King Leopold's Soliloquoy

120 years ago, the Belgian King Leopold II wanted a share of the colonial feast happening across Africa.

At the Berlin Conference (colonial time’s equivalent of the G7 conference) where the Powers conducted ‘orderly’ distribution of rights to the various lands, the British (the superpower of that time) and Americans, against Germany’s protest, ‘gave’ Leopold the right to a piece of land 4 times the size of Germany around the Congo Basin.

The Germans and other European powers were obviously unhappy that their small time neighbour got more than them, to say the least. Leopold being a nephew of Victoria was an obvious consideration.

The British got around the German’s protest on the basis that the area previously occupied mainly by British colonists and under the dominion of an ‘association’ led by Leopold was a ‘de facto state under international law at that time’. Its formation therefore did not need recognition from other states.

The legal argument was for convenience of course. The others did not give in to that but Britain’s sheer power. Sounds like Iraq in the 21st century?

And to keep the French quiet, Leopold signed a treaty to give France ‘first right of preference’ to that property in event the ‘association alienated the natives’.

Leopold gave his ‘fiefdom’ a nice sounding name of Congo Free State, and publicly declared his mission was to free its people from slavery and promote free trade.

The reality as history recorded was of course somewhat different. There were riches to be extracted from Congo the same way it was from the other colonies, and the colonists were never accepted by the natives (otherwise known as insurgents and terrorists in the 21st century).

To ‘run’ the new state Leopold reportedly made use of British and African mercenaries (21st century Bushite term is 'security contractors') the most famous of which included one called Stanley (where Stanley Falls got its name) and another called Rhodes (where old Rhodesia, present day Zimbabwe, got its).

In the 25 years that ‘Congo Free State’ existed, 5 to 15 million out of the 11 to 30 million of the natives were killed – I guess the natives are not quite important enough for them to bother to account accurately (the population of present Belgium is 10 million).

Apparently (only if you believe this), this was not public knowledge for that long (by the way to present day fools, that period is 120 years) because the atrocities were not reported in the press because King Leopold reportedly ‘bought’ them off (i.e. paid them to keep quiet).

As the story went, the world only knew about Leopold’s big lie when a clerk working for a trading firm named Morel noticed that ship manifests from the ‘free state’ had goods going only one way i.e. goods like rubber, ivory and precious materials were shipped in large quantities to Europe but nothing flowed back (so much about free trade).

Some reports had it that Morel was backed by certain Liverpool traders that were left out of the lucrative trades and therefore wanted to spoil it. Hah, greed can save the world...

In his fight to gather public support for his mission to ‘expose’ Leopold’s lie, Morel asked Mark Twain for support resulting in the work known as King Leopold’s Soliloquy. Mark Twain was then already a renowned anti-imperialist fighting among others the US colonization of Philippines (only the first US colonial occupation outside the Americas).

For some reason, this work was refused publication by his publisher (you can try guessing why).
The beginning of Mark Twain’s work had Leopold holding to his Bible pronouncing his great holy endeavor of ‘saving’ the Congolese.

The inspiration for that was probably drawn from Leopold’s speech at the Berlin Conference where he said that the setup of the new state was “for the propagation of civilisation among the peoples of the Congo region by means of scientific exploration, legal trade and war against the 'Arabic' slave traders…To open to civilisation the only part of our globe which it has not yet penetrated, to pierce the darkness which hangs over entire peoples, is, I dare say, a crusade worthy of this century of progress."

So it seems that every century or so a new set of Leopold-like idiots would think they are the chosen ones out on a crusade. My 21st century name for them is Bush-like idiots - different name, same regenerate idiots.

Now, if we change a few names, actors and terms/notions here and there, the above story will be not unlike what is happening in places like Iraq today.

The powerful will occupy someone else’s land using notions like freedom, free trade and democracy, but in reality does it with the intent to extract its riches. Any opposition to that are labeled anything pest-like from insurgents to terrorists, and brushed aside by sheer force applied with the help of both mercenaries and colluding locals.

At the same time the seemingly noble notions that are their fronts are hyped up by so-called free press and publishers in the hope that they can convince enough foolhardy ones amongst and beyond them of the greatness of their endeavors for them to get away with it as long as they can.

In this way, an entire people or group of people and nations (like the present day Allies in Iraq) end up sharing the stolen riches brought home to a 'thieves paradise' they sometimes like to think is the result of the greatness of either their intellect, or system of government or belief.

The result of such a way of living is at best the hanging out of a few scapegoats as self-repentance once internal or external revulsion from the truth and sheer atrocity of their acts become all too obvious to hide. Llike poor Leopold who was blamed for the whole Congo Free State thing when in fact many like the British, French and of course Belgians were also key beneficiaries.

At worst, it results in disastrous wars with those powerful enough to fight them face to face for a share of the same riches as in the great wars of the last century – for many present day fools Germany not getting their ‘fair’ share in places like Congo is not a reason for those wars, it was merely evil Hitler-likes.

But, as always, it is the small guys that suffer most like the proverbial ants among fighting elephants.

It is they whose livelihood will be taken away and who will have to fight with whatever means at their disposal. To the ‘Powers’ they are like ants to the elephants – mere pests whose various other similar pest-like names (terrorists, insurgents etc.) are but convenient labels for the excuse to terminate them large scale without qualms, and whose deaths in the millions can be conveniently consigned to some corners of history where the fools of the world don’t venture.