Talk:Juan Pablo Duarte

Untitled
During the independecy, Duarte was exiled from the country by the Haitian government. Pedro Santana Gained the presidency due to his merits in battle. During this firs Dominican Government, an economical and social slump called referenced later by historians as "La España Boba" led Santana to annex the country once again to Spain, only to be restaured by Gregorio Luperon on August 16, 1863.

Original research
This article contains claims that are not backed by any source (mostly because they are not true). For the moment, as I don't have more time, I will post an "original research" or "unverified claims" to the article if no one provides for a correction in a reasonable amount of time. Dominican 23:11, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Removal of vandalism
I removed the vandalism added. Dominican 23:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

This page got lot miss information
this page need major work, i put back to a state that seem more accurate...but this article need more work on it. Avfnx 23:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Not a copyright violation
The page given as a source for a copyright violation states: "NOTE: The information regarding Dominican Republic on this page is re-published from The Library of Congress Country Studies. No claims are made regarding the accuracy of Dominican Republic HAITI AND SANTO DOMINGO information contained here. All suggestions for corrections of any errors about Dominican Republic HAITI AND SAINT DOMINGOshould be addressed to the Library of Congress." Country Studies from The Library of Congress are in the public domain. 21:04, 11 June 2007

Attempt to censor
There apparently seems to be an attempt to censor this article on a regular basis by a few editors. The facts are that there is some controversy surrounding Juan Pablo Duarte's legacy and we have an obligation to at least include this information especially if there are numerous articles from reputible news organizations that have reported on Taina Mirabal's film "Padres de Racismo" about Juan Pablo Duarte. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.95.167.31 (talk) 19:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

This is a Encyclopedia right or a rumor mill...facts or fairly tales, it about facts and there no facts he was racist. The Haitians were, they didn't let white own land, killed off the mulatto population in there country...those are facts. 24.190.180.244 (talk) 05:19, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Claims for Juan Pablo Duarte's racism
An unregistered user has been reediting the article to denounce a supposedly unknown aspect of Duarte's life. These claims have been stated even on other articles, like the one for the Dominican Republic and even on xenophobia.

This information has consistently been removed because it is not backed by reliable sources. I will flesh out the sources given for that edit:

1. Padre De Racismo: This is a newspaper article about the controversy raised because flyers with Duarte's portrait and a message that said "Padre del Racismo" were distributed in New York City; as well as some statements made by the producers of the film. Nowhere in the article there is something that backs the racists claims. This looks like someone is trying to promote this specific news.

2. Taína Mirabal: Again, another newspaper article that does not support the point of view given. They are just reproducing Mirabal's interview. This is one person's opinion. I mean, she has the right to say whatever she wants about whoever she wants, but just because it appears in a minor online periodical publication, that doesn't make it a reliable source.

3. Los dominicanos han sido engañados: For the third time, this source is pretty much the same article, but written by a different reporter. The situation is the same, they are just repeating Mirabal's interview.

Finally, I would like to add that this information should not be included in the main article because it is only the opinion of Taína Mirabal (and maybe two wikipedia editors). Mirabal in itself is not a reputable historian. Her only work seems to be this documentary. She hasn't, so far and to the best of my knowledge, written any books, journal papers or taught history in school at any level. She doesn't even have a blog! Writing an article based on a film is like trying to re-write the history of the United States after seeing The Birth of a Nation.

Her work also seems to be stagnant. These articles first appeared on August 2007. After that, neither Mirabal or her film have gotten any reviews. Actually, if you google "Taina Mirabal", "Padre de Racismo" or "Fathers of Racism", it only links to the above mentioned articles and to wikipedia!

I understand that there might be people who don't agree with the way the history about Duarte is written, but if you want it to be on a wikipedia article, then create one that is called Controversy about Juan Pablo Duarte, or something like that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominican (talk • contribs) 17:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I forgot to sign. Dominican (talk) 17:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

we have a obligation to report
The fact is that this controversy is taking place and there has been press on it, we have an obligaton to include it. To supress this information is censorship. Taina Mirabal has gotten press and the movie has been reported on, that is a fact. She has made assertions about Duartes life and is releasing a movie about him. we have to include that in this article because it is going on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.95.167.45 (talk) 22:54, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Why cause one person make something up we should pay mind to them...If she says the world is flat, the it is...in no history book does it says or even implies this, it not censorship...this is place for facts not alleges that what the news is for AvFnx (talk) 06:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

We have no responsibility to include fringe theories in an article at all. If we do include them, they must not be written as if they were fact, but clearly explained as an opinion. And, of course, controversial views such as this theory need independant sources before being listed. Edward321 (talk) 04:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Not Hatred, Just facts
Reveling the true nature of Juan Pablo Duarte's motivations for a separte territory, does not equal hatred toward any group of people. Duarte was an individual who should be held responsible for what he has done. This is in no way defamation or slander nor lies; these are true facts. They may not push a nationalist agenda, but it still does not make them false at all. This is definatly not a personal thing. We have the responsiblity to tell the truth, even if we were born in the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.112.232 (talk) 01:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

you shouldn't blame puerto ricans
Hey I'm Dominican and I agree with Taina Mirabal, so it's not just one person who is making edits here.

Also you shouldn't threaten people with violence over the internet, you can and will be put in prison. There is now a record of it and I have reported it to the authorities.

If you disagree fine, then we can create a dialoge and see how to include both sides of the story, but lets not start threatening people with violence or by hacking into their computers; that is against the law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by La romana 31 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Duarte fue racista.
Oye mi gente,

Taina Mirabal speak the truth. Duarte fue una persona racista y los Trinitarios tambien. El es El Padre de Racismo, y yo soy Dominicano puro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony santos (talk • contribs) 22:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Donde esta tu prueba, dime donde lo libros de history, lo k Duarte escribio dice k el fue racista. AvFnx (talk) 22:38, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Los libros de la historia Dominicano tienen muchos mentiras de Trujillo y otros mi hermanao.Anthony santos (talk) 22:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)Anthony Santos

Hey i study more in NYC so where in the Americans books says that for that matter give any book that been publish AvFnx (talk) 22:58, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Puerto Rican?
I don't know know where you get the idea that I'm Puerto Rican, because I'm not. I think maybe some Dominicans find it hard to believe that they are some of us Dominicans that hate Juan Pablo Duarte, even if we were born there. Some of us Dominicans do have our own minds you know? Were not going to be brainwashed by schoolteachers, politicans and leaders who have been lying and stealing from us for 263 years. Wake up and open your eyes!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.112.232 (talk) 22:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

There words for ya people vende PaTriiiiiiiA!!!!!! that what some Dominicans are. Let be real how can ya talk so much trash of a man gave it all, money, power, and life. For the reason so you can call Dominican, and if true then ya not been real ya cause Dominican "is a racist name", so do me a favor don't use it. AvFnx (talk) 23:01, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't agree with all that "Dominican is a racist name" stuff. To me its just a word. But my grandfather used to tell me when I was little that Duarte and the Trinitarios were racists and there used to be alot of old people in San Pedro that said the same thing back in the days.

calm down primo
Primo! Calmate! Its not like Juan Pablo Duarte is your father or something. You shouldn't take it so personal. he was a racist, so what! That isn't going to make the palm trees or the beautiful beaches go away. Racism is a problem in our country and we have to be grown up enough to admit it. I know it first hand, I lived in DR for many years and still when I go back I see it loud and clear.

I'm not embarrased to speak the truth. Are you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by La romana 31 (talk • contribs) 01:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

This how i know you got no pride, Dominicans son hijo de Duarte. I don't see the racism you talking about; where the organization like kkk in DR...name 3 you know what name ONE!!!!!!!!....im waiting. Fact matter he wasn't...where the prove, till then all trash....here my prove:

“There’s no element that I remember once reading, in anything Duarte said or wrote, that could be interpreted remotely as racism,” said Anthony Stevens, assistant director of the CUNY Dominican Studies Institute. “It’s one of those things that you see and you wonder, ‘Is this somebody nuts, who took Duarte’s name out of a bag in a raffle and decided to use it?’ ”

CUNY Professor said, you know the educated class...which your not part off. I could back up my claim, now back up yours. AvFnx (talk) 03:11, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

27 de Febrero
Just as a reminder to all of you bloody ignorants. Today is the celebration of our independence from Haiti, which I can only thank to the people who gave their lives 164 years ago and to those, including Juan Pablo Duarte, who thought that we could be a free nation and did something about it. And you can thank him also, because you are able to defame his name and his, our, interracial country.

Padre de la Patria y liberador de mi pueblo de la tiranía Haitiana. Fundador de mi tierra y motivo por el cual hoy yo tengo una nacionalidad la cual me identifica. DIOS PATRIA Y LIBERTAD // REPÚBLICA DOMINICANA

Yo tengo un Dios al que amo, una Patria a la que adoro y una Libertad que disfruto. Yo soy de República Dominicana, yo soy dominicano ¿Y tú?¿Qué tienes?

(talk) 05:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

El 27 de febrero dia de la independencia dominicana.

Viva Duarte!!!!!

I Propose....
Let translate the Spanish version of Duarte in to english. AvFnx (talk) 15:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I see your point but that something that got be done. AvFnx (talk) 03:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Nationalist Bias and Protectionism
It seems to me that there is a whole lot of nationalist bias and protectionism fueling an organizaed movement to hide anything negative about Juan Pablo Duarte or the Dominican Republic. Even in articles dealing with racism or fear of foriegners, anything having to do with listing the Dominican Republic is erased.

It funny how the Confederate States of America are looked at as racist for wanting to separate from the USA but the Dominican Republic is not when it did the same thing. If separation due to religion, language or culture is looked at as racism and bias in any other part of the world then we should use the same measuring stick in judging the Dominican Republic. Facts are facts, the United Nations, Amnesty International and the U.S. State Department are not all wrong about Dominican Racism. The fact is that it is a problem and the problem started with Duarte no matter how much spin the government has put on the story over then last 100 plus years. Its not the end of the world. To cover it up just makes it worse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by La romana 31 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Your comments have nothing to do with why your changes are being reverted. You repeatedly insist on posting your fringe theories as if they were facts (and there's no indication they're even notable fringe theories).  Information on current racial problems in the Dominican Republic is cited.  Your contentions about the founders of the country, La Trinitaria, and their supposed inspiration for the KKK is the theory of one non-notable individual, Taina Mirabal.  Edward321 (talk) 02:48, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Did you know DR was a free country before been invaded by Haiti...so it now the same as the south breaking from the north. We had freedom and wanted it back. By your theory any country that get invaded and conquer doesn't have the right to free it self once again. That shows you limit, you not educated, you only have no life and this how you kill time. AvFnx (talk) 15:49, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The racism theory is interesting and I won't deny you have enough reasons to start an investigation about it, but as long as your arguments are only supported by Taina Mirabal and two local newspapers that printed an interview with Mirabal (those newspapers never said they agreed with the information), it can not be considered a reliable information. Besides I want to point out a few things that anyone who has lived in the DR can testify it's true: I could go on, but I only point this out in a Juan Pablo Duarte article to show that racism is not as it may look from outside and, therefore, Duarte should not be considered as a founder of a racist nation. At least not without proper and valid sources. Dominican (talk) 17:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The words "negro(a)" and "moreno(a)" may be equivalent (in some cases) to "sweetheart".
 * Dark skinned entertainment, political (including presidents) and sports personalities have been praised by all segments of society as role model Dominicans.
 * Haitians (regardless of their skin color) do not have to pay foreign student tuition fees (at least in the PUCMM campuses). Some of them even have the benefit of transportation dedicated to Haitian students. They are also included in the "Tarjeta Joven Estudiante" program.
 * In the DR buildings were never built with restrooms for whites and restrooms for blacks.
 * In the DR there have never existed miscegenation laws. It was never illegal for a black and a white to get married.
 * In the DR the Supreme Court has never considered that blacks are "beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect."
 * In the DR there have never existed schools for blacks and schools for white people.
 * Accent of people in the DR is dictated by region, not by skin color, that is, a black person growing up in the Cibao will have exactly the same accent as a white growing up in the same region. This means that blacks and whites did not live in segregated societies.

These are not valid arguements for non-inclusion. Segregation happend after reconstruction not before. The secession of the Confederate States of America is comparable to the separation of the Dominican Republic. Same Reasons. No matter how you try and sweeten it up. It is Dis-Unity simple and plain. Separation based on langauge, religion, ethnicity or race is not looked upon as a good thing anywhere in the world. Ever. The Dominican Republic should be no exception.

Secondly the D.R. was not a "free" country before the Haitian Liberation, because slavery was still legal. That is not a free country, it is a slave country. And the name of the "country" was Spanish Haiti, where only the white were free. If that is not racism I don't know what is. Lets not pretend. Also the Dominican Republic and Dominicans did not exist before Duarte created them, unless you are talking about the memebers of the Dominican Order of the Catholic Church. The same Dominicans that murdered Jews and Moors by the thousands in Spain.

Combined all of this with the fact that everyone who is against this being included is from the Dominican Republic. It's like having a bunch of editors from the southern U.S. editing a piece on the Civil War. Your voices are not neutral, they are very baised based on nationalist pride.La romana 31 (talk) 19:26, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Even if your staments are all true, that still doesn't give a reason for your repeated pushing of a non-notable fringe theory. And they aren't all true, I for one am not from the Dominican Republic. Edward321 (talk) 04:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Rewriting and Enhancing
Friends, I am in the process of reworking this article and I would appreciate your help. My goal is to make this article one of the top quality ones, and thus, I would need your help in making it readable, polishing its language, verifying claims with sources, and adding sections and information that are relevant and can be documented. I really hope we could move beyond the unnecessary discussions and zero-in on what would make Duarte's legacy and contributions public to the world. Please, do not hesitate to leave me messages or continue with the project of making a better article. Historian (talk) 17:47, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

A Plea for Historical Accuracy
As we try hard to rework this article, I hope that an increasing number of well-meaning participants join our efforts. Furthermore, I will like to plead with the contributors to keep their contribution within the limits of scholarship. There is a large number (and increasing) of books and articles recently written, in addition to lots of available primary sources on Dominican History, which should be our basis for input into the article. In other words, nothing, and I mean, Nothing, that is not substantiated from primary sources should be place in this article. Information deriving from secondary sources (books written by historians) should be (if at all) only mentioned as such—as opinions. Discredited authors or amateur historians should not feature here prominently—if at all.

Evidence is required for every single historical assertion about Duarte, particularly in relation to incendiary or controversial claims. Ahistorical (non-historical) contentions, as Duarte founding the KKK—which US confederate soldiers founded in 1866—should not be even considered for this article. I will consistently undo every contribution which violate these principles of historical interpretation, and which ignores the collective attempt of the online community. Historian (talk) 20:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)Historian (talk) 00:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

This comment is directed to user “Anthony Santos” and to any other who is trying to link Duarte to 20th Century racism. Stop all the comments about the Dominican independence being based on race consciousness or that Duarte was sent to Europe to "unlearn" any Black or Haitian acculturation because the fact is that there was no university in the Spanish-Speaking side of the island and thus any family wanting to provide any type of university-related education to their son should do what the Duartes' did with their son, namely send them to Europe. Comments that Duarte became an admirer of the inquisition or Catholic conservatism is not simply absurd (his main political problems came always from the Church), but very naive and deceiving. We have little evidence of Duarte's years in Europe and none of them point of him mingling with the reactionary/absolutist crowd--it would have been unconceivable for a patriot to be a traditional conservative. In addition to all of this, 21st Century people should understand that the concept of race that we see developing at the end of the 19th Century, which takes hold of politics and produces mass genocides in the early 20th Century has not yet been conceptualized in the early 19th Century when Duarte was just beginning his political life. The separation from Haiti was not based on race, but on economic and political issues—culture being the last of the reasons. For a serious introduction to the topic read Pedro Miró, Silvio Torres-Saillant, Moya-Ponz, and Castro. These are historians that are not only against the traditional historiography (Moya-Ponz is only with some caveat) that support the Hispanic and White identity long promoted by Trujillo and Balaguer, but they are also serious about accuracy and historicity. So, please, stop this madness, and spend some time familiarizing yourself with not only Dominican history, but history about racism and Black/White identity in the Americas, and then move to investigate primary sources BEFORE writing here. I may be as dedicated as you to provide a history that goes against the grain and one that is clean and honest about race and racism, but let us do it in the correct manner, which is based on primary sources and true to history. Historian (talk) 23:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello there! I was just wondering where are you from, you seem to know so much about Dominican history, but still for some reason I get the feeling you are not Dominican.

Neutrality dispute
The tone of the article is not one that fits an encyclopedia.

Phrases like:


 * "Duarte never giving up on the principles of democracy and fairness by which he lived, would only accept if voted in by a majority of the Dominican people"

It is not the place for an encyclopedic article to be so involved. If he said that or someone else did, then only the quotation of this statement should appear.


 * "Independence could not be denied and after many struggles, the Dominican Republic was born."

A neutral article would have said: After many struggles, independence was achieved and the Dominican Republic was founded. The tone is saturated with romanticism.


 * "Juan Pablo Duarte was to look back at this affair with nostalgia, wishing that it had lasted."

This assumes knowledge about how he felt. It should have been either a quotation or not be included at all.


 * His remains were transferred to Dominican soil in 1884—ironically, by president and dictator Ulises Heureaux, a man of Haitian descent—

It is not the place for an encyclopedic article to point out irony.


 * alongside Sanchez and Mella, who at that spot fired the rifle shot that propelled them into legend.

Too much romanticism.

If in 10 days I don't get a responce, I will rework the entire article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlagrange (talk • contribs) 05:23, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 20:39, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Juan Pablo Duarte. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100911085322/http://www.biography.com/articles/Juan-Pablo-Duarte-40045 to http://www.biography.com/articles/Juan-Pablo-Duarte-40045

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:04, 2 December 2017 (UTC)