When You Kill Ten Million Africans You Aren’t Called ‘Hitler’

http://www.walkingbutterfly.com/2010/12/22/when-you-kill-ten-million-africans-you-arent-called-hitler/



Take a look at this picture. Do you know who it is?

Most people haven’t heard of him.

But you should have. When you see his face or hear his name you should get as sick in your stomach as when you read about Mussolini or Hitler or see one of their pictures. You see, he killed over 10 million people in the Congo.

His name is King Leopold II of Belgium.

He “owned” the Congo during his reign as the constitutional monarch of Belgium. After several failed colonial attempts in Asia and Africa, he settled on the Congo. He “bought” it and enslaved its people, turning the entire country into his own personal slave plantation. He disguised his business transactions as “philanthropic” and “scientific” efforts under the banner of the International African Society. He used their enslaved labor to extract Congolese resources and services. His reign was enforced through work camps, body mutilations, torture, executions, and his own private army.

Most of us aren’t taught about him in school. We don’t hear about him in the media. He’s not part of the widely-repeated narrative of oppression (which includes things like the Holocaust during World War II). He’s part of a long history of colonialism, imperialism, slavery, and genocide in Africa that would clash with the social construction of a white supremacist narrative in our schools. It doesn’t fit neatly into school curriculums in a capitalist society. Making overtly racist remarks is (sometimes) frowned upon in ‘polite’ society, but it’s quite fine not to talk about genocide in Africa perpetrated by European capitalist monarchs.

Mark Twain wrote a satire about Leopold called “King Leopold’s Soliloquy; A Defense of His Congo Rule”, where he mocked the King’s defense of his reign of terror, largely through Leopold’s own words. It’s an easy read at 49 pages. Mark Twain is a popular author in American public schools. But like most political authors, we will often read some of their least political writings or read them without learning why the author wrote them in the first place. Orwell’s Animal Farm, for example, serves to reinforce American anti-socialist propaganda about how egalitarian societies are doomed to turn into their dystopian opposites. But Orwell was an anti-capitalist revolutionary of a different kind—and that is never pointed out. We can read about Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer, but “King Leopold’s Soliloquy” isn’t on the reading list. This isn’t by accident. Reading lists are created by boards of education in order to prepare students to follow orders and endure boredom. From the point of view of the Department of Education, Africans have no history.

When we learn about Africa, we learn about a caricatured Egypt, about the HIV epidemic (but never its causes), about the surface level effects of the slave trade, and maybe about South African Apartheid (the effects of which, we are taught, are now long, long over). We also see lots of pictures of starving children on Christian Ministry commercials, we see safaris on animal shows, and we see pictures of deserts in films and movies. But we don’t learn about the Great African War or Leopold’s Reign of Terror during the Congolese Genocide. Nor do we learn about what the United States has done in Iraq and Afghanistan, killing millions of people through bombs, sanctions, disease, and starvation. Body counts are important. And the United States Government doesn’t count Afghan, Iraqi, or Congolese people.

Though the Congolese Genocide isn’t included on Wikipedia’s “Genocides in History” page, it does mention the Congo. What’s now called the Democratic Republic of the Congo is listed in reference to the Second Congo War (also called Africa’s World War and the Great War of Africa), where both sides of the multinational conflict hunted down Bambenga people—a regional ethnic group—and cannibalized them. Cannibalism and slavery are horrendous evils which must be entered into history for sure, but I couldn’t help thinking whose interests were served when the only mention of the Congo on the page was in reference to multinational incidents where a tiny minority of people in Africa were eating each other (completely devoid of the conditions which created the conflict). Stories which support the white supremacist narrative about the subhumanness of people in Africa are allowed to be entered into the records of history. The white guy who turned the Congo into his own personal part-plantation, part-concentration camp, part-Christian ministry—and killed 10 to 15 million Congolese people in the process—doesn’t make the cut.1

You see, when you kill ten million Africans, you aren’t called ‘Hitler’. That is, your name doesn’t come to symbolize the living incarnation of evil. Your name and your picture don’t produce fear, hatred, and sorrow. Your victims aren’t talked about and your name isn’t remembered.

Leopold was just one of thousands of things that helped construct white supremacy as both an ideological narrative and material reality. I don’t pretend that he was the source of all evil in the Congo. He had generals, and foot soldiers, and managers who did his bidding and enforced his laws. He was at the head of a system. But that doesn’t negate the need to talk about the individuals who are symbolic of the system. But we don’t even get that. And since it isn’t talked about, what capitalism did to Africa, all the privileges that rich white people gained from the Congolese genocide, remain hidden. The victims of imperialism are made, like they usually are, invisible.

Hitler didn't kill 10 million Africans, he killed a load of Jews and white Europeans.

Not that I'm condoning the conduct of King Leopold, but Hitler did at least 15 million people. Stalin killed even more than both of them, so the Belgian is relatively small fry.

So are you saying the life, or more rather the termination of life, of a European is more important then someone from Africa?

Sounds like you're saying "big deal, they are from Africa"

Nope, I'm saying this Belgian geezer didn't do what Hitler did, so why would anyone refer to him as Hitler?

The Nazis alone were responsible for killing over 15 million people, but basically the blood of every man, woman or child killed, injured or emotionally harmed during World war II is on Hitlers hands..... including those from Europe, African and Asian colonies, Australia and the USA.

There's only so much space in a curriculum for history and there have been many genocidal rulers of various empires since the dawn of time. Are you saying this one should be elevated above his place in the grand scheme of history just because his victims were brown?

Nothing about my posts suggest that.  But again, by your own post, it sounds like you think Leopold is a "small fry" because his victims and crimes were in Africa.

Nowhere in any of my posts does it suggest I think he's small fry because his crimes were in Africa. He doesn't appear in history curriculums because there have been genocidal rulers that did even worse things.

If you watch history documentaries you'll have heard of Leopold II. Elevating him in the history curriculum would only heighten his notoriety, which he'd probably quite like.

I think the part where you specifically point out that Hitler didn't kill Africans, he killed Europeans, and that Leopold's toll is estimated at only 10,000,000 as reasons why he is of little importance suggests otherwise.

Well I'm just as entitled to make speculative incinuations as you are, so when you assume my words indicate I view African lives as less significant as European lives when that isn't what I said. I'm going to assume your words indicate you view white lives as less significant as black lives when that isn't what you said.

I also pointed out that Hitlers victims included millions of Jews without distinguishing them from white Europeans and that Stalin was responsible for more deaths than both of them. Why didn't you seize on those pieces of information to incinuate something that wasn't there?

Where are we getting these 15 million people figures in europe?

Fair enough then, I guess I don't see it, but since you do, you will tell me what I've said in this thread leading you to speculate I value certain people over others please.  I can't see anything remotely suggesting what you insinuate.  You have an assumption, you should be able to clarify why it is you have said assumption.

I've only responded to your reaction to this piece, that being Leopold's acts are of little importance because he only was responsible for an estimated 10,000,000 African lives as opposed to Hitler and his estimated impact on Europeans or Stalin and his victims, those are you words.  Only 10,000,000 and African are why you claimed this guy was of little importance compared to others.  Or is there a different reasons you find the history trivial?  I thought that was a strange reason to basically say, "meh, big deal", that is how it comes off.  I don't necessarily think you mean that, you said you didn't, but you haven't done a great job distancing yourself from what is easily implied from your observation.

It sounded to me like you said an African life is less important than a European life also.

Haha, only in a democracy could I be expected to distance myself from a comment I didn't make.

The only comparison I made was in numbers. The Nazi party under Hitlers rule is estimated to have killed upwards of 16m citizens of various races in Europe, not inclusive of allied and german soldiers in WWII and residual casualties.

The figures are approaching twice that of Leopold II. Thats why Leopold doesn't get the same billing in your respective history classes and almost certainly rightfully so.

Again, where are we getting these figures for deaths in europe during WW2?

A collection of sources.

The mean is 15-16 million, 5.6-6.2 million jews, but the nazis didn't stop there. They were equal opportunities genocidal psycos

Theres no way to accurately quantify it, so i'm basing my figures around the middle of the estimates of various sources.

5 million Jews died in WW2? That is so wrong. These are "facts" from their own site-

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/jewpop.html

Historic Jewish Population-

1880
7,800,000

1900
10,600,000

1922
14,400,000

1925
14,800,000

1939
16,728,000

1945
11,000,000

1950
11,297,000

1955
11,800,000

1960
12,079,000

1970
12,585,000

1980
12,819,000

1990
12,868,000

2000
12,900,000

2010
13,428,300

2012
13,746,100

So in the 60 years before WW2 their population grew by 9 million people and since the end of WW2 it's only increased by 2.7 million?

Hitler didn't kill 15 million people. I was always taught in school it was about 8 or 9 million people.

I remember one of my teachers did a social experiment on the class. He gave us a situation in which our country has just been attacked and we had to pick between 3 leaders based on their words and plan of action. We didn't know who they were, just had to vote based off of what they said.

The entire class voted for the same person. Adolf Hitler. One jewish girl ran out of the class crying because I believe one of her relatives died in the holocaust.

How many people know that early on Hitler was heavily promoted by our own political establishment and was named Time magazines person of the year multiple times. The Nazi's also got funding from American banks and corporations. They don't usually teach you that in school either.

oggy420 wrote:

How many people know that early on Hitler was heavily promoted by our own political establishment and was named Time magazines person of the year multiple times. The Nazi's also got funding from American banks and corporations. They don't usually teach you that in school either.

They also don't teach you that Osama Bin Laden was funded by the Americans in the 80's.

The issue as to whether 6 million jews were killed by the Nazi's in europe has been a topic of debate for some time now. The biggest issues here with that theory are:
How did they manage to kill so many of them?
Where did all the bodies go? Six million people is alot of bodies to deal with.

freakzilla wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

How many people know that early on Hitler was heavily promoted by our own political establishment and was named Time magazines person of the year multiple times. The Nazi's also got funding from American banks and corporations. They don't usually teach you that in school either.

They also don't teach you that Osama Bin Laden was funded by the Americans in the 80's.

Osama Bin Laden is a bit too current for most of what young adults today learned in school. In fact alot of Desert Storm was never covered in My history/civics classes in school.

Ludo wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

How many people know that early on Hitler was heavily promoted by our own political establishment and was named Time magazines person of the year multiple times. The Nazi's also got funding from American banks and corporations. They don't usually teach you that in school either.

They also don't teach you that Osama Bin Laden was funded by the Americans in the 80's.

Osama Bin Laden is a bit too current for most of what young adults today learned in school. In fact alot of Desert Storm was never covered in My history/civics classes in school.

Oh ok thanks. I'm with you on the 6 million deaths though also.

IMO we remember hitler because he threatened the entire work
The holocaust was not even realized and understood until after the war
When you essentially seize all of Europe , Africa, invade Russia and position yourself
For a air war wit America, you get remembered .

Case In point is people like Pol Pot, Leopoldo , Stalin etc.
Stalin killed 50 million of his own people and had nukes pointed at America , he still doesn't even register anywhere close to hitler on the richter scale of evil imo.

Ludo wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

oggy420 wrote:

How many people know that early on Hitler was heavily promoted by our own political establishment and was named Time magazines person of the year multiple times. The Nazi's also got funding from American banks and corporations. They don't usually teach you that in school either.

They also don't teach you that Osama Bin Laden was funded by the Americans in the 80's.

Osama Bin Laden is a bit too current for most of what young adults today learned in school. In fact alot of Desert Storm was never covered in My history/civics classes in school.

Depleted uranium rounds
Look it up
There's a reason we don't talk about gulf war
We accidentally poisoned our own soldiers