King Leopold II

>>2645941
Yes, he's actually largely remembered as "the builder king" due to his public works projects.

Likewise, in the Congo they remember him for ending "Arab Slavery" (probably not actual Arabs, but rather various Muslim Africans).

It's only Western SJWs who remember him so negatively.

>>2645960
Oh wow. I had assumed that other European powers had ended the slave trade in Africa prior to him. That's a pretty good thing then.

What do you mean by the builder king? Were these the projects he sponsored in Belgium or did he also do these in the Congo?

>>2646000

He didn't end the slave trade, he enslaved the locals himself.

>>2646058
Locals enslaved locals.

>>2646062
>hurr durr

Oh you mean the king didn't personally go there and singlehandedly abduct people himself? What a great insight! wtf I love Leo now

>>2645941
Congolese violated the NAP.

>>2645960
Regardless of how anyone remembers him Leopolds regime in the Congo was inhumane and a catastrophe. That being said I think it was much less Leopold saying "I want 5 million African hands" and much more about getting whatever profit you could while he could.

>>2645960

fun fact: Mussolini justified his invasion of Ethiopia under the moral crusade of ending slavery in that country.

>>2646058
So then he's equal with the Congolese?

>>2646195
Well if you're going to use that shitty of an argument, you might as well say Lincoln and Mussolini were moral equals.

In fact, you could say that Mussolini was morally superior to Lincoln, since Lincoln's primary qualm with slavery was its expansion, hence why he rejected the Crittenden Compromise.

>>2646207

>stating a "fun fact" is a shitty argument because it challenges your childish "bad guys and good guys" cookie cutter leftist world view.

reminder that westerns didnt start slavery, but ended it.

Not really. Shit tier King.

>>2646081
No I mean it was literally other Blacks who enslaved Blacks in the Congo.

>>2646239

Youre derailing the subject matter. Sure we could go in depth discussion of tutsi and hutu relations aswell, but thats not really what OP asked.

>>2646215
>westerners didn't start slavery, but ended it

yeah I'm aware and I'm not a leftist. I thought >>2646195 was trying to argue against that and say that the abolition of slavery was just "weapons of mass destruction" of the 19th/20th century.

>>2646247
>Facts derail the subject matter
Its relevant when discussing the actual implications of the rule of Leopold II.

>>2646239
>>2646247
OP here. I mean, that kinda does answer my question. I thought that slavery in the Congo was mostly over and that other Western empires had already eradicated slavery in the continent of Africa, since Belgium was so late to the colonization game.

What I was basically asking for is if there were any net positives from Leopold's conquest. He might've treated people horribly and killed tens of millions, don't get me wrong, but it's not like the Congo was a bunch of noble savages the way that they're often portrayed.

>>2646259
no, he didn't really build anything lasting in congo
all the benefits from his rule were directly centered in belgium
that said the later belgian colonization of congo DID have its positive sides to the point that the majority of public buildings in congo to this day are belgian in origin

>>2645941
>Is there any way to defend the imperialism of King Leopold II?
Sure, mostly that he had fuck all to do with what went on there. He told his people to make him his money and they did - mostly by emulating the natives, but with the advantage of western technology and two standard deviations of IQ.

>Did he do anything even remotely defendable like build infrastructure or educate the populace?
Not really those particular things, no.

>Was there any net economic benefit to the Congo from his actions?
The government of Belgium took over from him and made it into what was more-or-less a first world country in the span of one generation.

>>2646251

I was just bringing up the Mussolini thing to show how long Africa had slavery, up until the modern era.

>>2646239

Why is it so important to you what race Leo's mercenaries and slavers were? How does that make any difference?

>well, I'm a prisoner of the Belgian king and i'm being worked to death, but at least the guy chopping my hand off is black!

Congo free state is not the Belgium Congo retards. Why even bother teaching this shit in school if they are going to teach it wrong

File: le psychiatrist face.jpg (89KB, 794x608px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 794x608px

>muh six million hands

>>2645941
>imperialism

Congo was basically his personal property, nothing to do with the Belgian state or any Belgian imperialism.

The state of Belgium later took possession of Congo, and that's when it became a colony and a lot of development took place (education, infrastructure, aid, etc.)

>>2646393
>more or less a first world country in the span of one generation
>5th lowest per capita GDP Today

What the fuck happened?

>>2647036
Democracy. The Belgians ruled with an iron fist gloved in velvet and shut down all of the tribal bullshit, cannibalism, etc. but once they were pressured into allowing the blacks to vote all of that social discord came roaring back and the country self-immolated.

>>2646058
they weren't slaves, they were just giving the belgians a hand

>>2645960
But then enslaved the Congolese

>>2646215
There's ways around using slavery quite easily. Indentured labour, forced labour, debt slavery, wage slavery and the best part is you don't have to care for the guys upkeep and well being and the costs associated with that.

>>2647324
>The Belgians ruled with an iron fist gloved in velvet and shut down all of the tribal bullshit,

The Belgians didn't shut it down they just manipulated it for for their own gain. Have you never realized that a large amount of soldiers don't serve in the area that they live in?

>>2646393
>The government of Belgium took over from him and made it into what was more-or-less a first world country in the span of one generation.

Not at all. It was never first world in any stretch of the imagination what function source did you get that from?

>>2646696

> a lot of development took place (education, infrastructure, aid, etc.)

Extremely limited and low quality though in most cases

>>2645941
>did he do anything defendable?
he killed millions of niggers anon

>>2645941
Who honestly gives a shit about the Congo?

It's produced one good book and apart from that it's just a big open-air mine/plantation. The best thing Belgium ever did for it was to allow it to actually contribute to the rest of humanity in the form of giving rubber.

>>2647939
>Who honestly gives a shit about the Congo?

Pretty cool history