Belgian Congo

Leopold. The Belgian state had nothing to do with it

Draconian laws never work. Belgian was in the wrong.

*Belgium. but based on what the user above me said maybe more specifically Leopold.

t. Tyrone McNigger

Natives, all that they had to do was to harvest that rubber but no, they couldn't do that properly and had to resist so Leopold had to go and de-arm the situation.

I'm sure Veeky Forums find a reason to blame the British for this one.

Last time we had this discussion (or at least the last time I did) the consensus was that the Belgian Congo was bad but not nearly as horrible as the anarcho-capitalist paradise known as the Congo Free State, which King Leopold II ruled as a state-sized piece of private property
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atrocities_in_the_Congo_Free_State
>why wouldn't they be grateful for having their hand hacked off by a mercenary because father/husband didn't meet his monthly rubber quota?

Belgian state was also pretty shit too. Just upped the standards to just barely enough to ward off peering eyes.

Given that Brits are either directly or indirectly responsible for about 95% of the current shittiness of the world you can't really blame people for blaming them.

Only by virtue of the fact that we created America. Pretty much everything else Britain did was a net positive.

>Pretty much everything else Britain did was a net positive.

Cmon user that other user's Britphobia is pretty silly but so it your post too.

The African savages for seducing the hw'ite man to their brutal ways. All those crimes were done by congo soldiers with next to no white officers personally committing them

Belgium.

It was the only way for the Belgians to compete with the British economy, hence it's the Brit's fault.

How are they supposed to get rubber without hands?

>ask people to collect resources for you
>they don't collect resources for you efficiently enough
>punish them

leopold did nothing wrong

>africans don't produce enough
>chop one of their hands off so they produce even less
???????????

>Nazism was the only way for the germans to compete with communism, therefore the holocaust was russia's fault.

they cut their childrens' hands off to encourage them to be more productive.

Belgian Congo was an IRL Ancapmemeland

Quality ideologyball

SMART

>He-he, I think colonialism was a good thing.
>What are you gonna' do about it, cuck?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zappo_Zap

>The Zappo Zaps worked as mercenaries for whoever was in power. They had been engaged in slave raiding long before the Europeans arrived, burning villages, partly eating bodies and selling hundreds of slaves to the Arabs each year in exchange for guns, ammunition and other manufactured goods.
>The Zappo Zaps did not restrict their cannibalism to ceremonial occasions, as in other cultures. Instead they hunted humans for food even when other game was plentiful. They considered human flesh a delicacy, and ate all parts of the body, even brains and eyeballs. They fried the meat in the same way as bacon.[6]

No, it was Britain's because it was in London that Karl Marx's bullshit really started to take off. The Eternal Anglo strikes again.

>triggered
Hate to hand it to you but they're right. Just Blacks eating each other.

I'm enjoying this.
One day I will eventually die. Whose fault is that?

not an argument

T.Belgium

It's not state-owned. It's privately owned by Leopold.

Depended on tribe and location

Using you logic the Turks just colonized whites murdering each other

The King had to sell it

This makes no sense.

The idea was that locals weren't meeting the (unreasonable) rubber production quotas. So the king said when the quotas aren't met, someone gets executed.
However, because bullets were expensive to produce and ship to the Congo, the authorities required a hand to prove that the bullets were used for execution, and not for hunting. A village fails to meet the quota, a few guys get shot, and hands of corpses brought in to prove it.
In time, soldiers decided that they can just cut off hands, let the people alive, and go hunting with the bullets. Then they can cut the same guy's other hand later when the quota isn't met again (which is rarely was).
Then villages started raiding each other to cut hands, so when your village missed the quota you can give the soldiers some hands you cut from the other tribe, that way nobody on your tribe gets hurt.
Hands became a currency like that, and remained for a while.

In that sense, your post that "the belgians for not taking both hands are at fault" is wrong, because:
1. It wasn't economical to take both hands at once.
2. They did eventually take both hands.
3. Hands were chopped and sold by locals as well, not just soldiers.
4. Hands were chopped from corpses of people who died of natural causes as well.

What the FUCK was their problem?

"Colonial Powers", "Drawings by Th. Th. Heine".
From a german magazine.

>First image
"This is how Germans colonize" - goosestepping, tagged and labeled animals, all made to follow exact orders. Ordnung muss sein.
Signpost: "Dumping of rubble or snow prohibited."

>Second image
"This is how English colonize" - pouring whiskey into Africans while extracting as much wealth as they can out of them, in the cartoon literally pressing it out of their bodies.

>Third image
"And this the French" - They're apparently interbreeding with their colonial subjects. The cartoon is from the period (given it features Imperial Germany and their colonies, it's pre-WW1, so pre-1914 at the earliest and 1918 at the latest), so it's clearly mocking the French for choosing to "diminish" themselves by breeding with Africans. They may be mocking colonialism, but they're still subject to the times.

>Fourth image
"And this the Belgians" - The English may want to extract all the wealth, the Germans may want to instill their order and culture, but the Belgians? They just want to kill and eat their subjects.

Where does your moral compass start vibrating in alarm?

>when the king makes unreasonable production demands and punishes villages who don't meet them with execution
>when soldiers would rather save the bullets to go hunt and just take a hand to fake the execution
>when the locals would start tribal wars to accumulate enough hands so they can pay off their rubber quota and not have to suffer

This is an interesting case, you can tell a lot about a person telling them the story and seeing at which point they flip out.

Well it's one of those "hey we're already pimping out 12 year old girls why don't we sell five year old pussy as well" kind of snowball situations.

There are no new memes under the sun

What if they never flip out?

They actually did, if you fucked up once your hand was chopped off and if you fucked up a second time, your other hand got chopped off.

>Still thinks it was the Belgians
>Doesn't know it was Blacks who the Belgians hired to keep order and enforce law.

>Two of the three seem happy
They were use to Blacks coming and chopping of their hands for food and rituals. The only differences was now they had some money.

They didn't chop off hands as punishment for not reaching quotas. The Force Publique were required to bring the hands of their victims as proof they were not wasting ammo.

Slavery was commonplace before the Europeans arrived, the rebel Tippu Tup was a slave trader.

>Who was in the wrong here?
The world is a tough place. Such a tough place. If whoever is in the wrong is whoever did anything unethical or didn't do enough it would be nearly everyone.

Do they seem happy to you?

t. I have a neckbeard and achieved absolutely nothing in my life because of reptilian niggerkikes

Leopold, for his hands off policy of governance.

Well it were british explorers that mapped congo for leopold II and legitimized its claim
also the british were instrumental in giving him the freestate as private property

>maims thousands
>"the world's just a tough place brah"

Belgium for letting the situation in Congo get out of hand

...

unironically this

The natives shouldn't have violated the NAP by existing. Leopold did nothing wrong.

>Africans do what Africans do
>White people get blamed
Literally every time.

the niggers that cut off their hands to look like victims

who were doing it in order to meet a hands quota they owed thanks to the unreasonable rubber demands being imposed on them by management that they couldn't possibly meet so they did it to someone else before management did it to them.

Different user here.

Now you're comparing apples to oranges.

see

>Le fuck the evil white man

You historical and geographical illiterates really need to let go of postmodernist theory.

The big bang is why we can't have nice things

It didn't save you the first time Nazi, it won't save you now.

You're responsible for your underlings.

Neither Britain nor America are white so it isn't blaming whites.

>go to other tribe
>hey can you lend me a hand
>the hand barter system and the colloquialism is born