil unrest in 1929, the United States came to an agreement to end the Occupation before its Treaty-mandated termination in 1936. Once the Americans departed in 1934, Haiti reverted to its former state of various groups competing for national power to enrich themselves. Almost all changes the American Occupation attempted to accomplish failed in Haiti because they did not take into consideration the Haitian political and social culture.

Recommendation: Before the United States intervenes in foreign countries, particularly in those where nation-building improvements are to be attempted, the political and social cultures of those countries must be taken into consideration.

The Thesis is, itself, telling.  Those in the areas of commentary and punditry could learn something from that Thesis which is the seminal distillation of the entire work.  Any calls to improve the Haitian infrastructure, clean up its political system and get the Haitian economy going fell apart as soon as the US left Haiti.  In the Background is the telling sentence I highlighted that points to the failure of the infrastructure being rooted in Haitian political and social culture, not the fault of the 'occupiers' who created a then modern infrastructure, financed its farming and banking system, and installed a political group to run Haiti.  From that the Recommendation is well founded and the US, outside of wartime work, must examine when it intervenes in foreign Nations and determine what, if anything, can be done through the good will and money of the people of the United States in regards to the country we are involved with.  That Recommendation is the largest warning flag to be put up for all of those seeking 'humanitarian missions' and 'peace keeping' operations and are then unwilling to examine the society, culture and political structure of those areas that they want intervention.  It is a hard lesson the United States learned in blood and money put into a Nation that could not, for all of the niceness of its individuals, keep that infrastructure going even after they had been trained to do so.

Any goals for 'humanitarian missions' must take into consideration that while all men are created equal, they form different and unique societies that are unequal to each other and that some will operate far, far better than others.  That is no aspersion on the individuals, although the society is reflective of them, but of the inability to examine the society involved in an honest manner and ask: 'just what can these people sustain once we leave them?'

To examine the roots of the problem you do not look at 'root causes' but see the roots, themselves, and how they exist and function.  You do not start with presumed 'root causes' and see if they match against some pre-determined checklist, but, instead, see what functions, how it functions and why it functions the way it does to see what the causes of problems actually are.  That is a much harder job than blithely pointing at 'root causes' because it leads one out of gauzy theory and multi-culti blandness and into the cold, hard world of examination and seeing the illnesses of society as they exist, not as you think they exist.  You cannot think your way to survival but only do your way to survival and, similarly, you cannot think your way to the causes of societal problems via theory, only the actual doing of examination.  If you do not think before you do, then you are likely to screw things up and if you can't examine the actual problems when you form your plan you are likely to fail.  Thus any good analysis paper starts with examining things as they are:

By the turn of the 20th Century, Haiti was a deeply troubled country. Its society, since the revolutions, had always been divided. In the absence of the French colonialists--all of whom fled the country in 1804 or were killed--the mulâtres, the mulatto class, approximately three percent of the population, assumed the social role of the colonials. The peasantry, almost exclusively African in ancestry, remained peasants. The elite of Haiti, who for all intents and purposes ran (and run) Haiti, are largely, not exclusively, mulâtres. Noirs, particularly those with a military background or powerbase, could become part of the elite, and often ruled Haiti. But Haiti was and is most often administered for the benefit of the elite, and the elite are heavily mulâtre. "As in colonial Saint Domingue [Haiti], where the gens de couleur and black slaves hated each other, racial antagonism persisted between the elite and the black peasantry of Haiti."4

This is long after Haiti became an independent country in 1804.  And while it would still suffer from its original association with France, the shift of power inside the Nation to an elite, minority class was a result of its history as a colony.  The division in society between the mulatto and blacks served as a long term divisive factor in the Nation.  External factors do play a role in that period before the first US occupation, as seen in the corrupt banking system:

The Banque Nationale d'Haiti was Haiti's treasury and fiscal agent. Instead of being a financial entity controlled by the Haitian government, it was a French stock company, owned principally by French banks, led by the Banque de l'Union Parisienne. It charged a commission on the Haitian issue of paper currency and on the cashing of checks. Since the French blacklisted Haiti on the world financial markets, so as to keep the Haitian account for themselves, the French funneled all loans to the government through the Banque, often at outrageous discounts*.12 To give an example of French loan practices, Haitian obstacles to establishing a bank in 1874 was multiplied by the various political and financial thieves inside and outside Haiti:

[Late 19th Century political leader Antenor]Firmin and historian Antione Magloire say the loan was 60 million francs, to be repaid in forty annual installments of 7.5 million francs, a return of 400 percent. [Dantes] Bellegarde says 50 million francs, but that the Crédit-Général in Paris was able to raise only 36.5 million, of which 26 million went to intermediaries and private pockets in Port-au-Prince and Paris, while the remaining 10 million francs were used to liquidate, at par, a mountain of worthless Haitian bonds bought up as scrap paper by European speculators. The Crédit-Général's commission alone exceeded 9.5 million francs.13

Finally chartered in 1880, the Banque Nationale d'Haiti lost its charter in 1905, after refusing to back Nord Alexis' blizzard of paper money. A five year period of intense competition between French, German, and American (relative newcomers) banking interests ensued over rechartering a new bank. Finally, in late 1910, the Haitian legislature voted to dissolve the Banque Nationale d'Haiti, and created a new Banque Nationale de la République d'Haiti, which moved into the old Banque's headquarters. French banking interests, which put the package together with several German-American private banks, diplomatically invited in American interests (including the infamous National City Bank14). The French had a 75% interest in the new bank, the Americans and the German-American banks 20%, and the German Berliner Handelsgesellschaft Bank 5%. Not surprisingly, the new $13 million loan was discounted to $9.4 million.15

The government that backed this, in Haiti, was neither wise, smart or had any foresight.  They would further back a railroad scheme by James P. McDonald that would effectively give him rights to half the land in Haiti for putting down a railroad.  That rail line was never completed, but did lead to an unrest and an uprising in the northern highlands.  Those highlands served as the place where mercenaries had traditionally gathered to serve the local tribal Kings, and they attacked the railroad camps and then the government itself.  That racial division, then, served as one causative factor to an insurrection and the short-sightedness of the ruling elite then served as another: neither one is indicative on its own, and both required the long tradition of local tribes hiring mercenaries to come to a head as had happened before in Haiti.

Thus the 'root causes' argument of Haiti being the fault of France/US/Germany can be dispensed with.  If Haiti had a functioning society it would seek to smooth out the differences between the urban, elite culture and the rural, tribal culture and offer opportunities for 'buy-in' by that rural culture without having to go through elitist intermediaries.  No one has forced that societal structure on the Haitians, and while it was an artifact of colonial rule, that rule directly ended in 1804 with the rulers fled or dead.  Yes France did play a role in the system, without a doubt and is a causative factor.  The society, itself, by adhering to that for over a century is a primary factor: any society that wanted to do without such meddling, without an elite class, would have removed them either peacefully or under force of arms.  The tribes had demonstrated that capability and by 1910 it would begin the ball rolling to further internal disasters.

If we replace kleptocratic elites for the French, you then get the same power structure with a different formulation of who gets what, but retaining the same societal agenda that was previously set.  No amount of 'reparations' would improve this, and the similar work about to be undertaken by the US underscores that.  You cannot 'make right' with money a society and culture that is failing.

Skipping ahead past sorry turmoil, insurrections and such, we come to 1915 the US President is Woodrow Wilson noted for his not wanting to get involved in the European World War that was going on, wanting to be the big peace maker and generally be a Progressive in pushing forward an isolationist agenda militarily but an expansive global agenda in other realms and the Admiral is Caperton of the (CA) USS Washington:

In July 1915, the Washington, Rear Admiral Caperton embarked, sat in Port au Prince harbor as still another Haitian presidency wound its way to a messy conclusion. This time it was Guillaume Sam, who was besieged in his palace by a new challenger, Dr. Rosalvo Bobo. At daybreak on 27 July 1915, Sam made a break for the French legation next door. Sam made it, although most of the people accompanying him did not. He sent a message to his chief of police, Charles-Oscar Etienne, at the police Arrondissement in the lower city, to the effect that his presidency was over and that Etienne should follow the dictates of his own conscience ["La partie est perdue, j'abandonne le pouvoir. Faites ce que votre conscience vous dictera."]. Accounts vary, but somewhere between 160 and 'nearly 200' political prisoners, from Haiti's mulâtre elite--including ex-president Oreste Zamor, died. The next day, a mob of the elite attacked Guillaume Sam in the French legation and murdered him. Sam's mutilated body was dragged through the streets. Having received a green light from the State Department via the Acting Secretary of the Navy, Caperton met with the American and British chiefs of mission and the French minister aboard the Washington and, with their concurrence, decided to land troops and restore order.24

While his small landing force secured the legations in Port au Prince, Admiral Caperton had a problem. With Guillaume Sam dead, there was no one really in charge in the city. There was a revolutionary committee formed by General Polynice,25 Charles Zamor (brother of the recently deceased ex-president), and others*, but no one, at least to American eyes appeared to be in charge. The landing force was disarming what remained of the Haitian Army in Port au Prince (and confiscated five wagon-loads of weapons the first day), and the Haitian legislature was going through the opening stages of voting for still another new President, but with the immediate crisis under control, Caperton didn't know what the United States Government wanted. The Secretary of State, Robert Lansing was relatively new (his predecessor, William Jennings Bryan, resigned in June 1915, in a disagreement over President Wilson's handling of the Lusitania crisis), so he asked the President: "The situation in Haiti is distressing and very perplexing. I am not at all sure what we ought to do or what we legally can do . . . I hope you can give me some suggestion as to what course we can pursue." Wilson apparently answered the next day:

I suppose there is nothing to do but to take the bull by the horns and restore order . . .

1. We must send to Port au Prince a force sufficient to absolutely control the city not only by also the country immediately about it from which it draws its foods . . .

2. We must let the present Haitian Congress know that we will protect it but that we will not recognize any action on its part that does not put men in charge of affairs whom we can trust to handle and put an end to revolution.

3. We must give all who now have authority there or who desire to have it or who think they have it or are about to have it understand that we shall take steps to prevent the payment of debts contracted to finance revolutions.

. . . In other words, that we consider it our duty to insist on constitutional government and will, if necessary (that is, if they force us to it as the only way), take charge of elections and see that a real government is erected which we can support.26

Caperton radioed Washington DC on 5 August that the president of the Haitian Senate, Philippe Sudre Dartiguenave, appeared most electable, and that he "realizes Haiti must agree to any terms laid down by the United States, professes to believe any terms demanded will be for Haiti's benefit, [and] says he will use all his influence with [the] Haitian Congress to have such terms agreed upon by Haiti."27 To insure Dartiguenave's election, all Caperton had to do was neutralize the Cacos, take Dr. Bobo out of the running, and make sure the election in the Haitian legislature went for Dartiguenave.

Thus under the best of intentions, to create a constitutional form of government, President Wilson ordered the intervention into Haiti.  Notice that the unrest had caused a problem in the food supply?  For a Nation that is barely 30 miles wide and has one really good deep sea shipping port, Haiti has a problem in that anything that causes Port au Prince to go into disorder soon puts the entire Nation in jeopardy.  Also notice that the orders are from the top heading downwards?  Create a constitution first, get everyone to run by it second?  That is Progressivism at work, trying to create a new social order from the top and impose it on those beneath the top level.  It would prove to have ruinous ramifications.

An extension of those ramifications would be brought up in Senate testimony given by Admiral Caperton in 1921 as he described trying to get agreement from the two major leaders of Haiti, Senator Philippe Sudre Dartiguenave and Dr. Rosalvo Bobo an associate of Davilimar Théodore who had fallen out the with Zamor family and took control of the Cacos army (a mercenary group that the Zamor family had hired, but couldn't finance due to banking troubles).  In that testimony Admiral Caperton describes how the meeting he had with the two men went in 1915:

"Senator Dartiguenave, in case Dr. Bobo should be elected will you promise that you will exert every influence in your power to assist him for Haiti's good; that you will join with him heartily and helpfully and loyally?"

"If Dr. Bobo is elected president I will give him the most loyal, earnest support in every effort he may make for Haiti's welfare," replied Dartiguenave, with simple dignity.

"Dr. Bobo, if Senator Dartiguenave is elected president, will you help him loyally and earnestly in his efforts to benefit Haiti?"

"No I will not!" shouted Bobo. "If Senator Dartiguenave is elected president I will not help him. I will go away and leave Haiti to her fate. I alone am fit to be president of Haiti; I alone understand Haiti's aspirations, no one is fit to be president but me; there is no patriotism in Haiti to be compared with mine; the Haitians love no one as they love me."28

The Senator is one of the elite class in Haiti, while Dr. Bobo is a third-hand representative of the Zamor family, and neither had much in the way of scope or grounding to lead Haiti.  With the Senator being the only one of the two elected, Dr. Bobo saw the handwriting on the wall and left just before Admiral Caperton would go through his chain of command to say that the US supports the Senator in his bid to be President of Haiti.  With that the USMC secured the legislative building and a session of the Haitian legislature arrived, with members armed, to hold a vote for the next President, which was one by Senator Dartiguenave, overwhelmingly.  Thus the elite would have their leader for the Nation that would serve their purposes and not so much those of the people of Haiti.  The Treaty that would allow the US occupation of Haiti, however, had the US in a role of oversight for Haitian finances, and the analysis examines just who was the resistance to the occupation because of that:

Another byproduct of the American Haitian Treaty was the Haitian Union Patriotique, which was to become the principle organization of Haitian resistance to the First Occupation. Interestingly, it was an organization of and for the Haitian elite, the opinion of the noir peasantry towards the Occupation was apparently neither desired nor solicited.33 (A comment by the French minister in May 1916 (after the pacification of the Artibonite and the North by the Marines): "'The peasants, the pure noirs,' he wrote, 'are, like the tradesmen in the towns, delighted with the American occupation.'"34)

The US comes in, creates stability, pisses off the elites and gets the support of the middle class of Haiti.  It must be remembered that the middle class is primarily urban, not rural, while the peasantry spans from urban to rural.  The US would take over trade and customs control, putting in normal regulatory systems and set the Haitian currency on par with the US dollar, which would wipe out the elite class that depended on debasing the currency, running costly exchange venues and getting private deals for goods.

To get permanent reforms through the Haitian legislature would not be amenable to the necessary laws to put their favorite cronies out of business and President Dartiguenave dissolved the Senate and put the lower house representative body in charge of writing a new Constitution.  It is interesting that although this was expedient for both the President and the US, it was not what was expected for a means of enacting reforms:

Using an ancient Haitian constitutional device, Dartiguenave dissolved the Haitian Senate 6 April, 1916, and instituted a Council of State in its place. He  then designated the lower house a Constituent Assembly to rewrite the Constitution40 (Annex C, Appendix 8). Interestingly, a document from the Butler Papers (Butler was Chef of the Gendarmerie by this time), entitled "Coup d'Etat" details the reports the American had and made on the closing of the Senate41. From the title, and its inclusion in Butler's papers, it would appear that Butler, his Marine Gendarmerie officers, or both, disapproved of Dartiguenave's action, even though it served American interests as well as Dartiguenave's. This is especially interesting, considering Butler's part in the closing of the Haitian legislature the following year. According to his testimony before the Senate investigating committee in 1921, Colonel Waller, who had been told by Dartiguenave that he feared impeachment, was also opposed to the action.42

Maj. Butler (later Lt. Col. and Brigadier General) and Col. Waller (later Major General) were both of the USMC and were part of the force to stabilize Haiti.  Both of these men are part of the US system of military in which there is civilian control over the military and the idea of dissolving a Constitution to get legislative reforms through is one that obviously did not sit well with them in their role as 'occupiers'.  With that said it must also be understood that Haiti had gone through 17 Constitutions by that point in time.

This is actually a prime point: Haiti would be doing what Jefferson recommended, having a new Constitution every generation, save that it would be about every 6 years in Haiti between Constitutions.  You cannot set up a government with any continuity in 6 years.  You can't set up an orderly system of civil law if the Constitution on which it is based changes that frequently.  The absolute reverence by the US military forces, here the USMC, for a Constitutional law process and civil command over the military puts them in stark contrast with what is going on in Haiti.  No civil society that exists can survive such major changes so frequently and be a coherent society able to support civil needs as what may be perfectly allowable one year may not be in 6 years or 3 years or next year depending on who is coming to power and when.

Top down government that starts with a Constitution with only political representatives from the old system that do NOT offer widespread public input to a Constitution are unlikely to draft a Constitution that does anything but meet current needs.  When the people are eliminated from the drafting process and only the political elites form that process, the result is an elitist supporting document.  Here even the limited geography of Haiti, which should be the hallmark of creating a strong republic, has not sufficed for such a republic as the people have no means of input to it and the elites feel they can change the structure of government via overthrow of an existing regime and getting their cronies to support the takeover.  The end product of that is not a government that has stability, but is seen as unstable from the start.  As each ruling clique comes to power, they wash away the previous set of laws and support for them and will keep only a few 'traditional' forms of government.  Like allowing the President to liquidate the Legislature and have the lower house draft a new Constitution.   That makes the Presidency the key point of power and puts the Legislative branch into a secondary, and supporting role for the Executive.

Why bother voting if none of your input matters and none of the expected works of government (safeguarding the Nation, controlling its borders, ensuring equal opportunity for trade and commerce) can 'stick' via the legislative process?  Without an adherence to a system of laws, you get no legal system from that as the crafting of such a system requires long term input and remediation, not overthrow of the whole thing in a term or two of a representative.  Without the security that government brings via laws and governance to private life, to safeguard your wealth from the ravages of tyranny, you get a system that is tyrannical and sees private wealth as a 'cookie jar' to be raided by one set of elites or another.  Basic security of ownership rights creates an atmosphere where achievement can take place and a society and Nation be built upon personal achievement for oneself and one's family.  In being unable to get the basic underpinnings for personal rights Haiti does not create an atmosphere where you are expected to do for yourself.

If you cannot DIY and create the necessary safeguards to fall back on for yourself and your loved ones, and await the next group of elites that may or may not rob you blind, when a disaster strikes you are in a position of needing rescuing as the government has not allowed you to do the basics so you can rescue yourself.

In Nations with normal law processes, when the citizens start to safeguard themselves by supplying themselves with necessary long-term consumables before they are needed (stockpiling) a clear and exacting message is being put out: the citizens no longer trust the government to secure their rights to a civil economy.  With that said, change the government via any means and overthrow entire systems of laws based on Constitutions that are ephemeral, then the supplies will run out and government will exercise its will over people's economic well being to the ends of government, not the people.

With one short episode and the responses to USMC members on what was going on at the time, we get a clear sign of why Haiti had problems and would continue to have problems: there is no ability to make the rule of law stick there.

The Harding Administration had a review of the Occupation performed to look into military abuses during and after an uprising.  The claims were found to be over-blown and the committee recommended a number of civil works be performed to help the people of Haiti:

The committee also noted that the thrust of most of the accusations had been an effort to discredit the entire occupation of Haiti.57 More importantly, the Committee noted that the occupation was not serving its goals and recommended changes:

¨ "... [place] within reach of the Haitian masses, justice, schools, and agricultural instruction . . . [and] . . . send to Haiti a commission comprising a commercial advisor, an expert in tropical agriculture, and an educator . . ."

¨ "..advise the Haitian government against permitting foreign interests to acquire great land holdings in Haiti."

¨ "...as communications are opened up and as the peasants are secure in their life and property, . . . reduce the force of marines in the territory of the Republic and ultimately to intrust the maintenance of order and peace exclusively to the gendarmes."

¨ Eliminate provost courts for civil crimes and "offenses by the press against public order."

¨ Raise the caliber and qualifications of the Americans who represent the United States in Haiti.58

Interestingly, almost a year earlier, President Harding had apparently solicited an evaluation of the Occupation from the State Department shortly after his inauguration in 1921. Written by Sumner Wells, who at the time was Chief of the Latin American Division of the State Department and who would become the American High Commissioner in the Dominican Republic in 192259, it recommended similar changes in the Occupation and its administration:

¨ Increase the size of Gendarmerie d'Haiti in order to increase public order.

¨ Appoint a single representative of the United States to represent the President in Haiti and subordinate all United States "Treaty officials" to this representative.

¨ Change the basic supervision of the Occupation of Haiti from the Navy Department to the State Department, which would presumed to be more diplomatic in budget items, for instance.

¨ Develop the Haitian economy, principally by reforming the Haitian education system60 (Annex C, Appendix 16).

Thus, getting recommendations from all sides, the Occupation of Haiti entered a period of great change and, ultimately, some progress.

This is modern 'Nation Building' seen in a nutshell.  It is famous for not working.

Notice that all the recommendations are top-down predicated?

Without exception this is the concept that good government can 'create' society that is civil.  Yet our understanding is that civil society creates many organs of which government is but one, and not the brains, either, but the means to digest the rougher stuff so that sustenance can be garnered for the entire body.  Government cannot create civil society, but is an outgrowth of civil society.  Trying to build up a government and hope that it gets popular support is a dream of every individual supporting the conception that government is the leader of civil society and that we should vest all our effort, welfare and, ultimately, lives in the support of government.  Getting good and honest bureaucrats is one thing, getting a good and honest system of government to find, maintain and support a modicum of good an honest bureaucrats is something else, again.

When the people are considered citizens, they get an input into society and government, and are able to protect themselves without the undue intrusion of government in their lives and can seek the recourse of law against government.  When one is a subject of government, the people are considered objects of government and even with courts one must plea or supplicate to get justice done and the government may, at its convenience, forestall any suits against it in the civil venue.  While all governments have that last as part of its background, in a civil system that is upheld by society, government rarely uses that ability and puts itself in the position of being controlled by the citizenry.  Subjects are less able to assert civil control over government and when government pleases to do something that is against one or many of the people and seeks the refuge of its ability not to be held accountable, then one is left with arms as the only means to hold government accountable.

That last is the case of Haiti, save that only those with some money (the elites and land owners) have the ability to overthrow government by force of arms.  Even when there is peasant input, it is to an elite group that they look for leadership or organization, not to themselves.

Our recent experience in Iraq points to these lessons being learned as COIN did not consist of getting this or that public works built or making this or that department of government able to stand up, but put up a framework of a government and then went to the bottom to start the re-building process.  One of the prime testing grounds for this conception, and a large scale success, was in Fallujah where, post-combat and after some stumbling of initial stand-up, the US forces reached out to the local population and found what the diverse tribal groups actually wanted to feel secure. That turned out to be not water, sewage, or electricity or schools, but getting the family compound walls fixed. 

In a city that has always been described as 'lawless' in travelogues going back to the 1920's, and even further back in local history, trust was won and built upon at the lowest level and built up, not downwards.  At each higher level of needs there was local support for them and it wasn't imposed by a grand vision or scheme which would 'make everything right' and set down a government.  The system of politics that arrives from that is one that is federalist in formulation: strong local governments, accountable provincial governments and the National government needing to address the needs of the provinces to be seen as legitimate, plus the people from the local basis have direct input and say into their own political structure. 

By repeating the methodology and allowing the locals to set the course of their needs, first, the entire rebuilding would change the original framework by adjusting it, yet still leave its outlines visible.  The civil society grew into an adaptable framework of government and populated it from the bottom-upwards.  You will still get corrupt bureaucrats and politicians, yes, that is true in any system of government.  What was put in place, however, was the concept of using the structure to weed them out via civil law.

In Iraq the people considered themselves Iraqi's, first, members of tribes, second, and family members and clans, third, with religion falling out into the much lower ranks for associative elements.  That points to a class of people who have education, a knowledge of government and the ability to understand why you need a Nation and why you need strong social ties within society.  Haiti would not be so lucky in the 1920's as even getting the basics taught met resistance:

One area in which the Americans encountered an immense amount of resistance was in the area of public education. In his memo for President Harding, Sumner Welles accused the Haitian elite publicly funding education at adequate levels, while actually pocketing the bulk of the money for themselves.67 In 1923, General Russell instituted a Service Technique de l'Agriculture et de l'Ensignement Professionel, or Service Technique as it became known, to provide a agricultural educational system for the noir peasantry under a Dr. George F. Freeman. This was "a matter of extreme social sensitivity for the elite," who feared both the social consequences of an educated noir peasantry and the loss of the noirs' loyalty to the blancs, who were improving their lives.68

The elites preferred an uneducated peasantry as educating the poor would change the entire power structure of society to the detriment of the elite classes.  Yet that is the foundation of a civil society that supports any form of representative democracy: an educated population.  The very foundation of the modern public school system was to get the very basics of what is necessary to be literate, reading, writing and math skills, to the poor or those who could not afford private schooling.  In an agrarian system with so much time spent working for adults at manual labor, there was little or no opportunity to teach any skills to children.  Adults, themselves, were often illiterate and unable to do basic and necessary math functions for understanding what their labor was worth.

DIYism does not, of necessity, predicate itself upon literacy or math knowledge.  Without them you cannot judge changes in society either in type or scale, so as to estimate the impact of them on your life.  One of the observations of the use of home computers is that they allowed the common man to utilize sophisticated analysis tools for economic review and forecasting, thus allowing people to change their perspective on what was coming to either maximize their profit or minimize their losses.  This is a large step away from being able to see if changes are coming, but the literacy in reading and math skills means that such venues are open to you: without them you are relying upon the educated class for your survival, by and large, although still keeping some things for a 'rainy day' you cannot judge if it will be a gentle summer shower or a hurricane.

Education would prove one of the spark points that would usher in the end of the American Occupation of Haiti, in that student uprisings against the teaching of the peasants would spread throughout the cities and require the Hoover Administration to start the plans for leaving the Nation.  Under FDR the last of the Marines would leave in 1934 and the works build over the prior years were turned over to the Haitians:

The Constitution, modified in 1928, was again changed in 1935 to invest more power in the President. According to the first Haitian Chef of the Garde d'Haiti-- Démosthènes Calixte, the same officer who was the Haitian deputy of the then-new Ecole Militaire in 1922 under General Russell--the Garde was rapidly politicized, beginning in 1934.78 This same officer offers some observations (1939) to what happened to the institutions left the Haitians by the United States Marines Corps and Navy:

¨ The Sanitation and Hygiene Service, which was originally an organization trained by the officers of the Medical corps of the United States Navy, has lost its real purpose as an institution. The persons responsible for its administration are rank politicians and the most ill-bred officials Haiti ever had.

¨ The Public Works Administration was also organized by officers of the Civil Engineer Corps of the United States Navy. But since its "Haitianization", it has become merely a payroll institution for all the friends of the President who are jobless, as well as those who do not care to work. The engineers and architects in charge of various departments cannot do anything to remedy the situation.This is why this service has spent so much money and Haiti still has no roads, no bridges, and no sewers in areas where such construction is badly needed.

¨ The Agricultural and Rural Education Service . . . was, after its "Haitianization." placed under another foreigner, a Belgian, who resigned in 1938. This department could have rendered great service if the five-year plan submitted by the scientific agriculturist-in-charge had been approved by the government. . .Political opportunism was rampant. No attempt was made even to try the plan.

¨ The Contribution or Internal Tax Service was also organized by Americans. The Haitians who have replaced the Americans are competent and honest; but again political interference was followed by embezzlement of Government funds, which of course went unpunished.

¨ Education is purposely neglected for the benefit of politics and social prejudice. The method of education in Haiti has always been a matter for "discussion." The removal from office of competent administrators and personnel of the Education Department for political reason renders the problem practically insoluble.

¨ There cannot be an independent press in Haiti, because of the enactment of a law against a free press. A 'state of siege' is maintained by the present government, but even in time of peace no one can express an honest opinion as to the general condition or administration of the country without being mistreated.79

Other observers, even those hostile to the United States Occupation, have noted the deterioration of the infrastructure: "American civil service reform, for instance, had little impact. After the occupation, Haitian politics reverted to the 'spoils system' whereby successive administrations installed their own partisans in public office."

"...The network of roads, potentially the most significant legacy of the occupation, didn't last long because almost all roads were unpaved and required elaborate maintenance."80

This is the crux of the matter for Haiti: without an educated peasantry there are not enough people to maintain civil works such as roads and understand good agricultural practices so as to prosper from their work.  Land owning is a part of that, yes, but it is not a 'root cause' as individuals who are able to utilize their own liberty by understanding it can then gather up funds to go into farming or business for themselves.  Unfortunately the society is in such a state of disability in those realms that there is not sufficient education for the population to take over such works on a local scale and depend upon the National government to maintain them.

Getting to the present day and the disaster in Haiti, we must ask: has this society remedied its ills as seen in the early 1930's, or have they continued on since then?

The unfortunate answer is the latter as we see individuals very much in the form of modern day peasants cast asunder by the extremely destructive earthquake, and the ruling elite have demonstrated their incompetence in either fostering a civil society or putting in good works to safeguard civilian infrastructure.  While quakes of this magnitude are rare in Haiti, they are not unknown and even basic earthquake code building would stand a better chance of survival than the unreinforced masonry buildings typically seen in urban Haiti.  Brick and masonry buildings are cheap, yes, but they offer no ability to ride out an earthquake without steel rebar or other internal reinforcements so as to maintain structural integrity of the building.  As horrific as the scenes of apartments that have collapsed are, the scenes of modern hotels, police and fire stations and even modern hospitals collapsing stagger the imagination.

To have rescue services they must survive a disaster and not collapse with it.  That is the lesson learned from every earthquake venue on the planet with inhabitants nearby: civil structures for police, fire and medicine must be reinforced as they are the first line of protection after a disaster for civil society.  Just the structures, themselves, at the very least, must survive so that survivors can utilize them as community rallying points.  Having competent and self-sacrificing police officers, firemen and medical personnel are also necessary, but they must have places to rally to so as to be effective.  Their specialized equipment cannot be stored at home, great fire trucks cannot festoon the city parking spaces with individual ownership.  Storehouses of medical supplies must be in structurally sound buildings so that the supplies are useful and not destroyed by the ravages of the quake and local climate.

Without those the local population must be able to fend for itself, which requires a pre-existing system that teaches self-reliance and that if things go wrong you are the first line of defense for yourself.

That is not what we see in Haiti.

With those commentators that want to see the US 'take over' rebuilding, our past must inform our current and future decisions.

We can put forward that a spare, lean framework of a government must exist while the local sections of Haiti put themselves back together and are allowed to state their own needs and get them met through bottom-upwards forms of government that does not rely upon an elite class.  Yes emergency shelter is necessary, and yes temporary structures for housing and other needs is necessary.  And if we do as we did in the past, then those will be the only things we leave behind and the Haitian people no better off and just in much danger tomorrow as they are today.

To get to a system that can help itself, first, must be the goal of any 're-building' efforts, and placing the tools and skills on the ground to help teach how to re-build and build anew must be a part of that process.  Unfortunately with the ill-conceived notions of Presidents involved in the past, the government run venue must be temporary, limited and seek only to ensure that private aid and restructuring organizations willing to teach the basic and fundamental skills to Haitians are protected and supported. 

Agencies that teach to ask for a hand-out can go to hell.

For Haiti to avoid future disasters and be able to coordinate their own relief, they require the very basics of understanding that personal freedom and liberty can build that for themselves and they can maintain it.  To try otherwise is to place high value structures into the hands of those who cannot maintain it and who have elites wanting no power to get out of their control to the people of Haiti.

That hasn't worked so well before.

Perhaps it is time we try something different with a proven track record this time?