Were there any other colonies/colonist who were cruel and exploitative similar to the Belgian Congo

Boers did nothing wrong. If America was allowed to secede from Britain and keep slavery than the Boers shouldve been allowed to get independence and their segregation.

Also the Boers had German, Dano-Norwegian, Huguenot, and Dutch heritage.

>Not too long ago (as in a DECADE ago) their government ran a pedophile ring.

And Britain still runs dozens, all run by pakis.

Quite simply, no. They were prety much just another European-style culture, just adapted for African life. I'd say it was one of the few white cultures fully capable of surviving in Africa and that boer and Afrikaans culture was irrevocable fucked up by the British annexation. A fiercely independant culture being annexed leads to a post-WW1 Germany tier loss of national pride, and the culture-wide fear of losing independence probably contributed to the severity of the whole apartheid ordeal. Certainly a period of segregation was inevitable, but I reckon the independant republics would have gotten over it quicker than South Africa did.

Leopold Congo was fucked up but it wasn't unusual.

Many of the powers that were shocked at what he did performed similar stuff in their own colonies with huge numbers.

Lol nope many are from other ethnicities across and many are Indigenous brits. Many people high up back then and now engaged in sexual abuse and kiddy fucking. Know one bothers to check the Uk's massive history of sex abuse or forget it disturbingly fast.

>It's nigger/muslim tier punishment.

Its pretty fucking retarded to have that mentality that only one group does it or that "we so special we don't unsavory stuff" *proceeds to descend into world war twice*

>Not too long ago (as in a DECADE ago) their government ran a pedophile ring
Implying...

I believe the Germans done some pretty bad stuff in Namibia, the French in Algeria and much of west Africa and Japan in Korea and Taiwan.

>French Algeria
>KZs ran by Germany who had some experience in it
>mass shootings to evacuate villages
>gassing Muslim soldiers with alcohol gas
>turbo right wing generals get rid of the republic and put Charles De Gaulles in power

Underrated.

Funny thing is that it wasn't even punishment. >troops stationed on rubber plantations to ensure the "workers" don't run away
>instead they just hunted the local wildlife while wasting massive amounts of bullets
>local colonial government got pissed and wanted to know what were they wasting them on
>troops pretended they killed "workers" who ran away
>local colonial government asked for proof in the form of hands
>troops started cutting hands left and right so they could keep hunting

Is this what they call the "banality of evil"?

German Namibia
Genocide is in their blood

French did nothing wrong they built hospitals, roards, schools, etc

It was the islamists who commited monstruous crimes.

French are so kind than even Malians want french to heklp them against the algerian islamists.

telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/mali/9794871/Mali-asks-for-help-from-France-as-Islamist-rebels-push-forward.html

kek
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_during_the_Algerian_War_of_Independence

>Wikipedia

Anybody can write all he want on this website, thus this isn't a valid argument.

And torture is something natural during a war, everybody use it.

>Implying...
Grow up. Pedowood is real.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Dutroux#Allegations_of_cover-up

>On the witness stand, Jean-Marc Connerotte (fr), the original judge of the case, broke down in tears when he described "the bullet-proof vehicles and armed guards needed to protect him against the shadowy figures determined to stop the full truth coming out.[14] Never before in Belgium has an investigating judge at the service of the king been subjected to such pressure. We were told by police that [murder] contracts had been taken out against the magistrates." Connerotte testified that the investigation was seriously hampered by protection of suspects by people in the government. "Rarely has so much energy been spent opposing an inquiry," he said. He believed that the Mafia had taken control of the case.[16]

There are countless examples of equal or worse cruelty throughout history all over the world, but few match it in scale.

One example I can think of is British India; about 10 million people died in the Bengal Famine of 1770, caused entirely by the British forcing Indians to produce opium to force on the Chinese instead of food. It's amazing how it's completely forgotten/ignored today.

I don't know how many people died in the Spanish Americas due to reasons other than disease (though there's no doubt the numbers were massive), but the killings, exploitation and enslavement of the natives was clearly on a massive enough scale that even the Spaniards themselves were disgusted by the actions of the colonists.

It don't know it if counts as a 'colony', but for an earlier example the Mongol rule of Iran and Iraq in the 13th century was marked not only by the initial massacres of the population and destruction of towns and cities, but also by another century of enormous exploitation of the populace who were subject to arbitrary taxation that crippled the economy, a collapse of agriculture as farmland was converted to pasturage and a total demographic collapse that Iran and especially Iraq never really recovered from.

>cruelty
>exploitativity
nice spooks

Since when were Jimmy Savile and Ian Watkins a Paki?

Prove that the article is wrong without using a site run by France ultranationalists

And then Europeans do it too. Nice logic.

I read that as
>implying they're not still doing it

>Le Belgian Congo was evil
This meme really needs to die. It was the private property of the king when these things happened, and therefore it wasn't Belgian.

Sorry, what country was he king of then?

>A single person does something bad and therefore the entire country is responsible
You need to be 18 to browse this site

Nobody's saying the peasants should be held accountable. But it saying the King of Belgium isn't Belgian is just stupid.

The United States?

Slavery there was pretty cruel and exploitative, no?

>missing the point entirely
Congo Free State!=Belgian Congo

Nah, it's played up for US political reasons but it was actually not bad at all by new world standards.

As for Spanish America as a Venezuelan I can give an example that is little known in most of the world. Around Margarita Island in the southern Caribbean, a beautiful tropical island that used to be a tourism/resort destination (before commies made it a living hell like now of course), the Spanish in the 16th century quickly discovered a vast abundance of pearls. They rounded up most of Venezuela's coastal native population (women and children too) and forced them to dive for pearls until their lungs literally burst, as in they would be diving all day and when they came up to breathe if they didn't have pearls they would be shot at or stabbed a bit until they went back down. Until they died and were left to float.
Within 30 years almost all of these coastal tribes were dead and only the Amazon natives remained.

Although I should add, the crown did take legal action against the colonists when they found out where all their pearls were coming from but it was too late for the natives. And this caused some colonists to chimp out over "muh autonomy" and rebel against Spain for a little while (a guy calling himself Aguirre the Tyrant).

>free food
>free housing
>have a rich person pay for everything you need
Some slaves lived better than some poor rural people.

Germany and Japan were both pretty fucking awful. There were multiple genocides between both of them. The Dutch also had their day in the Pacific. Honestly, the only colonial power that didn't just go around murdering the natives was Sweden.

>slavery
>American colonialism
Completely unrelated. If you were going to bring out the dark side of our colonial past, you'd point at the Philippines.

By the standards of cruelty set by other colonial powers at the (17th-18th-19th centuries) time in the Americas, such as the Spaniards or Portuguese, the American negro slaves were treated remarkably better, though that's not to say they were never subjected to undue cruelty and inhumane conditions.

Congo ruled by Belgians was very shitty even for a colony.

Came with a lot of huge cons.

Maybe, but it wasn't a slaughterfest as some want you to believe

They were cruel and exploitative but not in a similar way to Leopold's Congo. Leopold's Congo is exceptional.

This is an important bit with the difference of state sanctioned violence and violence due state's inability to project its laws.

Belgian Congo was like an edgy teenager's wet dream

I think you could cherrypick some examples from just about any colonial empire.

>literal genocides
>not on the same level as abused workers
Wut

And the House of Lords.

Well I thought were talking specifically about acts that was not motivated by wanting to exterminate a group of people but simply exploiting them cruelly. In which Belgians in Congo were exceptional because they were consistently and in a widespread way cruel for no reason at all, rather than just being dismissive or neglecting of native populations or wanting to outright murder them for "better of the state"

There's often little difference in motivation. Take the Herero genocide. Once the war was over, they just rounded them up and worked them to death in mines.

Again that's exploitative practices that's dismissive or neglecting. While Belgian Congo was cruel.

There is a difference between enjoying the suffering for the sake of suffering and being inconsiderate for others whether working them to death for profit or killing them because it will be better for you.

>Any Herero found within the German border,with or without a rifle, with or without cattle, is to be shot. I do not accept women or children either: drive them back to their people or shoot them
- General Lotha von Trotha

Yes, this is not cruel at all.

No one is saying Belgian Congo was worse than genocide but it was worse for the exploited workforce under neglect compared to other colonies.

Do you think say a battle between two armies Napoleonic war was more cruel than Belgian congo?

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congo_Free_State
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_Congo
Please learn the difference

>but it was worse for the exploited workforce under neglect compared to other colonies
But the Herero WERE an exploited workforce once the war ended. Not to mention German treatment of Tanganyikans.

>Do you think say a battle between two armies Napoleonic war was more cruel than Belgian congo
False equivalence.

Indeed but it had a lot of meme things about it like the birth place of HiV

Germans treated colonials worse, they genocided them, they also genocided Jews. You won't see me defending their atrocities.

What I am arguing is the difference between murder and cruelty for no reason at all than straight up murderous exploitation.

>False equivalence.

I didn't say it was equivelant the situation between Germans and Belgians but rather just because one side is killing and other side is dying it doesn't make it more cruel than from a situation where less people died overall.

French Congo was pretty bad.
they killed ~17,000 of them just to build a railroad that started a huge ass rebellion that forced France to sign International Labour Organisation Forced Labour Convention of 1930, No. 29 in 1946.

Leopold's Congo can be construed as exceptional but once you learn about other colony stuff it's kinda still horrible but not that huge of a discrepancy since Leopold got his death count through sheer numbers.

>OP asks if there were any colonies more cruel and exploitative
>you disagree with my statement
>then proceed to agree that it's exactly what the OP asked for
Fucking wew.

proofs?

>1660720
regular congo.

The Belgians are fucked up, this is a known fact. It's pretty much the only reason France hasn't annexed them after all this time, it'd be too embarassing to have them share the same flag.

The cruelty of the Belgian Congo is a prime example of British meme history.

Studying the source material of this era will reveal one thing: there isn't a lot of it. But somehow they manage to produce death tolls that run in the millions, while providing zero evidence that the Belgian administration had any interest in the destruction of these people. King Leopold 2 even created a commission to fight sleeping sickness, the prime killer in the Congo. If the likes of Adam Hochschild had the balls to tackle their own history they would be ridiculed by their own peers for their shitty history. They produce exotic tales of exagerrated cruelty for the sake of popularity.

The Congo was of course a cruel place, mostly because of a lack of management where capitalism could run wild. But no, the Belgians didn't run death camps or hunted Congolese for sport ffs.

This theory has been debunked.

Hell at least it wasn't as bad as modern African Slavery or rubber plantation work.

It was still extremely shit though, still was needlessly cruel and extremely exploitative. There's a reason why it can get played up, its because there's a lot to point at. Like America still fought a war over slavery (though its more economics than suggested in highschool)

Slavery and forced labour is still a thing in every continent. America has a ton of it in regards to migrant labour.

>Defending Leopold 2

Now I've seen everything.

He's right though. The death count is highly questionable to say the least

...

propaganda

Haiti

>Their masters poured burning wax on their arms and hands and shoulders, emptied the boiling cane sugar over their heads, burned them alive, roasted them on slow fires, filled them with gunpowder and blew them up with a match.
>The blowing up of a slave had its own name - "to burn a little powder in the arse of a nigger"
>Many slaves showed no emotions at all unless they were whipped.
>Suicide was a common habit, not for personal reasons, but to spite their owner.
- Black Jacobins

The Haitian colony was literal hell. Any French men that was not born in the colony wanted to get the fuck out of there as fast as possible after setting up their estates. Also of course the African slaves, and the Mulattoes who wanted to escape to France it was hell on earth for them too.

You people should take a look at Brazil's history with slaves. Darwin apparently was relatively "racist" in terms of IQ disparity between races, etc.. but when he went there he was so fucking ashamed of humanity he basically said that differences were irrelevant when it came to treating people worse than animals.

"On the 19th of August we finally left the shores of Brazil. I thank God, I shall never again visit a slave-country. To this day, if I hear a distant scream, it recalls with painful vividness my feelings, when passing a house near Pernambuco, I heard the most pitiable moans, and could not but suspect that some poor slave was being tortured, yet knew that I was as powerless as a child even to remonstrate. I suspected that these moans were from a tortured slave"

"have stayed in a house where a young household mulatto, daily and hourly, was reviled, beaten, and persecuted enough to break the spirit of the lowest animal. I have seen a little boy, six or seven years old, struck thrice with a horse-whip (before I could interfere) on his naked head, for having handed me a glass of water not quite clean; I saw his father tremble at a mere glance from his master's eye."

He recounts a lot of shit.