Why isn't Leopold II more well known...

Why isn't Leopold II more well known, people know Pol Pot better then Leopold despite Leopold probably being responsible for more deaths then him.

Because Leopold's existence doesn't fit in the easy narratives like
>oriental barbarism
>communism is evil

He was west european and had no grand ideology behind him, he was simply greedy and indifferent and did what everyone else was doing in Africa but without any pretenses. And worse, it was only possible because european powers handed Congo to him. It's something that cannot be conveniently explained away.

>people know Pol Pot better then Leopold
Citation needed.

...

...Niggar pls.

Pol Pot had some fame because 'Nam and shit.

Leopold was pretty well known in the early 20th century. And communists who want a response to accusations of communist mass crimes always remember him too.

Like you.

Considering pol pot was active through the 1970s it makes sense more information would be available on him with a google search.

it makes sense that people remember someone more recent in history, with people still alive today that were there to remember the regime of the man, rather then someone who died before WWI

more gooks than waffles

This is a white genocide

Cambodia is still full of mines and other explosives, so you can pretty much expect losing a limb or two as a result of wandering away from established routes
On the other hand, you can live in belgium without the fear of your limbs being chopped off, like in belgian congo

His generiosity has been overshadowed by ridiculous claism like the one you are making. He is not similar to Pol Pot at all, and he never intentionally killed anyone in the Congo free state. Vile adminstrators and other bureucrats fucked Congo up, Leopold was a good man.

Yeah, he did nothing wrong.

This. OP is a retard.

>Vile adminstrators and other bureucrats fucked Congo up
Correct
> Leopold was a good man
Let's not get carried away

>Intentionally

Well.. He didn't really do it with the aim of killing people. But he had no regard whatsoever for human rights. Death by exhaustion was just a side effect to that disregard.

Leopold II was a very bad man, but very good at what he did.

Pol Pot did not intended mass murder as well, all he wanted to do was to create a communist utopia.

Yeah, he did intentionally kill off everyone who wasn't a peasant.

>But he had no regard whatsoever for human rights.
A non-existent meme that no one had a concept of more than 60 years ago.

The first human rights movement was raised internationally, to stop Leopolds cruel treatment of the natives.

If it didn't already exist, Leopold made it popular just by being such a massive asshole.

He didn't, it was vile adminstrators and other bureucrats who did it

Leopold II was literally the all encompassing owner of the Congo free state, and as a result, is to blame for what his administrators did. That's how it works.

I ain't sure why this guy doesn't get more attention. Maybe it's because people don't really talk much about colonial activities in Africa (at least not in America, but that may be because of the standard of "education" here). Also, you'd be surprised how many people haven't even heard of Pol Pot.

>Leopold is the communist equivalent of neo-nazis talking about Dresden to distract from the Holocaust

People obviously cared enough about humans to abolish slavery and promote the 40-hour workweek by then. Don't act like it was all a wash and everyone was equally bad, because you know that's not true.

Leopold was a good leader
>fights tooth and nail for years to get a colony for Belgium
>ends up acquiring land over 50x the size of the metropole, greatly enriching his country

A true belgian hero

He was a great leader, just a very bad person.

A bad man who was great at beign a man.

He's white and killed Africans

Congo wasn't a Belgian colony. It was literally the personal property of the Belgian king. The Belgian state had no right on the territory.

That was during his life. When he died it went to the Belgian state

he enriched himself (and his whore) and shamed his nation even in contrast to other colonial powers

and the belgian state stopped cutting hands off

Leopold II's handling of the Congo has its own paragraph or two in general world history chapters on European colonialism in Africa

you accept that obongo should be impeached for funding and creating ISIS, and the syrian and libyan instability then

Leopold II spread western civilization and culture to the Congo. Rather imperfectly, anyone would agree, but still. Pol Pot just killed people and called it communism.

can you live in Congo without the fear of your limbs being chopped off?

if you avoid nogs yeah

How can you collect rubber without hands? Isn't that kind of inefficient? Why didn't they just spank them or something.

how to avoid them in Congo?

yeah, Congo is great nowadays

That's a conspiracy theory, not a fact.

That can be attributed to lack of security in Africa which is in large part due to hasty decolonization.

If you want to blame evil whitey your argument would be stronger by pointing out colonials just wanted to leave and didn't pay back their debt by supporting the fledgling new states and helping them kill commies.

put em in the ocean

ebin shitpost

it was a pretty big deal at the time but then ww1 started and the media made belgium into an innocent little butterfly that dindu nuffin

The lives he took had little values racially speaking

...