Thanks for the detailed response. I am neither Haitian nor Dominican but I also absorb history and given its nuances, whenever someone declares their view to be "reality" juxtaposed against others it always makes me go

Sure there are a lot of Haitian nationalist loudmouths but its clear you've adopted the Dominican mirror view of this (which isn't right or wrong) but has its own issues
Haitian nationhood and identity have had sharp contours, primarily because of the Black/Mulatto divide but saying the DR's classification is important to Haitian identity is a stretch. Both sides flex and you point out the Haitian distortions while repping the DR ones.
Let's not mix points. I wasn't talking about Boyer (a mulatto) and his policies in Haiti and the DR. I was speaking of Soulouque's motives. Sure conquest was one but there was serious info (or more likely disinfo) from Britain and other powers on this point as the great powers fought over DR, especially rights to Samana. Saying Soulouque was just bloodthirsty because he "hated mulattoes" and there weren't other political complexities is simplistic.
As far as knowing peace and stability it is strange again you act as if the DR is so superior to Haiti in this time. We going to act like Santana stabbing Durate and others in the back and having them exiled or killed is good governance, just to put down Haiti? How about Baez repeatedly becoming president and getting overthrown repeatedly as well in the late 19th century? The whole island unfortunately has been a mess for most of its history.
Um, not having a stable written foundation for your government is hardly an American point of view on a country's stability. Only one country--the UK--has really pulled off having no constitution in modern times and they are unique. I'm not saying they had to have one constitution---only the US and Netherlands have had long term constitutions still in effect I believe--just their government has been in a lot of damn flux which you want to downplay for your narrative. In one breath you dismiss the fact of constitutional turnover in DR and in the next you go all the way back to Haiti's first constitution to "prove" something about Haitian identity. Is that not a very Dominicanized viewpoint of Haiti's constitutional history?
The Haitian identity isn't that contentious--it's who will control the island. So I guess there is no South African White identity b/c of the Boer/Anglo clashes nor a Spanish identity because of the various regionalisms, not just Catalonia and Basque country or no German identity since that country is younger than either Haiti or DR and had a huge rift between the Protestant North and Catholic South until after WWII. Come on man.
Ok. But way to ignore the example I gave in Geffrard and Haiti actually helping DR during the Spanish annexation. Also, after the Spanish were kicked out Haiti never invaded again. Maybe after Faustin was gone and the Second Empire ended Haiti was a bit more stable and had more modern (though imperfect) rulers. But since Haiti has to be shown as a burden and basket case at every opportunity, we can just sweep all that under the rug I guess. All the positive stuff Frederick Douglass said about Haiti, despite his problems, when he was a consul general there was hotep babble?
You do well to point out some common Haitian conceits in this thread but a lot of your "reality" is the nationalist DR history popularized from Trujillo through Balaguer among others. If DR history was so plain and simple Trujillo wouldn't be killing and expelling people and popularizing historical narratives to prevent "Haitianization".