The nature of colonial rule in the Congo was that of brute force, greed, and a lust for power. The scramble for Africa was one that was headed by the Europeans with small as well as larger countries owning colonies in Africa. The Europeans saw great opportunities for colonization and with the idea of colonization came power as well as wealth. For King Leopold II of Belgium, running an Empire was everything he had wanted since he was young. Adam Hochschild, the author of “King Leopold’s Ghost,” writes that it may have been Leopold’s lack of parenting that made his lust for power and wealth so drastic.1 With failed attempts to buy the Philippines and other land masses from other European countries, Leopold saw his only hope for his dream of an Empire in Africa. Leopold “had learned from his many attempts to buy a colony that none was for sale; he would have to conquer it.”2 He wanted a colony because he too wanted to gain profit from the natural resources the land would provide as he saw in France’s success with Northern Africa and England’s success with South Africa. Explorers talked of Africa as if it had no inhabitants and was just “waiting to be filled by the cities and railway lines constructed through the magic of European industry.”3 With Henry Stanley’s expedition and research of “empty” Africa, Leopold saw an opportunity to create an Empire. He acted as a philanthropist in public with only a few of his closest people knowing about his true plans to colonize parts of
King Leopold II developed his dream for colonization at an early age. Before he even took the throne he was on the lookout for unconquered land that could later be in his possession. The king wanted to become rich as a result of his new land through the process of trading. Once King Leopold II set his sights on the Congo, he would not give up until the land was his. He connived, manipulated and conned his way into the land. He did not care who got hurt; he just wanted his dream to be fulfilled.
During the 1600-1700s, a typical colonial planter felt there were problems with equality under the the British government, while they simultaneously disregarded the views of slaves and indentured servants, and American Indians. Colonial planters felt exploited by the British government. The document, “The Propriety of Colonial Subordination, a British View, 1726”, stated how Britain strongly condemned the “English plantations in America” in their defiance to the Crown. In 1764, the British enforced the Currency Act taking colonial currency out of circulation as a way to stronger enforce mercantilism. This angered the planters because they feared an increase of taxes and that they would not be able to pay their loans without paper money. Colonists were
European powers began to take over territories throughout the continent of Africa during the 19th century. Historian Adam Hochschild’s depiction of King Leopold of Belgium was written in 1998 and titled, King Leopold’s Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa. Hochschild talked extensively about the greed for money and slavery resulting in the genocide of the Congo and the protests of humanitarians that followed the King’s exploitation of Africans. In his thesis, the author stated that “[t]his is the story of that movement, of the savage crime that was its target, of the long period of exploration and conquest that preceded it, and of the way the world has forgotten one of the great mass killings of recent history.”
The rule of King Leopold II instilled disturbing methods of ruling. He enslaved the people of The democratic republic of Congo (Congolese) to gather him resources that would only benefit him. He was willing to do whatever it took to gain resources, even if it meant enslaving the people. “ King Leopold II nearly enslaved many of the Congolese people in order to gain wealth, and to bring power” (Citation) imperialism had a negative impact on the country, it had a long lasting impacts on the country because he depleted them of their resources which means they don't have much to export as a country now. King Leopold II used the people as slaves to gather their resources due to the danger of the work, which resulted in many casualties and injuries. He wanted to rule the country as he wanted rather than what was right for the people. He lied to the Belgian government in order to gain power of the country, by saying that his
In the first part of Hochschild’s book, he describes the actions and desires that led King Leopold to seize the Congo Free State, the rules he broke and how he manipulated the nations with his righteousness of combating slavery- even though figured such as George Williams and ____ began speaking out against him. Hochschild describes King Leopold II as rude, revolting and awkward as he was growing up. His characteristics only began to drift towards persuasive and cunning when he discovered his curiosity in the colonization of new land. Conveniently, many European countries had no interest in colonization. When Leopold gained power, and searched for his lovely colony, their ambivalence resulted in him creating a colony on his own account.
During King Leopold’s time he was scrambling for a way to create wealth, but could not dabble in the trade of Africans because of new abolition laws, then he got lucky. In the Berlin Conference held by Otto Von Bismarck, Africa was divided like a cake; pieces were given to European countries. While they had decided that they were “respecting” human rights, it was also believed that Africans needed to be governed. Through this Leopold gained the territory of the Congo, marking the beginning of colonialism, an era of unequal wealth and poverty.
During the late 19th to early 20th century, King Leopold II impacted the African Continent and the larger International community more than any other European monarch. Firstly, King Leopold II sinisterly orchestrated a colonization operation that is comparative to a genocidal regime. Secondly, King Leopold II’s actions in the Congo led unified condemnation across oceans from a broad range of socioeconomic statues. Lastly, the opposition forces against King Leopold II’s colonization of Congo helped pave the way for future justice on the continent as well as internationally. Ultimately, this Europe created the competitive environment that promoted King Leopold II’s quest for colonization.
Admitted in the Memoir of Ndansi Kumalo, “Well, the white men have brought us some good things. For a start, they brought us European implements - plows; we can buy European clothes, which are an advance. The government has arranged for education and through that, when our children grow up, they may rise in status.” The Europeans admittedly brought many great things to the Natives of the countries they conquered; better technology, education, and overall help were given to the natives. In the beginning, Europeans tried as much as they could to prop up the natives to a better, civilised stature. However, as their power and grasp on the region increased, as did their greed. According to Richard Harding Davis in Leopold, The Janitor from the Congo and the Coasts of Africa, “The Charges brought against Leopold II, as King of the Congo, are three: (1) That he has made slaves of the twenty million blacks he promised to protect. (2) That, in spite of his promise to keep the Congo open to trade, he has closed it to all nations. (3) That the revenues of the country and all of its trade has retained to himself.” Such imperialism allowed far away kings to exploit their populaces of Native Africans as if they were just toys to the crown. Leaders would force their powerless and technologically underdeveloped subjects into fruitless
King Leopold II ruled the Congo from 1885 to 1908. “He ruled the Congo less as a colony but more as his own personal priority. He treated the native Congolese nearly as slaves and used the wealth of the Congo to grow his own personal wealth.” (http://drcimperialism.weebly.com/life-under-imperialist-power.html). Under his rule the people of the Congo were treated horribly. The Congolese experienced a humanitarian disaster consisting of enslavement, exploitation, and even extermination. Moreover, by the end of this era it was estimated that the population was cut in half. “Eventually international outrage forced Leopold to turn over his personal colony to the Belgian government.” (Esler 572) Nonetheless, during the years of Leopold’s rule imperialism thrived.
The beginning of colonial life started off with great living conditions. There was a lack of disease and good amount of clean drinking. These new conditions for the colonist added a few years to the life expectancies. Because of the new great life spans of the colonist, the growth of New England was at an all-time high.
He uses different perspectives to convey the different moments throughout the book, albeit some are biased toward the European imperialism (opposing Hochschild’s thesis). The diverse reference points throughout the story make for an effective support for Hochschild’s argument because he cross-applies these sources and justifies why one may be more reliable to use. Hochschild even uses the evidence which appears to controvert his thesis to give an explanation for why the imperialism occurred in the first place. He quotes Leopold when the Belgian king was still looking to receive the Congo, reciting “We… wishing to secure for Our beloved fatherland the fruits of the work which, for many long years… have been pursuing on the African continent… declare by these presents, to bequeath and transmit… all Our sovereign rights over [the Congo Free State]” (Hochschild 95). Hochschild then writes, “There was one added twist. When the king made public his will, it was backdated, so that his bequest looked like an act of generosity instead of part of a financial bargain” (Hochschild 95). By exposing Leopold’s actions, Hochschild convincingly allows the reader to understand the moral flaws in Leopold’s imperialism. Additionally, Hochschild backs up these claims with eyewitness accounts of the Congolese peoples who had suffered. One report explains the natives hatred for one general,
Have you ever heard of “The Star of David?” The Star of David is a widely recognized symbol of Judaism, named after King David of ancient Israel, which consists of two interlocking equilateral triangles. According to legend, the Star of David may have originated from the Shield of David. It may also have evolved from the mysterious Seal of Solomon (five-pointed star) that was used in the ancient world as a talisman. However, the star's pedigree as a common Jewish symbol did not become widespread until the late Middle Ages. Since that time, it has become one of the defining symbols of Judaism along with the more ancient symbol of the Menorah. The star has been used to adorn the cover of the Torah, and it is found on Jewish synagogues
Once Léopold and Stanley came together to discuss their ideas of imperialism in the Congo, Leopold decided they needed some way to seize the land to make it his. Leopold sent Stanley down to the land, and discussed a written agreement which explained how Leopold would take over the land to prevent the Arabs from abducting the congolese as slaves. The Congolese could not understand very well, as their main language was French, but nevertheless agreed to the compliance (AWPHRocklin Belgian Congo. Web). Leopold then went on to controlling the land and forced the congolese to do
Question: Please describe and explain the Sufi interpretation of Islam. What are the doctrines of this belief . Please offer your evaluation.
The book of Deuteronomy is the fifth book of the Christian and Jewish Bible and the final book of the Pentateuch. Deuteronomy 5: 1-21 begins with Moses summoning all of Israel and declaring the Ten Commandments to the people of the land. The analysis of historical context, literary techniques and the reader’s response to this passage, empowers the readers to appreciate the purpose of the passage.