Once again, Haiti is in the throes of violence and upheaval. It has ever been thus. While the nation Haiti shares the island of Hispaniola with, the Dominican Republic, has been relatively thriving (the key word is “relatively”) Haiti is in almost perpetual chaos. Florida is expecting another mass flotilla of refugees fleeing the hell-hole, and make no mistake, Haiti is a hell-hole. Under current law, and certainly under the warped Biden administration’s immigration policies, it is hard to imagine any scenario where thousands of Haitians do not enter the American populace.
Here is the ethics dilemma that it is politically incorrect to mention above a whisper: Haiti has a toxic, violent, ugly and undemocratic culture that has been ossifying for centuries. People who come from bad cultures, and this is a truly terrible culture, tend to have values and behavior traits that are antithetical to American society. Many in our “Imagine” subculture refuse to accept the fact that any culture is inferior to any other culture; hence they oppose “assimilation,” celebrating multi-culturalism instead. Multi-culturalism eventually metastasized into the DEI religion, and the success of the United States as a nation and a culture has been built on a once-solid foundation embodying the principle that immigrants come here to become Americans, with all the values and priorities that implies. Much of the division and cultural rot we are witnessing in the 21st century is a direct result of several decades of undermining that foundation.
One of Donald Trump’s endless stream of undiplomatic, inflammatory and offensive remarks that caused a destructive emotional response to a genuine issue was when he asked (allegedly) why the U.S. accepts so many immigrants from “shit-hole” countries. Hell-hole, shit-hole, tomato, tomahto: Haiti is unquestionable a “shit-hole” country if there ever was one. Asking whether it makes sense for the U.S. to take in immigrants (illegal or legal) who have been raised and marinated in toxic cultures and may be reluctant or unable to assimilate to our values is one of those topics that is never debated honestly. The DEI types will claim that there is no such thing as an inferior culture, to which the obvious rebuttal is: look at the history of Haiti, then look me in the eyes and say that without giggling. There are other toxic cultures (Islam, for example, or the Palestinians) but Haiti is as vivid an example as there is.
Of course there are Haitians who for reasons of character or experience have not had their values polluted by living in such a dysfunctional place. They might become good, productive, loyal American citizens, and deserve the opportunity. Should they be robbed of that opportunity to enjoy American citizenship because the majority of their fellow migrants are likely to carry the destructive values and traditions of their incurably sick nation with them to our shores?
It is an ethics and policy topic that must be debated without accusations of racism and abject denials of reality—yes, some cultures are better than others, and history has made that clear to those willing to see it—but it won’t be. In our culture as it is today, we don’t have the guts, and our culture’s progressives won’t risk allowing a debate they don’t have the facts to win.
Ethics Alarms 
Your post also brought to mind another taboo question that may be worth contemplating. Is there merit in just playing the role of the British Empire, stepping in, saying “you guys are a mess, and we’re in charge now.” The Anti-colonial modern crowd would have a fit, and perhaps they would have a point. On the other hand, there’s something to be said for just stepping in and fixing something when it’s completely out of hand.
It certainly isn’t actually feasible as a course of action, but perhaps the idea should be discussed.
What is the catalyst that lifts toxic “every man for himself” cultures of corruption selfishness, feudalism and brutality out of the dark ages and into enlightenment?
If you consider Congo and Rwanda, colonialism only seems to delay or exacerbate it.
This area demonstrates where the DEI pushing factions of the left are deeply addled. The part that they’re not connecting is the deeply anti-liberal stances of these three cultures you mention. One can scan down the list of socially liberal positions, and you will find the most extreme examples of support for the opposite positions.
In the USA, the left is attacking the mainstream for “micro-aggressions” for not fawning over every lifestyle they espouse. Meanwhile, you can trot on over to Dearborn, MI where you have strong support for capital punishment for being homosexual. For some reason, Christians are bad for tsk tsking, but outright violence from Muslims is OK.
Rather than address the specific example of Haiti, I’ll suggest that the book _Exodus_ by Sir Paul Collier does a good job of addressing the general issue of immigrants bringing their values to the destination country.
charles w abbott
I think the Palestinians are a good case in point. There is a reason that NO Middle Eastern country wants them. There is a good reason that Egypt has reinforced their border to keep the Palestinians out.
It is obvious that some cultures result in a more desirable society than others. Although immigrants can be assimilated, there is a limit to how many can be assimilated at once. There is also the question as to whether the importing country should import people who are beneficial to the society (have desirable skills, training, etc) or is obligated to take people who will be a detriment to society (low skills, from a violent culture) and try to rehabilitate them.
How many people is reasonable?
How many high-skill, in-demand people?
How many (if any) low skill, detrimental people?
Obviously, importing a large number of Chilean, organized crime members would be insane….never mind. Uh…importing a large number of MS-13….OK…importing a large number of foreign military members….
OK, I give up.