Title: King Leopold's Ghost: A story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa
Author: Adam Hochschild
Genre: non-fiction, African history, colonialism, racism
**This review is adapted from a reflection essay for my Modern World Civilization class**
Before reading this book, I knew that Africa had been politically
“carved up” between various European powers without any input from Africans and
I knew that the Belgians had colonized the Congo but I had never read or
learned about the details of Belgian colonization until now. After reading this
book, I think the Belgian regime can be summed up in two words: greed and
brutality. The Belgians were in Africa due to the restlessness and greed of
King Leopold II. His ambition and restlessness affected his personal life (his
wife and daughters despised him; Leopold disowned his daughters), he constantly
defrauded the Belgian government to raise money for his insatiable desire for
land and empire, and his race-based, Euro-centric regime killed and maimed
millions of Congolese. After thirty-eight years on this Earth I am aware that
humans have been cruel to each other since the beginning of recorded history,
yet I am always horrified to find out how that cruelty is manifested.
Hochschild uses the phrases “African cake” or “cake of
Africa” many times throughout this book, a sentiment first expressed by King
Leopold to one of his staff members (Hochschild 1998:58). This phrase confirms
the European attitude towards African and its inhabitants: an object or thing
to be devoured or consumed instead of a continent that was (and is) home to
millions of human beings. After Britain abolished slavery in the early 1800s,
the British empire focused on abolishing slavery in other parts of the
non-European, non-Christian world as well: “Righteous denunciations poured down
on a distant, weak, and safely nonwhite target: the so-called Arab
slave-traders raiding Africa from the east” (28). Africa became an object of
desire in the Victorian era since “these were the years when, to the distress
of many young male Europeans, Europe was at peace. For a young man looking for
a battle…the Congo was the place to go. For a white man, the Congo was also a
place to get rich and wield power” (136). When it was confirmed that Africa
could provide the raw materials needed to fulfill increased manufacturing and
consumer demand during the Industrial Revolution, (27) Africa’s fate was
doomed. Once Europeans reached Africa they viewed Africans as lazy (68) yet
forced them to do hard labor that benefited European interests: “To Europeans,
Africans were inferior beings: lazy, uncivilized, little better than animals.
In fact, the most common way they were put to work was like animals, as beasts
of burden” (121). Thanks to this inhumane treatment and racist mindset,
thousands of African men died from the intense physical labor, meager food
rations, and disease.
Victorian-era explorers, soldiers, and businessmen
cloaked their racism under the banner of guns and glory; unfortunately, some
missionaries also hid their racist biases under the guise of humanitarianism or
a spiritual call to serve. British Protestant missionaries were originally sent
to Africa to help Africans improve their quality of life (according to European
quality of life standards) (211). This goodwill eventually morphed into the
belief “that improving the lot of downtrodden people everywhere was good for
business” (212). Sometimes missionary zeal developed and colluded with
something more sinister: Leopold planned for military, religious, and
vocational schools to be set up for African children (133). The military
schools were filled with children whose orphan status was in doubt- these
schools were run by Catholic missionaries loyal to King Leopold who rewarded
their loyalty through financial means. Like the male adults, African children often
died of disease or starvation on their way to the orphanage or soon after their
arrival.
The Belgians maintained control of the Congolese through
firepower and the much-feared chicotte
which was a “whip of raw, sun-dried hippopotamus hide cut into a long,
sharp-edge corkscrew strip” (120). Lashes from the chicotte were unleashed on a victim’s bare buttocks while the
victim was tied to two poles laying on the ground during the administration of
his punishment. To add salt to the wound, “the bulk of the chicotte blows were inflicted by Africans on the bodies of other
Africans” (122). This allowed the Belgians to physically and psychologically
separate themselves from the dirty work of administration and “created a class
of foremen from among the conquered” (122) and probably soured relations
between Africans.
Other terror tactics included alliances with certain
ethnic groups (which did not protect them from later enslavement by the
Belgians), the lack of promotional opportunities for black soldiers (who were
mostly conscripted), and state-sanctioned kidnapping. In a cruel twist of
irony, Hochschild points out that “white officers who bargained with village
chiefs to acquire ‘volunteer’ soldiers and porters were sometimes dealing with
the same sources that had supplied the east coast Afro-Arab slave-traders”
(130). During the natural rubber boom of the 1890s, male laborers were forced
to meet rubber-harvesting quotas. To prevent rebellion and runaways, the
Belgians would loot a village of all its foodstuffs and food sources and then
kidnap the village women until the required rubber quota was met (161).
Rubber-harvesting areas were also controlled through the issuance and denial of
travel permits for Africans (similar to the travel permissions in the antebellum
South). Males were required to wear a metal disk around their necks that noted
the status of their rubber quota (163). Sometimes rebellious Africans were shot
on sight by the colonial police force (the Force Publique) but this practice
was frowned on by the officers who wanted proof that bullets had been used in
military skirmishes, not in recreational hunting (165). The proof soldiers
brought back was the right hand of dead Africans (165). Like all unofficial
policies, this was not enforced, and soldiers amputated hands from living
Africans to cover up personal use of ammunition.
The
atrocities in the Congo were finally exposed through the words and evidence
provided by three whistleblowers: Edmund Dene Morel, William Sheppard, and
George Washington Williams. Williams was an African American Civil War veteran,
pastor, journalist, and lawyer. He was no stranger to controversy- while in the
States he often spoke out against post-Civil War violence against blacks. The
purpose of Williams’ trip to the Congo was to scope out work opportunities for
African Americans: “In Africa, surely, there would be the chance for pioneering
and advancement then denied blacks in the United States” (105). Williams’
idealistic vision of opportunity was quickly dashed by the horrors he
personally witnessed. Williams used his outrage to publish a pamphlet exposing
King Leopold’s regime to the world. Williams’ Open Letter “was the first comprehensive, systematic indictment of
Leopold’s colonial regime” (109). Williams accused the Belgian regime of fraud,
widespread death and destruction, excessive cruelty, starvation, kidnapping,
slavery and other “crimes against humanity” (112). The Belgian government
issued a rebuttal against these accusations while Belgian newspapers defended Williams.
Williams died soon after his exposé which allowed the Belgian government to
save face.
Edmund
Dene Morel was a clerk for the Elder Dempster shipping company which held a
lucrative and exclusive monopoly on all shipping between Antwerp and the Congo.
Morel was tasked with supervising the shipping between Liverpool and Antwerp
and he soon realized that his reports submitted to the Belgian government did
not match up with the trade statistics released to the public. Upon further
investigation he discovered that weapons were being secretly shipped to the
Congo, someone was making a huge profit (King Leopold), and African workers
were not being paid for their labor: “From what he saw at the wharf in Antwerp
and from studying his company’s records in Liverpool, he deduced the
existence-on another continent, thousands of miles away-of slavery” (180).
Morel quit his job at Elder Dempster to focus on exposing Leopold’s lies full
time; Morel created and edited the weekly journal, The West African Mail. Thanks to his extensive research and fact
checking, documents and photographs were smuggled to him by missionaries and
others within the Congo (190). The photographs were the most important pieces
of evidence against King Leopold for they “provided evidence that no propaganda
could refute” (215).
William
Sheppard was an African American, Presbyterian missionary who brought joy to
everyone he met in Africa. Hochschild notes that Sheppard grew in
self-confidence while in Africa once he was away from the chafing restrictions
of American society and the Southern Presbyterian denomination. His outlook as
a marginalized American allowed “his writings [to] show an empathetic,
respectful curiosity about African customs” (156). His demeanor, curiosity, and
language skills allowed him to meet with the Kuba, one of the last African
kingdoms, unharmed. Unfortunately, not all of his discoveries and adventures
were pleasant- he discovered the policy of severed hands mentioned above and
published his findings in numerous missionary magazines upon his return to the
United States. His reports along with the photographic evidence submitted to
Morel was the beginning of Leopold’s downfall in the public eye.
I
think the truth of the Congo was able to stay secret for so long was due to
multiple factors: Leopold put a humanitarian spin on his conquest and
colonization of the Congo and very few people seemed to question his real
motives. After Leopold’s death, his real motives were revealed through his
convoluted accounting system which took years to uncover (276). Most Europeans
didn’t think anything was wrong with their treatment of the Africans; Europeans
believed themselves to be a superior race and civilization. When Leopold did
set up investigative committees, these committees were mostly a PR move to
maintain his humanitarian image. Committee members were usually appointed by
the king and they had personal and financial interests in the activities and
future of the Congo. When investigative committees did release reports
criticizing the king, the reports were never released to the public or they
were rewritten in a more favorable light.
Hochschild
also points out that the humanitarians that were outraged at the atrocities
found in the Congo often turned a blind eye to atrocities committed by their
own countries or political allies, “…it was a safe target. Outrage over the
Congo did not involve British or American misdeeds, nor did it entail the
diplomatic, trade, or military consequences of taking on a major power” (282). “The Dark Continent” as Africa was called,
was not only an allusion to African skin color but was also a euphemism in the
eighteenth century about the unexplored portions of the continent. The Dark
Continent is also a metaphor for the dark deeds perpetrated by various European
regimes over the past four centuries- deeds based on greed and the thirst for
land, resources, and power.
****************************************************************
During our class discussion
of this book, the professor asked us, “How would you describe this book in one sentence?”
As you can see from my above review it would be very difficult to describe the
events recounted in King Leopold’s Ghost
in once sentence. Well, one of my classmates responded with this succinct statement:
“King Leopold was a douchebag!” In all seriousness though, the class was
shocked that the world (outside of the Congo) knows little to nothing about
this “forgotten holocaust.”
No comments:
Post a Comment