The Diabolical Brutality Of King Leopold II (Warning* Mature Audiences Only)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 июл 2023
- The official title of the Belgian kings is “King of the Belgians.” In Belgium, there is a difference between the titles “King of Belgium” and the “King of the Belgians.” The first suggests that the monarch is the owner of all of the country's land. The second title implies that he simply “reigns” over the Belgians in the constitutional monarchy that's existed in the country since it separated from Holland and the “United Kingdom of the Netherlands” in 1830. The Belgian king, and its been a king, not a queen, since independence, was never an absolute monarch, though in the 19th century, the king had considerable more power and influence than King Philippe does today.
The problem for Leopold was that he really wanted to be that king - you know, the “your wish is my command, Sire” type king, and he could not be that kind of a king to the Belgians, who had gone through much debate, internal strife and some bloodshed to prevent that kind of absolute monarchy in Belgium.
Much of Western Europe was going through the “Second Age of Imperialism” in the latter part of the 19th century. Great Britain's empire spanned the globe - the largest empire the world has ever seen. The French controlled a great deal of Africa and parts of the Middle East. Italy had a small African empire. Holland had extensive colonies in the Pacific, most notably today's Indonesia. Even declining Spain and Portugal had colonies in Africa and the Far East in the late 1800s.
Some in Belgium call Leopold II “The Great Builder,” for in Belgium, he sponsored and promoted the building of new roads, public buildings and a variety of public works, many of which are still in existence. Many in the country believe that that was his purpose in attempting to gain the Congo River area for Belgium - to improve and modernize the vast forested territory. He also wanted to spread the Christian faith and to bring Western culture and technology to the area.
#kingleopoldii #history #congo #belgianhistory
Music: Motionarray.com
Copyright © 2021 A Day In History. All rights reserved.
DISCLAIMER: All materials in these videos are used for entertainment purposes and fall within the guidelines of fair use. No copyright infringement intended. If you are, or represent, the copyright owner of materials used in this video, and have an issue with the use of said material, please send an email to adayinhistory2021@gmail.com
I don't get why there are still people who seem to justify this and see nothing wrong with it, just sadistic
it's because they're bl...
Colonialism apologetics literally disgust me. Ppl would literally rather justify their racism or anti blackness by saying “they gave technology” or whatever whilst shutting their eyes and brains off, to the brutal reality of the situation. Being this.
@@ishredder4006funny but unironically it’s because of anti blackness
@@justjoshua5759Your full of dung. Slavery has been going since the beginning of time. Colir of skin has nothing to do with it.
@@David-rz7jj yh but this particular instance was.
Leopold II was one of many who committed crimes against humanity the never got their just punishment.
No he didn't escape justice. He and case was sent to a higher Court. He's going to stand before a judge that can't be bought persuaded and blackmailed. No tampering or compromising the evidence. Just the facts and all of sins. And all mankind will stand before this Judge and give an account for all of their sins and wickedness. God will be that Judge❗ And if we don't confess Jesus Christ as our Lord and savior and asked him to forgive us of our sins put our faith, hope, and trust in Jesus Christ we will stand before that Judge God. Then we will pay for sins for all eternity. Jesus paid for All of mankind's sins. So if you reject Jesus you're basically telling God you want to pay for your sins.
Indeed. There was more than one Holocaust, although one apartheid group has copyrighted the term for itself. Stalin, Pol Pot, etc. Well into the second half of the 20th century. How many children are learning about these dictators?
@@maulwurf62- 100%
You mean like Britain, Spain, France, Portugal, Italy, Russia, United States????
right on. I'm from The U.S. and we are high on the list. When I came back from Vietnam I refused to honor our flag we are hypocrites.
hypocrites@@TheOverproof151
Read a book about a British consulate worker, Roger Casement, who gave up a privileged life and his life, in order to expose the atrocities in AFRICA and in the Putamayo Region of S. America.
So what he didn't kill the evil ones so he didn't do nothing
@@BYTHERULES1871That’s like saying “the allies didn’t kill Hitler so they didn’t do anything to stop him” 💀
@@BYTHERULES1871 What are you talking about?
Can you look at YOUR own privileged life and tell me what YOU ARE DOING to stop ANY of the other atrocities going on around the world right now?
Which ones are YOU bringing to light with critical evidence that it exists and is happening as we speak?
Step back and consider what you, yourself, are contributing to any changes in this world before you damn well criticize others for being braver then you presently are at this point in your life.
@@rabbitholesincwhat are ppl doing now to stop atrocities?
Its crazy to learn about what happened in the Congo. Generally when thinking of Belgians nowadays they are just kind of neutral place. History is crazy, everyone has been terrible to someone else at some point
Welcome to the human race.
Well that's kind of the thing, and it's interesting how you write "everyone has been terrible to someone else at some point". I find it weird how we attach behavior of some people to other people as if they had some kind of responsability over it. A country is not a conscient being, we are not to be hold accountable for other people's doing. Belgians of today, therefore, have not been horrible to someone else, other people who lived on the same land have been. It seems stupid once said like that but sometimes the most obvious things are so obvious we just forget to think about it
I think it is the reason why you see a lot of people justifying those horrible acts, they feel accountable for something they would never do and they don't know how to react to it. I'm sure 99% of them would disagree if you asked them to do this today
@@MrJJOBT You could break this down further. Some common people who by chance got born in the same country as an Elite few who once ruled that country. For the vast majority of the human race in which ever country, had nothing to do with any atrocity, nor any position to influence events, even at that point in history.
Do not identify the Von Saxen Coburgs with Belgium. Those German lunatics have nothing to see with Belgium. They are just a bunch of maniacs, that considered Congo as their personal property. So if Congo wants to be reimbursed, they have to go to the Van Saxen Coburgs, not to the Belgian people.
They call Africans as barbarians, but the history knows who are
Barbarians. In India they shot a peaceful meeting
Against the 150 years of British rule, and an animal
Called Reginald Sure fired at the crowd, for 20
Minutes, with 40 soldiers, and 1350 people with woman and children died. Not only that next day till 24 hours nobody
Was permitted in the area as punishment to remove the wounded and many hundreds died of bleeding. This happened in 1916 in a place called Jallian wala Bagh in North India. The British queen who visited post India several times ,she never asked even a formal apology. If only the Europeans stayed in their places, without enslaving and robbing other nations ,the world would have been a much much better place.
Capt. Bharathi.
Blah blah, everyone’s watched ‘Ghandi’ who together with the political elite used this to expel their ‘masters.’ This guy was disciplined for this incident. And so how many died, with the partition, Hindus and Muslims - way more - because of your local politics after they left? But I guess you blame the Brits for that too?
This massacre was shown in the movie "Gandhi".
Humanity started with blacks
Very true
You are very right
Dublin born, UK Diplomat Roger Cacement was knighted after his 1904 report to the British Government on conditions of, brutality and atrocities commited against men, women and Children in the Belgian Congo. He later became an Irish nationalist and was hung in Britain for his part in the Easter Rising 1916
Hanged, not hung. He was not a tapestry.
@@bollockjohnson6156is this your takeaway from all of that? Really?😢
@@bollockjohnson6156 Of all the things to get *hung* up on.🙄
He hung after he was hanged.
I certainly believe he
would have wished to say more in preventing either of those resulted outcomes than to hear one quibble over these words after his death.
@@rustyhowe3907 now is hardly the time for puns. Did you miss where the discussion was about a human rights pioneer? Fool.
I’m West African and was thought by my parents and educators about the cruelty that the Europeans inflicted on African especially in West African. Unfortunately, the cutting of the hands that the Europeans used as source of punishment was adapted by the rebels and guerrillas on my people during the diamond expectations. What many around the world would call “blood diamonds” 😢
Robert Davis estimates that slave traders from Tunis, Algiers, and Tripoli
*enslaved 1 million to 1.25 million Europeans in North Africa, from the beginning of the* 16th century to the middle of the 18th century.[3]
The Barbary slave trade involved slave markets in the Barbary States.
*European slaves were acquired by Muslim Barbary pirates in slave raids on ships* *and by raids on coastal towns from Italy to the Netherlands, Ireland and *
the southwest of Britain, as far north as Iceland and into the Eastern Mediterranean.
The people that installed the cutting hands as punishment were africans...
@@jeffschlarb4965 Of course they don't know that ..also a lot of the Europeans involved with the slave trades were bought by other black traders.
it was mainly the africans cutting off hands in the congo, not the europeans. There were not that many europeans in the country to do as much damage as what happened there. I asume you haven't seen what's happening in south africa at the moment? The tribes there don't like people from other african countries coming in to get jobs and take to them with machettes, they especially don't like the Nigerians. Nothing to do with europeans. What about the Rwanda genocide? Child soldiers now, the ridiculous things that have been going on in sudan in the past and now, how many tribes kidnapped and sold other tribes into the slave trade back in the day??? The whole blood diamond thing is an entire different subject too. Don't forget Africans do damn awful things to each other now and throughout history because they can. Same as the europeans doing awful things to each other (the Bosnia war for one...)
Kinda paradoxically to say someone owns a free state!
Second how illogical to cut someone's hands feet ect off because they are not producing" enough ". They certainly are not going to produce enough with missing limbs. Just absurdly horrific
I think soldiers were given certain amount of target and if that was not fulfilled by the people under their region they had to give them punishment so next time others will work extra because of fear.
They cannot take whole body after killing so were showing hands or feet to show their bosses that they gave punishment.
Yes it makes no sense because this video tells the classic british tale of the belgian congo. They invented a bunch of things to finally put their own hands on the congo. No one got hands cut off because they didn't work enough. No one in history was that dumb. As Testrraea8928 said, hands were cut off on dead people to show they (they = the force publique, which was 95% locals and 5% europeans) didn't waste bullets for their own needs. But they still wasted bullets and cut hands off some people alive
Free was in the meaning of "open to trade for all countries", as in duty free.
For the second point, you have the answer and defence of Leopold: "why would I ask to cut hands when I need hands for working???"
In the Sierra Leone 🇸🇱 civil war the cut off peoples hands and feet. Usually teachers and other professionals.
The punishment is intended to be a warning to others to not get any ideas.
More like absurdly sadistic.
The fact this part of history isn't mandatory in Belgian Schools is insane, (it's up to each and every history teacher to decide whether or not to include it) then you get people who have no idea this happened or just got a very toned down versions of it thinking it possibly couldn't be that bad. All because the government doesn't have the balls to acknowledge the gravity of it, or simply doesn't care about the people that were involved. Nobody is trying to put anyone in jail today for those atrocities, but right out act like it never happened, rather than acknowledging it in an effort to clearly state that this is not what the country stands for today and make sure it never happens again, it's just cowardly and despicable to me, this same government will be shitting on other (essentially) non western countries that don't acknowledge their dark history, while shying away about their own, and they're not the only one doing so in the countless western ex colonial empires
Unfortunately, this isn't exclusive to Belgium either. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any country in the world that either hasn't glossed over or completely hidden the atrocities of its past in its education system. There are things about my own home country that I never learned about in school but just accidentally stumbled across as an adult, and I'm sure there is much more that I still don't know about.
How about Spain, Cortez was a real gem?
Cry more but please how many did China and Russia kill their their dictators oh yeah more then Hitler ever did wow but keep crying about us Europeans 😂😂😂😂😂 man u people funny but meanwhile it's ure own leaders that's selling u or screwing u over
In fact this is mandatory in belgian schools and i challenge you to find 1 single school where this isn't taught.
@@kassiperpro1378 lmao well the ones where I've been all my primary and secondary years, the teacher merely mentionned Leopold owning congo ! Friends of mine from other schools were taught this part of history, others like me weren't, so I dont know what you're on...
This was painfully sad and very disturbing to see. Those poor people 😥
The Dutch (Holland), Portugal, The Germans, the French and the British have all committed similar Atrocities in Africa !
The Germans actually had Africans in Concentration camps in 1904 ! 3 Decades before they did it to the Jews in Europe !
Give it time.
It's crazy how much has happened in Africa in recent history, even today, that no one talks about.
The subsequent Congo wars are a doozy
It’s not crazy to realize that the atrocities committed by white colonizers are watered down and forgotten.
Growing up in the UK, we were mainly taught about historical periods that paint the UK in a good light or as the victims...
But people still condemn Germany only ... What about Italy , UK , France , Turkey ? Thank you for posting this .
King Leopold did not kill one African, he never set one foot in Africa. However people working for him did sometimes go too far. Leopold II did liberate Congo and Africa from slavery. Because of that it also stopped the expansion of the Islam in Africa. When he heard that some people were treating the Africans bad, then he threatened to take away the pensions of all Belgians involved, if they continued to mistreat Congolese. Those documents are still kept in the archives. Cutting off hands was never attributed to Belgians, but to Arab slave traders such as Tipo Tip. No one knows how many Congolese died during that period, not even approximately. We know that most Africans died of disease. In Belgium, during the same period, more people died on average from deprivation and working in poor conditions than in Congo. There are no known photos of a genocide. He could not even have killed 20,000,000 as many claim, because in those days there lived not even 10,000,000 people in ‘Congo Free State’. The lies about Leopold only started much later when England wanted to take Congo from Leopold II because of its many precious resources. They sent two ‘researchers’ to Congo with orders to write something about horrors so that the League of Nations, would take Congo from our king (and hopefully would give it then to England). Unfortunately for the English, there was great doubt about what they claimed. Congo was indeed taken from Leopold, because it was impossible for him alone to run such a large country, and was given to the Belgian government. From that moment on It became ‘Belgian Congo’. If a genocide had really taken place, the Congolese would not have welcomed the Belgians afterwards with open arms. They couldn't either, because if we had to believe the lie, then there wouldn't have been any Congolese left anymore.
@@user-vl8oo5lh4r The USA are untouchable :/
@@user-vl8oo5lh4r There's a very famous man in your country (a black man) I forget his name for a moment, who also knows the history of America, and he also puts into perspective a lot of lies about slavery in your country. There, too, the truth was often taken for granted. There were also black slave traders in America and millions of white people were sold as slaves throughout history, including in African and Arab countries. But all over the world, it was the whites who ended slavery.
It took the British to stop slavery
@@kevinstreet5709 Slavery was ended by Leopold II in Congo and because of that it stoped in the rest of Africa. He made a deal with Tippo Tip to stop the other slave traders. He was a brilliant king.
So you can't say cannibalism, but you can say "they fried human flesh.."
God I love the algorithm sometimes haha 😂
the chew thought police dont want people remembering that non Huites ate people
Thank you for bringing this monster to the light I've done myself to spread the knowledge and educate people in the social media platform as I consider it my duty as an African to expose the evil of colonialism
It's already over-taught to the extreme in every single western school, mate.
The question is now how we react. As an African, you should focus on building your own nations and eradicating modern day slavery. White people are not responsible for your problems.
Sort your own country out first because I’m sure it’s viciously corrupt, mismanaged, tribalistic and a hundred years behind any European country. And, yes, I’m sure you’ve profited from all the benefits of Western Culture.
Colonialism didn't commit the crimes, ..the 9,000 soldiers were " OTHER AFRICANS "..evil people are the issue,and man's inhumanity to man...We are all related and cousins, traced all the way back to the first man and women, Good people need to stand against bad..period!.., and children need brought up right..without that, we are sliding further away from love of fellow humans.
@@mikebaum5976What is Colonialism
@@mikebaum5976i feel like colonialism gave way to painful unspeakable horrors
2 Movies touched on Leopold II…The Legend of Tarzan and Young Victoria. Leopold was Victoria’s Uncle or other close relative from the intermarriages among England, Spain, Hapsburg, Prussia, Holy See, Russia, French, Norway, Sweden, Greece, and other Royal courts.Leopold was Queen Victoria’s precious Royal Consort Albert’s Uncle or father
Absolutely horrific
Leopold’s father was uncle of prince Albert who married queen Victoria, so they were cousins. Are you blaming families of serial killers for what their relatives did? Leopold the second was a monster who was Unfortunately in position to do what monsters do unpunished and on large scale. It’s unfair to blame prince Albert for what his cousin did. Europe paid what their ruling monarcs/politicians did with deaths of aproximately 100 milion people in both great wars and Spanish flu epidemics afterwards. Europe’s people suffered greatly. It doesn’t make what that monster did any better. Ordinary people everywhere paid the price for crowned psychopats.
@@danakaleb4882 When you have a government system where you pick a high office holder e.g. a king by family affiliation, then royal families not cutting ties with a royal serial killer is a problem.
@@eljanrimsa5843 even when cutting ties, it’s still a problem - as WWI clearly showed us.
@@danakaleb4882idk... their family organized their inbreeding to keep power out of the hands of anyone else, surely kissing cousins and siblings fd up Leopold's genetics in ways that made him MORE insane. They all appear monstrous from 2023. And yes, it is the family's fault
Now I know what Billy Joel meant when he referenced "Belgians in the Congo" in his history lesson of a song. 😁
So the Belgians started the fire?!!?
@@charlest5604 no none of them did. "It was always burning since the world's been turning". 😁
@@margaretreefer1145
Well played.
He might reference to the Belgian officers who helped with the Lumumba assassination, when the independent country's first Prime Minister was executed by Belgian-backed separatist rebels.
King Leopold did not kill one African, he never set one foot in Africa. However people working for him did sometimes go too far. Leopold II did liberate Congo and Africa from slavery. Because of that it also stopped the expansion of the Islam in Africa. When he heard that some people were treating the Africans bad, then he threatened to take away the pensions of all Belgians involved, if they continued to mistreat Congolese. Those documents are still kept in the archives. Cutting off hands was never attributed to Belgians, but to Arab slave traders such as Tipo Tip. No one knows how many Congolese died during that period, not even approximately. We know that most Africans died of disease. In Belgium, during the same period, more people died on average from deprivation and working in poor conditions than in Congo. There are no known photos of a genocide. He could not even have killed 20,000,000 as many claim, because in those days there lived not even 10,000,000 people in ‘Congo Free State’. The lies about Leopold only started much later when England wanted to take Congo from Leopold II because of its many precious resources. They sent two ‘researchers’ to Congo with orders to write something about horrors so that the League of Nations, would take Congo from our king (and hopefully would give it then to England). Unfortunately for the English, there was great doubt about what they claimed. Congo was indeed taken from Leopold, because it was impossible for him alone to run such a large country, and was given to the Belgian government. From that moment on It became ‘Belgian Congo’. If a genocide had really taken place, the Congolese would not have welcomed the Belgians afterwards with open arms. They couldn't either, because if we had to believe the lie, then there wouldn't have been any Congolese left anymore.
It truly is astounding how the real worst men in human history are the ones you almost never hear about.
You do hear about Stalin, Hitler, Mao Tse-Dong and Pol Pot, all four of whom had millions of people tortured and murdered.
And mostly European
Can't believe people are saying that this is erased from history. Like bro, thiq very well known, not only in belgium. And yes, this is actually taught in basically all schools throughout the country, there is not a single person here who doesn't know about it. We should simply not be held accountible for something a king and a handfull (at it's hight around 2000) of privileged people did almost 150 years ago.
King Leopold did not kill one African, he never set one foot in Africa. However people working for him did sometimes go too far. Leopold II did liberate Congo and Africa from slavery. Because of that it also stopped the expansion of the Islam in Africa. When he heard that some people were treating the Africans bad, then he threatened to take away the pensions of all Belgians involved, if they continued to mistreat Congolese. Those documents are still kept in the archives. Cutting off hands was never attributed to Belgians, but to Arab slave traders such as Tipo Tip. No one knows how many Congolese died during that period, not even approximately. We know that most Africans died of disease. In Belgium, during the same period, more people died on average from deprivation and working in poor conditions than in Congo. There are no known photos of a genocide. He could not even have killed 20,000,000 as many claim, because in those days there lived not even 10,000,000 people in ‘Congo Free State’. The lies about Leopold only started much later when England wanted to take Congo from Leopold II because of its many precious resources. They sent two ‘researchers’ to Congo with orders to write something about horrors so that the League of Nations, would take Congo from our king (and hopefully would give it then to England). Unfortunately for the English, there was great doubt about what they claimed. Congo was indeed taken from Leopold, because it was impossible for him alone to run such a large country, and was given to the Belgian government. From that moment on It became ‘Belgian Congo’. If a genocide had really taken place, the Congolese would not have welcomed the Belgians afterwards with open arms. They couldn't either, because if we had to believe the lie, then there wouldn't have been any Congolese left anymore.
Germans can use same logic, Hitler and his aides did all the bad stuff. Don't blame us. Most people are on it. This is how European empires were built.
Only that Belgium continues to do the same to Africans till this day. Your mining companies are still killing and maiming African children. And all the profit is sent back to Belgium. The terrorists killing Africans here are in possession of weapons some of which were manufactured by Belgium. Your atrocities never stopped. You only learned to hide them better. You are just as evil as ever.
Ask yourself what you know about the US and British treatment of the US and Canadian Native populations, or the true history of what England did to the Indigenous people of the land they called Australia.
@@dieterbarkhoff1328 Don't forget what the Australian aboriginal people also did to each other. Why is this never mentioned?
As a Belgian, I am outraged because of what happened, I see buildings all along this country builded with stolen money. What happened to those people is terrible, there is no excuses. When someone takes some distance from this particular story, ask your self how Indians were treated, I mean the original people from America, America imported Africans for slavery, natives in Australia were treated bad too and even after all that Hitler came. All is very shameful for humanity, until today everyone wants to heal the shame in thinking they are doing well. 😢 So sad. Money and power given to an invidual can cause great harm. So be careful who you choose if you live in a democracy today.
Shallow minds will view this horrific behavior by the emerging modern nations as racist and imperialistic without further thought. When one, or a group, believe they are superior to another group, they will eventually enslave or diminish the value of that group and they will feel justified to do so by their own bias…it being religion, culture, status, race, history of conquest, etc. As a 78 year old minority myself, I’ve experienced racism, physical abuse, etc., in my long life by every race imaginable, and also, been given a helping hand by all, when I was in need of help so I don’t Glibly look to cast aspersions on any race, culture, or group, etc. I do protect myself from those with hate filled ideological agendas that would try to enslave, or diminish me as a human. We are all, including you dear reader of this, capable of unspeakable horrors so personal reflection on your daily behavior in relation to others of higher or of lower status than yourself maybe in order. I recommend reading Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s biography, The Gulag Archipelago, to see if you may very well be one of the monsters he aptly described therein.
I'm curious, how is status defined? Wealth, position of power, or behavior? What would separate you and I in status?
This is one of the most reasonable views I have heard in a while.
Judgement will come to those who have committed such atrocities.
@@patriot1685none of the above. Status is defined by race; always has been, always will be.
Which race is on top changes throughout history, but it’s always been a racial caste system.
I don’t think it’s got anything to do with racism at all, when you consider one tribe were cannibals and eat black and white if they could.
While we look on this horror-story similar crimes are committed by China to the Uigures.
And we do nothing against it.
We all make business as usual with China.
We repress the reality.
As a german I have learned one thing:
„Every political crime is made with one part brutality and 1 million parts ignorance.“
This is a dirty lie, manufactured from always evil western media
Bullshit
Great quote!
B for Bullshit
Right now americans sended original owners of America to concentration camps and doing nothing. Real people of America can't hunt on whole territory, they can't set their own governments and travel around the world with their own passports
Great coverage of this important & indeed essentially ignored subject. Thank you.
Surprised some people don't know about this. Crazy fact Leopold II is queen Victoria's cousin. If you go to a candy store in Belgium you will see a bags of chocolate hands for sale.
I had to check if you were joking or not....and you're not they have a whole website for it...this is truly insane
@@esther1900 yep so other countries need to check themselves now. Before talking about other countries.
@@rocdaneweracap MAJOR FAXS RIGHT THERE....a lot of European countries like to point their fingers at America when it come to slavery and stuff....but compared to what the other European countries did, what America did was child's play😬
@@esther1900i guess you forget Americans came from Europe
@@esther1900 and the Americans(Europians) killed 80 million natives(indians)
This puts "poor little Belgian" of WW 1 in a different light. In fairness the typical Belgian had nothing to do with the atrocities conducted in the Congo.
they sure as hell benefitted from it.
@@orangerightgold7512their King had. How much money do you think the ordinary people got?
The king went there on vacations and did his little chopping off limbs thing in every city town he came if u were whit em well u not telling a king no that's how u die especially in that time
@@walterlaten7662 you sure he was doing it himself? It was usually punishment for’not working well in mines’ performed by supervisors.
@@danakaleb4882 when he was there oh he did it apparently he was a very depraved man like most kings
I really appreciate it in the most recent retelling of Tarzan that they Incorporated all of these facts
Top quality. Thank you for your work.
It sheds light to what monarchie was about in those years! Same thing keeps re-occurring today by politiciens of many countries! I guess we will never learn!
The Philippine-American War was no doubt brutal, but after reading that Leopold wanted to buy the Philippines from Spain, I think it’s safe to say the Philippines dodged something much worse.
yikes.
Philippines dodged a nuke.
OH FUCK DAMN THIS SCARED ME ACTUALLY I CANT IMAGINE BEING UNDER THAT GUY'S RULE
@owokosohna5154 what about the soldiers that served under Leopold II. They're just as guilty
Read Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, it describes many of the atrocities carried out and the absolute power of the local trading agents
Excellent if difficult read
And your point is?
@@vladvlog9677 Um, I'm uncertain what you're debating about? About a book or unless you're an unfeeling psychopath or you're debating that these events took place?🙄
So with a simple question asked, you reply with three questions? Have you even read the book? You say you have. It’s not a book, it’s a 100 page novelette. Doubt it. You appear to be a lazy person who wants to be told what to think, so long as you can feel superior to everyone (noted by your implied judgement). Don’t use the word ‘debating’ because you haven’t demonstrated it here.
And it inspired the film Apocalypse Now.
You can read more about this topic in the book "King Leopold's Ghost"
Thanks for the book recomendation
@@Ivan-ng6to You're welcome....a not well known period of colonial awfulness.
The crime of these racist and monstrous people will not be erased in history .
Who is racist? Stop talking nonsense.
Wait until you find out about The Bantu!
@@maht0xBantus are not racist because where they are from they live among people who are the same race as them. Try again idiot.
@@vladvlog9677the people who did all of this are not racists? Stupid.
@@vladvlog9677are you really defending leopold
why is luxembourg missing on the map?? it should be between germany, france and belgium.
Saudi only banned Slavery in 1967 but we cant talk about that can we
Yes the western nation of arabia
Whataboutism
@@may51973Still Legal in 94 countries ,You care to name them
Thank you for censoring the word "cannibal". I was getting ready to eat my neighbor but the word was partially bleeped out.
There have been and still are so many cruel humans in this world.😢💔🕊️
*Odd how this was almost “erased” from history books!* 🧐
If only you had used bold font sooner!!
What ALWAYS will be in history will be the atrocities of Germany and Japan -- only .
I'm pretty sure every child knows about this by like, highschool at the latest. Next you're going to say WWII has been glossed over.
@@RETIREDBUGKILLER *I work at a school my friend…..No they don’t..!!* 🚫
@@11buttnaked It is something that is just in the collective consciousness. As long as you're not a dumbass, there's no way you've not heard of this happening. It's like saying you don't know about Jeffrey Dahmer, or heavy metal, or the Holocaust, or that dude who went to Alaska to live out his days in the wilderness and died lol. Then again we're speaking about a generation obsessed with tik tok and the Kardashians who's career aspirations are limited to RUclipsr or onlyfans "model"..
Don't forget about the netherland who colonies indonesia for 350 years. They also killed millions of our people.
This is NOT erased from the history books. It is well known for anyone who reads about colonial Africa. While most powers,. especially Britain, believed in colonialism as a way of helping Africans eventually become independent, with an understanding that exports and imports should balance i.e. no economic exploitation, Leopold was a complete and utter selfish bastard who saw the Congo as a way to make money while pretending to be a humanitarian who would practice free trade - the only reason the Great Powers gave him the Congo to administer. Certain Belgian officials participated in terrible atrocities against the locals to maintain the rubber quota although most atrocities were committed by the African troops in their employ - almost all the soldiers were African, only the more senior officers were Belgian.
I have just finished reading The Scramble For Africa by Thomas Pakenham. He spends a lot of time with Leopold throughout the book - and he pulled the wool over everyone's eyes, getting even the supposedly (then) anti-imperialist Americans to fight to have the Congo placed in his charge for the good of the natives and ending the slave trade. Leopold's intentions were completely the opposite.... Having said that he seems to have made most his money from loans from Belgium (£5.2million) he was given by pretending he was losing more money in the Congo than he actually was....
Nearly all European colonies LOST money in Africa - the continent was a big money loser. More was spent on railways and development than was gained in commerce, and until 1880 most European countries didn't want to touch Central or Interior Africa with a barge pole. The principle reasons for European colonisation in Africa, which occurred VERY late 1880-1900, was for imperial prestige, to deny colonies to rivals, and to end the sordid African slave trade, which in 1880 was thriving especially in muslim areas such as the Sahel, Northern Nigeria and the Swahili lands where Arab traders raided for slaves as far as the Congo - Livingstone's appeal to Britain to intervene to end the murderous slave trade in Central Africa was one big clarion call to take responsibility for the blighted lands and help the people there.
So the Congo wasn't a very nice place even before Leopold's evil rule - there were very many cannibals and the Arabs linked to Zanzibar raided frequently for slaves for the muslim world. When the Belgian military defeated the Arabs in eastern Congo and the Arabs surrendered, the cannibal tribe allied to the Belgians decided in the confusion to eat the inhabitants of the Arab settlement....as well as their own wounded. Several Belgians, including the nice ones, ended up eaten.
ok and the other countries who had colonies did not do nothing !!!
@@NMHC1978 King Leopold did not kill one African, he never set one foot in Africa. However people working for him did sometimes go too far. Leopold II did liberate Congo and Africa from slavery. Because of that it also stopped the expansion of the Islam in Africa. When he heard that some people were treating the Africans bad, then he threatened to take away the pensions of all Belgians involved, if they continued to mistreat Congolese. Those documents are still kept in the archives. Cutting off hands was never attributed to Belgians, but to Arab slave traders such as Tipo Tip. No one knows how many Congolese died during that period, not even approximately. We know that most Africans died of disease. In Belgium, during the same period, more people died on average from deprivation and working in poor conditions than in Congo. There are no known photos of a genocide. He could not even have killed 20,000,000 as many claim, because in those days there lived not even 10,000,000 people in ‘Congo Free State’. The lies about Leopold only started much later when England wanted to take Congo from Leopold II because of its many precious resources. They sent two ‘researchers’ to Congo with orders to write something about horrors so that the League of Nations, would take Congo from our king (and hopefully would give it then to England). Unfortunately for the English, there was great doubt about what they claimed. Congo was indeed taken from Leopold, because it was impossible for him alone to run such a large country, and was given to the Belgian government. From that moment on It became ‘Belgian Congo’. If a genocide had really taken place, the Congolese would not have welcomed the Belgians afterwards with open arms. They couldn't either, because if we had to believe the lie, then there wouldn't have been any Congolese left anymore.
@@NMHC1978 why should they?..why didnt other africans stop the Strade to help their brothers?..stope living in wokecity
found the anglo with the typical "all colonialism was evil expect ours"
@@fritz99911 But it’s true.
It's amazing what greeds does to people...Change into animals and have no regards about other human lives!!!.
In the 50s and 60s, not a word was said in history classes in Belgium about the rubber related amputations. At best the use of the so called “ chicotte” ( sort of whip or stick) was. The official version of the colony was an edulcorated summer camp with nice Belgian administrators, doctors, teachers etc benevolent white masters, priests ( so called “pères blancs”). Education consisted in learning catholic prayers, geography of Belgium, history of Belgium ( “ nos ancêtres les Gaulois “) net result: indepence in 1960 with a total of 5 ( five ) African congolese university graduates ( not one in engineering though).
First let me say that Liberia and Ethiopia the only two countries in Africa that were never conquered or ruled by any european power.
King Leopold told the Berlin conference in 1885 that his mission was to build schools, churches and hospitals and the "civilisation" of savage peoples. After the ivory resources ran dangerously low, they turned to rubber production. Pierre De Brazza a frenchman working in conjunction with or for king leopold ordered that if the rubber labour force could not meet their quota of rubber latex, a hand would be severed and if they failed again an ear was cut off. If they should fail again to meet the quota the other ear was cut off. One elderly man who had failed twice to meet the quota was about to have the remaining ear cut off and he begged the soldiers not to cut it off, when they asked why? He said he would have no place to rest his cigar. The severed hands were used as currency among the soldiers and De Brazza himself had hundreds of severed hands forming a border around his garden. After Missionaries from France went to the Congo and seen no promised churches, schools or hospitals or anything that would enrich the lives of the Congolese people but, instead were a lot of people with one hand and no ears. This was reported back to France and in time Ftrance offered 15 million Francs to Leopold to relinquish the land and his control of the Congo, in essence France bought the congo from leopold.
(Source: The Scramble for Africa by Thomas Pakenham.)
Even today France takes approximately 53 billion pounds of resources out of the Congo every year, yet we, the ordinary person on the street are accosted at every turn by agents of "Water Aid" and out of 53 billion per year, France cannot even put in a water pipe for the Congolese people. In my estimation france is no better than the begian butcher king leopold.
🤣🤣🤣 You confuse Belgian Congo with French Congo 🤣🤣🤣
Pierre de Brazza explores and then creates French Congo, but France never buy this territory to Leopold!
Forgot who caused civilwar in Liberia? And the same in Ethiopia?
Didn't the Italians take over your country before WW11?
King Leopold II of Belgium, the german General Lothar Von Throta and other monsters we still remember of them in Africa today.
Who is ‘we?’ Are you important or something or just one of the many small people in your country needing to be someone? Go and get a job.
I'm glad you remember them as monsters because some people actually revere them, as if they know nothing about their own and their ancestors' history.
@@veronicamoody3981😂😂😂😂😂😂
1914: the German goal wasn't to invade and occupy Belgium. This was a collateral damage. They needed it to invade France from safe grounds and an unexpected point of attack.
This also wasn't the reason why WWI started...
What was the reason?
@@a.f.7246 Complex treaties, tensions between practically everybody in Central Europe. The spark to let the tense situation explode was the assassination of the Austro-Hungarian Archduke Franz Ferdinand,, heir presumptive to the Austro-Hungarian throne, and his wife, Sophie, Duchess of Hohenberg on 28 June 1914 by Bosnian Serb student Gavrilo Princip. Austria fought back hard against Serbia, Serbia was backed by Russia, Germany was an ally of Austria, France and UK were in the triple Entante with Russia, Belgium and Serbia also backed the Entante, the Osman Empire was on the side of Germany and against the UK anyway, Bulgaria also backed Germany and a chain reaction occurred.
I thought it was just a joke that aliens don't visit us because of our nature, but now it kind of becoming reasonable.
Oh well, still we got 'Tintin' from Belgium & an Asterix in Belgium ' comics album. Heh. 😮.
Having travelled in Africa I can assure you the former colonial powers still treat Africans with contempt. I can see why they are gravitating to support from China.
What colonial powers? There are none and have long gone. Anyway based on the present situation they had good reason to have contempt. And Africa is gravitating towards China, because beggars can’t be choosers - having stolen and destroyed all aid funded projects for the past 50 years. Africa needs to learn its lesson and China is a like minded brutal teacher. They deserve each other.
If you check you will find i wrote 'former' colonial powers.
@@irahoppe3632You did. Either way, former or present - you seem critical, without reason, other than on ‘Your travels in Africa.’ You must’ve met individual ‘Colonialists’ to come to this conclusion.
I spent months there, including in Niger and it was not individual colonialists I met that brought me to this conclusion but speaking with the Niger people. I also observed the contemptable way the Europeans still treat the African people everywhere.
@@irahoppe3632Just remember you were a tourist there and you have no real life experience in Africa to make such quick judgements about (I assume) your own people.
The fact that Roger Casement, and the work that he did, has not even been mentioned is ... interesting, to say the least.
The reports he wrote about the horrors carried out in Belgian Congo went so far to both ending those crimes against humanity, but also guided humanitarian law right to the present day, plus he's considered to be the first (?) humanitarian.
And as an Irishman that in and of itself is worthy of being put on record.
The point is, that the people working for Leopold, were the people who were in the slave trade, now unemployed as importing slaves was now illegal.
The people who actually did he crimes were African Muslims, who had been treating people like this for the last 500 years.
You could say that Leopold did not oversee the work properly, he may have also been afraid that war might break out if he pushed the issue.
Belgian schools to this day downplay what happened and the bastard still sits on his horse in Brussels and his body still lies in the royal mausoleum which was visited and blessed by Pope John Paul II. Unfortunately, Roger Casement’s message has been completely lost on the Belgians which perhaps explains why 30% of Flemish voters currently support a racist party.
He was an amazing man. Treated disgracefully by the Britush as detailed in The Trial of Roger Casement.
He was an amazing man. Treated disgracefully by the Britush as detailed in The Trial of Roger Casement.
He was an amazing man. Treated disgracefully by the Britush as detailed in The Trial of Roger Casement.
From what I saw on another video., Belgium hired Congo soldiers to overlook the operations and it is these african men who did atrocities of their own
those facts dont suit the beat Huitey agenda
That's the thing: to groups like the Zappo Zap, they were not 'their own'. No matter how hard you wish, in the minds of the Zappos Zap, this is not what they were doing.
Cool, Belgians are absolved. Happy?
@@Shreevenk Sure.
@@lokitus shifting blame to the natives is all it took, who would've thunk. And to think there are those who believe victim blaming doesn't work. What fools 🙄
The practice of cutting hands is much older than the colony, it was a common local practice by Arab slave traders.
Well said. And they had contempt for them too.
This kind of horror is the way it was able to afford the king's luxury life. That is so terrible. I am feeling very unhappy that this was happening. Very sad.
read "king leapold's ghost" best book out on the subject. narrato didn't mention E.D. Morrel or Tiger Casemen which i thought was disappointing as both had been very intermental in ending king leapold's rule of the congo.
King Leopold did not kill one African, he never set one foot in Africa. However people working for him did sometimes go too far. Leopold II did liberate Congo and Africa from slavery. Because of that it also stopped the expansion of the Islam in Africa. When he heard that some people were treating the Africans bad, then he threatened to take away the pensions of all Belgians involved, if they continued to mistreat Congolese. Those documents are still kept in the archives. Cutting off hands was never attributed to Belgians, but to Arab slave traders such as Tipo Tip. No one knows how many Congolese died during that period, not even approximately. We know that most Africans died of disease. In Belgium, during the same period, more people died on average from deprivation and working in poor conditions than in Congo. There are no known photos of a genocide. He could not even have killed 20,000,000 as many claim, because in those days there lived not even 10,000,000 people in ‘Congo Free State’. The lies about Leopold only started much later when England wanted to take Congo from Leopold II because of its many precious resources. They sent two ‘researchers’ to Congo with orders to write something about horrors so that the League of Nations, would take Congo from our king (and hopefully would give it then to England). Unfortunately for the English, there was great doubt about what they claimed. Congo was indeed taken from Leopold, because it was impossible for him alone to run such a large country, and was given to the Belgian government. From that moment on It became ‘Belgian Congo’. If a genocide had really taken place, the Congolese would not have welcomed the Belgians afterwards with open arms. They couldn't either, because if we had to believe the lie, then there wouldn't have been any Congolese left anymore.
Thank you for showing this, can you please now show a series of Englands influence on their colonies… including Ireland, Scotland and Wales….
Histories of the world are beyond sad . And atrocities still exist in todays world. 👵🏻👩🌾❣️
SPEAKING AS A BELGIAN; there is a lot of misconception about Belgium and the then called "Congo"; first of all, THE BELGIAN PEOPLE NEVER EVER WANTED CONGO, it was our king at that particular time(and of course, some of Belgium's rich industrial figures of that time, which are never mentioned in any history-classes)that came up with the idea; he commissioned the explorer Stanley to map the entire area(and who was undoubtably accompanied with several geologists, to access the riches which Congo held in it's soil, like Copper, Rubber and more)before starting to exploit it, using unscrupulous railroad-officials and others to subdue and force the natives into industries they weren't familiar about... With a gruesome amount of violence.
Then came the now famous(or better said infamous) foto's of natives with no hands, which caused a tremendous(and JUST)outroar amongst the then "civilised west", which pressured the king to relent his personal control of the Congo to the government.
Until this day, people from all over the world are still holding the PRESENT populace of Belgium accountable for what a FEW Belgians have done, even holding Belgium responsible for the state Congo is in at present...
"King of the Belgians" is really a joke; "our royal house" ISN'T BELGIAN AT ALL to start with; after the "Belgian" revolution in 1830, the then super-powers of the era, France, England and the Germanic states "Shoved" us a king, Albert of SAKSEN - COBURG(not at all a BELGIAN)
in order to thwart the ambition and power of the Netherlands...
All in all, the "CONGO"episode isn't one that any Belgian looks back upon with any pride, and apart from the industrials and companies involved(who's identities have been carefully hidden until today, because it might turn out that some of those companies are still around today and they want to avoid paying for any retributions to the people who they used to exploit)who have blatantly stolen a lot from Congo to their huge profit, The Belgian working populace is left with a gigantic headache of often being called "colonialists", racists
and more... How hypocrit can you be as king Filip, apologising for all of the Belgians??
The sole and only thing positive about Leopold the second, in my humble opinion, is that shortly before his death, he authorised the building of the great fortress-belts at NAMUR and LIEGE, which would thwart the careful timing of the German "Von Shlieffen-plan" and ultimatly defeat the Germans in WW1, and that he gave the major cities in Belgium a more "glamorous" look...
Well join the club, the Dutch, French and English population is still being held responsible for the trans Atlantic slave trade to this day. Hell I would say this is the case for all Europeans even if your country never held any lands in Africa. Even though non of us or them were alive to experience it. I’m not losing any sleep over it.
Indeed, even though Europeans ended slavery they are the most persecuted for it@@dankfarrik8376
I understad. But you still you ( belgians) you benefited from the infrastructures he created from these atrocities. Ofc you new generations are not guilty tho..
King Leopold didn't like the amount of ammunition that was being "wasted" by his soldiers in the Congo so he declared that for every bullet spent a right hand had to be returned to prove that the spent bullet had been used to kill a native and not just "wasted"
This set up an entire industry, collection points in the Congo were set up where the amputated hands were packed into crates to be shipped back to Belgium, and in Belgium the hands were counted to check the number of hands accounted for the number of bullets being used in the Congo.
Belgium under King Leopold in the Congo is one of the most horrific despicable episodes of human history.
To make the statement that slave conditions were 'less severe' under Britain compared to Belgian, Germans and Portuguese 'natives' is preposterously racist. Sashi Tahoor points out that 120 Million Indians died under British Rule and I'm sure they died grateful that the British were more benign. Programs like this really raise my ire. A death is a death, a slave is a slave, torture is torture: to grade them is as stupid as the gradation of 'Sins' in Catholic mythical hierarchies. It's like saying that what the Nazis did to the Jews was much more horrible than what Israel does and has done to Palestinians. I suppose it helps armchair moralists more comfortable about not having to look into the mirror of their own atrocities.
120 million people exterminated by the British? Are you a joker? Yeah right, you coming from the worst form of tyranny - the caste system, which you all were happy to accept for centuries, women burned with their husbands and untouchables cleaning toilets, whilst the elite Brahmin caste treated them as inhuman. So with your logic, you don’t mind being an untouchable, unclean. And may I remind you the British found it impossible to get rid of this system especially the burning of widows on funeral pyres. I think you should change your bed-time stories, Hypocrite yourself.
When such a small state conquers a large state of millions of people who allowed such crimes to be committed against them. This can only be done with the help of the Africans themselves. And if they don't like the colonizers, why do most people from the Congo dream and risk their way to that same Europe for a better opportunity. Where is the pride, why go into the bosom of their colonizers of their own free will?
Excellent video .... except the maps shown at the beginning. Belgium and France. And where is the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg which is not part of any of the countries shown and mentioned. Modify in order to show correct/relevant information.
This is why, I say with History like this within Africa in place's like The Congo/& Sierra Leone Rwanda was complicated.
Léopold owned this area personally and privately, publicly advertising this was on humanitarian grounds. It was not a colony. Belgium is NOT to blame for this and when the truth finally emerged, the country took it over and changed the situation. It’s not as though they had the internet in those days.
Indeed, King Leopold did not kill one African, he never set one foot in Africa. However people working for him did sometimes go too far. Leopold II did liberate Congo and Africa from slavery. Because of that it also stopped the expansion of the Islam in Africa. When he heard that some people were treating the Africans bad, then he threatened to take away the pensions of all Belgians involved, if they continued to mistreat Congolese. Those documents are still kept in the archives. Cutting off hands was never attributed to Belgians, but to Arab slave traders such as Tipo Tip. No one knows how many Congolese died during that period, not even approximately. We know that most Africans died of disease. In Belgium, during the same period, more people died on average from deprivation and working in poor conditions than in Congo. There are no known photos of a genocide. He could not even have killed 20,000,000 as many claim, because in those days there lived not even 10,000,000 people in ‘Congo Free State’. The lies about Leopold only started much later when England wanted to take Congo from Leopold II because of its many precious resources. They sent two ‘researchers’ to Congo with orders to write something about horrors so that the League of Nations, would take Congo from our king (and hopefully would give it then to England). Unfortunately for the English, there was great doubt about what they claimed. Congo was indeed taken from Leopold, because it was impossible for him alone to run such a large country, and was given to the Belgian government. From that moment on It became ‘Belgian Congo’. If a genocide had really taken place, the Congolese would not have welcomed the Belgians afterwards with open arms. They couldn't either, because if we had to believe the lie, then there wouldn't have been any Congolese left anymore.
Belgium never compensated the victims of their barbarism.
And what with the US, Russia, france, the whole of africa, China, japan. Wait mongolia, roman empire, ….. compensation. When Belgium was invaded by france, germany, spain,roman empire,…. Where is that kind of compensation?
@@jorren1000 Indeed, King Leopold did not kill one African, he never set one foot in Africa. However people working for him did sometimes go too far. Leopold II did liberate Congo and Africa from slavery. Because of that it also stopped the expansion of the Islam in Africa. When he heard that some people were treating the Africans bad, then he threatened to take away the pensions of all Belgians involved, if they continued to mistreat Congolese. Those documents are still kept in the archives. Cutting off hands was never attributed to Belgians, but to Arab slave traders such as Tipo Tip. No one knows how many Congolese died during that period, not even approximately. We know that most Africans died of disease. In Belgium, during the same period, more people died on average from deprivation and working in poor conditions than in Congo. There are no known photos of a genocide. He could not even have killed 20,000,000 as many claim, because in those days there lived not even 10,000,000 people in ‘Congo Free State’. The lies about Leopold only started much later when England wanted to take Congo from Leopold II because of its many precious resources. They sent two ‘researchers’ to Congo with orders to write something about horrors so that the League of Nations, would take Congo from our king (and hopefully would give it then to England). Unfortunately for the English, there was great doubt about what they claimed. Congo was indeed taken from Leopold, because it was impossible for him alone to run such a large country, and was given to the Belgian government. From that moment on It became ‘Belgian Congo’. If a genocide had really taken place, the Congolese would not have welcomed the Belgians afterwards with open arms. They couldn't either, because if we had to believe the lie, then there wouldn't have been any Congolese left anymore.
So let’s start with you by compensating - give your resources away to all these imagined victims, long dead, for your society, back through countless generations, long dead. Who are you to arbiter world wide culpability and assess world justice, to diminish your own society, when you’ve reaped its benefits? You are a child, who probably would be the last to sacrifice any of his resources, making judgements and demands on others. We all did Economic Marxist History of Africa - a poisonous ideology playing the blame game by self righteous a**holes. Hypocrites the lot of you!
When the Belgian's left they created more attrocities. There were a handful who ruled and several violent uprisings, and it is still today a terrible place to live for most even though it has many resources.
Hahaha I love your racially charged arrogance. You would be delighted to know that colonialists often left their colonies in a deliberate state of poverty, chaos and disharmony so as to give it as small a chance of succeeding on its own as possible. Success in surviving as an independent country implied that colonialists were not needed at all, and so had to be thwarted at all costs.
Speaking as someone living in a country that is still trying to mend the deep divisions created by the Empire as their last gift to a country desperate to get rid of the leech.
funny how American and British youtubers tell the tales of invasions and genocides committed by other countries while they themselves have been doing the same
Funny how they also like missing out that the Africans were slaving each other and was selling to the white man or some of the biggest slave traders were black strange this does not get spoke about, soppose does not fit into the divide narrative
I consider myself to be good at history and yet although I knew about Leopold ii exploits I was not aware of the poor natives having their hands cut off. It’s unbelievable to think about that even though it was a different century it is appalling that the practice was allowed to continue. I wonder if the majority of Belgians know about their past.
all for rubber for cars and bike tyres etc
David van reybrouck heeft het boek Congo geschreven Dit geeft een goed beeld van deze tijd.Een prachtig boek met gesprekken en interviews met mensen die de koloniale tijd hebben meegemaakt.Daarbij prachtige beschrijvingen van het alledaagse leven.
This looks like Flemish.
The amputations were so beautiful!
@@blugreen99 In de zin dat het een accuraat beeld geeft van een krankzinnige tijd .En literaire gezien een prachtig boek is.Begrijp je wel.
Leopold's Rubber: so good you'd pay an arm and a leg for it!
King Leopold did not kill one African, he never set one foot in Africa. However people working for him did sometimes go too far. Leopold II did liberate Congo and Africa from slavery. Because of that it also stopped the expansion of the Islam in Africa. When he heard that some people were treating the Africans bad, then he threatened to take away the pensions of all Belgians involved, if they continued to mistreat Congolese. Those documents are still kept in the archives. Cutting off hands was never attributed to Belgians, but to Arab slave traders such as Tipo Tip. No one knows how many Congolese died during that period, not even approximately. We know that most Africans died of disease. In Belgium, during the same period, more people died on average from deprivation and working in poor conditions than in Congo. There are no known photos of a genocide. He could not even have killed 20,000,000 as many claim, because in those days there lived not even 10,000,000 people in ‘Congo Free State’. The lies about Leopold only started much later when England wanted to take Congo from Leopold II because of its many precious resources. They sent two ‘researchers’ to Congo with orders to write something about horrors so that the League of Nations, would take Congo from our king (and hopefully would give it then to England). Unfortunately for the English, there was great doubt about what they claimed. Congo was indeed taken from Leopold, because it was impossible for him alone to run such a large country, and was given to the Belgian government. From that moment on It became ‘Belgian Congo’. If a genocide had really taken place, the Congolese would not have welcomed the Belgians afterwards with open arms. They couldn't either, because if we had to believe the lie, then there wouldn't have been any Congolese left anymore.
NICELY PLAYED
@@normanzimmerman5029 Truth will always prevail and the lie will vanish
Very interesting, thanks
Had to comment on this. David Livingston was not English. He was Scottish and was born in the town of Blantyre not too far away from where I live.
So?
So he was Scottish...@@cassandrarocha7369
@@cassandrarocha7369 So just get it right. Say either British or Scottish.
OMG this was awful. That kind of inhumanity must never be allowed to happen again. Unfortunately it did happen again in Germany, China (committed by Japan), Soviet Union, Cambodia, and many more. I just learned of "Derby dose" created in Jamaica by Thomas Thistlewood. Heck look at North Korea.
Hi Fred, Unfortunately atrocities are common. Even in the time since Belgium left the Congo in the 1960s the atrocities committed in the Congo/Zaire, even today, are enormous.
@@jamesevans1890 It is so sad.
King Leopold did not kill one African, he never set one foot in Africa. However people working for him did sometimes go too far. Leopold II did liberate Congo and Africa from slavery. Because of that it also stopped the expansion of the Islam in Africa. When he heard that some people were treating the Africans bad, then he threatened to take away the pensions of all Belgians involved, if they continued to mistreat Congolese. Those documents are still kept in the archives. Cutting off hands was never attributed to Belgians, but to Arab slave traders such as Tipo Tip. No one knows how many Congolese died during that period, not even approximately. We know that most Africans died of disease. In Belgium, during the same period, more people died on average from deprivation and working in poor conditions than in Congo. There are no known photos of a genocide. He could not even have killed 20,000,000 as many claim, because in those days there lived not even 10,000,000 people in ‘Congo Free State’. The lies about Leopold only started much later when England wanted to take Congo from Leopold II because of its many precious resources. They sent two ‘researchers’ to Congo with orders to write something about horrors so that the League of Nations, would take Congo from our king (and hopefully would give it then to England). Unfortunately for the English, there was great doubt about what they claimed. Congo was indeed taken from Leopold, because it was impossible for him alone to run such a large country, and was given to the Belgian government. From that moment on It became ‘Belgian Congo’. If a genocide had really taken place, the Congolese would not have welcomed the Belgians afterwards with open arms. They couldn't either, because if we had to believe the lie, then there wouldn't have been any Congolese left anymore.
Mankind will always find a way to fail.
@@normanzimmerman5029 King Leopold did not kill one African, he never set one foot in Africa. However people working for him did sometimes go too far. Leopold II did liberate Congo and Africa from slavery. Because of that it also stopped the expansion of the Islam in Africa. When he heard that some people were treating the Africans bad, then he threatened to take away the pensions of all Belgians involved, if they continued to mistreat Congolese. Those documents are still kept in the archives. Cutting off hands was never attributed to Belgians, but to Arab slave traders such as Tipo Tip. No one knows how many Congolese died during that period, not even approximately. We know that most Africans died of disease. In Belgium, during the same period, more people died on average from deprivation and working in poor conditions than in Congo. There are no known photos of a genocide. He could not even have killed 20,000,000 as many claim, because in those days there lived not even 10,000,000 people in ‘Congo Free State’. The lies about Leopold only started much later when England wanted to take Congo from Leopold II because of its many precious resources. They sent two ‘researchers’ to Congo with orders to write something about horrors so that the League of Nations, would take Congo from our king (and hopefully would give it then to England). Unfortunately for the English, there was great doubt about what they claimed. Congo was indeed taken from Leopold, because it was impossible for him alone to run such a large country, and was given to the Belgian government. From that moment on It became ‘Belgian Congo’. If a genocide had really taken place, the Congolese would not have welcomed the Belgians afterwards with open arms. They couldn't either, because if we had to believe the lie, then there wouldn't have been any Congolese left anymore.
Let's hope that Satan himself has chosen Leopold as his bed partner
Lol, deep
An excellent overview of a horrific time in modern history. It’s shameful, however, that you were compelled to edit out a word that accurately describes a questionable human practice. Let’s just consider the content of what’s generally discussed throughout media, which I think is far worse than a word applied in a very direct and accurate manner. Anyway, just goes to show you how as a species we are only a stones throw away from the worst part of our selves. Let’s always strive to do better and remember why we do it.
King Leopold did not kill one African, he never set one foot in Africa. However people working for him did sometimes go too far. Leopold II did liberate Congo and Africa from slavery. Because of that it also stopped the expansion of the Islam in Africa. When he heard that some people were treating the Africans bad, then he threatened to take away the pensions of all Belgians involved, if they continued to mistreat Congolese. Those documents are still kept in the archives. Cutting off hands was never attributed to Belgians, but to Arab slave traders such as Tipo Tip. No one knows how many Congolese died during that period, not even approximately. We know that most Africans died of disease. In Belgium, during the same period, more people died on average from deprivation and working in poor conditions than in Congo. There are no known photos of a genocide. He could not even have killed 20,000,000 as many claim, because in those days there lived not even 10,000,000 people in ‘Congo Free State’. The lies about Leopold only started much later when England wanted to take Congo from Leopold II because of its many precious resources. They sent two ‘researchers’ to Congo with orders to write something about horrors so that the League of Nations, would take Congo from our king (and hopefully would give it then to England). Unfortunately for the English, there was great doubt about what they claimed. Congo was indeed taken from Leopold, because it was impossible for him alone to run such a large country, and was given to the Belgian government. From that moment on It became ‘Belgian Congo’. If a genocide had really taken place, the Congolese would not have welcomed the Belgians afterwards with open arms. They couldn't either, because if we had to believe the lie, then there wouldn't have been any Congolese left anymore.
Completely biased and missing in pertinent facts, designed to ignite emotion.
@@vladvlog9677 What """pertinent""" facts are missing? Are you going to tell me that 'fellow africans killed other africans' ignoring that white officers forced them to? or perhaps you would question the death count which has already been established to be in the millions AND a direct cause of belgian negligence?
@@vladvlog9677explain to us in your infinite wisdom what's missing
@@mvanluven78Refer to my other comments for you to become enlightened.
Its crazy how similar the situation in many african countries is today to the situation described im your video.
I personally know one belgian soldier who told that they tried to free some white colored belgians out of villages in kongo ... but then killed them all instantly because these belgians became mad caused by the brutality of black kongo-people which became extremely brutal against belgian occupiers ... AND TODAY no one of the worldwide empowered leaders is bringing africa to humanity ... WHAT A SCHAME.
We need to stand up and fight when it is even to the last man if necessary.
No you won’t. Stop talking nonsense.
@@vladvlog9677So did you watch this just to get tickled by the sadism or to just police comments from blacks? This is why blacks can’t heal. We hear these painful stories and it’s all a joke to others. I’m starting to feel that people haven’t changed much and are still capable of this level of depravity.
Why the hell wasn't that dude charged with crimes against humanity?
By who?
Monarchs throughout history have nearly always got away with murder, rape and theft. mainly by fawning bureaucrats.
This legal notion didn't exist back then. It was created ex nihilo after the Shoah.
Oh didn't know that
"No tragedy, with Humanities end." 😑
14:43 I don't think I'd describe it as "enjoyment".
Am I reading this right ... Leopold didn't introduce barbarity and savagery to the Congo , it was already endemic ?
Yes. Self-loathing white liberals with white-saviour complex existed in the early part of the 20thc too.
Alice Seely-Harris was one of them, and she made the atrocities public. If you can find it, you can hear a radio interview of hers in the 1970's.
It seems that the failure to prevent the atrocities has been turned into the blame for committing them.
Yes
The fact that the Congo had to fight for independence and freedom shows that Belgium didn't learned any lesson of being two times being occupied. And still do nothing in the case of historical guilty.
and how many Belgians were killed by them in their idependence war. They used their own woman and children as human shields when they attacked belgium soldiers.
@@NMHC1978it was deserved.
I’m sure you would be the first to butcher your own people if given a little power. Thank god mercenaries were brought in to deal with butchered innocent priests and nuns, who had dedicated their lives to Africans.
WHEN did Belgian Congo FIGHT for independence???
The brutality ! I hope that leopolds soul roam the earth without a momment of rest or peace for all eternety .
Ik heb in een oud Duits boek een foto gezien hoe deze "koning"op jacht ging naar de inboorlingen.Deze werden als wild afgeschoten....
"King Leopold's Ghost" by Adam Hochschild is an excellent book, covering this in exhaustive detail - it is also emotionally exhausting.
The current generation of Belgians should not be accused of the wrongdoings of their ancestors, let's focus on the present.
Okay but ignoring history isn’t great either and a lot of Belgians love denying this history or make excuses for that.
I agree but you’re not being blamed in a vacuum
Send chocolate reparations
Nobody is accusing today's Belgians of committing these atrocities, I'm guessing you meant to say that they shouldn't be the one paying for it, which while it's not your average Belgian that should take this responsibility, however, it is the government and the monarchy's duty to do so, which we can't really say they did nor are currently doing. And Yeah let's focus on the present, because we can't really say things are doing perfect when it comes to racism in this country.
Didn't the current Belgians get benefits from the accumulated wealth from the belgian empire?. A- holes
@@regcla6667 pretty sure we payed allot over the years
remember reading about it a few years ago
not that it make's this all gone and forgotten
Yet his statues can still be found all over Belgium.
never seen ONE
So what, it’s their country, don’t bring your Marxist nonsense here.
Prominent historical figures ARE often immortalized with statues, yes.
@@RETIREDBUGKILLERunfortunately there's usually at least a few handful of old farts that still jack off to them around the world
And many have been torn down or have a plaque beneath it explaining what happened in the congo and what a dispicable man he is. I prefer that over tearing it all down, as that risks history being forgotten. Also, you'll be hardpressed to find any belgian who wouldn't gladly piss all over his statues, his is pretty much universaly despised here.
This is crazy to imagine. Humanity truly has no limit to how cruel and wicked we can be to each other.
SO before there were "Blood Diamonds" there was "Blood rubber"...
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? Jeremiah 17:9
At that time it was the king's personal property and not Belgium's. Leopold II himself never visited the Congo and never gave the order to cut off the hands of people who did not harvest enough rubber. These crimes are mainly the responsibility of plantation guards and officers of the local army. They were often fortune seekers with questionable morals. Which of course does not approve of what happened there, in any colony for that matter.
These excuses are what allow these things to stay swept under the rug. I assure you he had full knowledge of what happened and didn’t care.
These are not excuses but facts. Leopold II reportedly disapproved of dismemberment because it harmed his economic interests. He was quoted as saying "Cut off hands-that's idiotic. I'd cut off all the rest of them, but not hands. That's the one thing I need in the Congo." All coloniseres oppressed the peolpe in the colonies. The British, Dutch, French, Spanish, Portugese etc. And above all, you can't change the past.@@tayriobravo6204
@@tayriobravo6204exactly, that comment is just helping with hiding facts. No one gets involved with something without knowledge
So sad to see what human beings can do to each other
They bleeped the word for " humans who eat human flesh".
You tube is silly.
Proof of all CLAIMS are Required.
Leopold was a cannibal too..
Show me evidence. You can say a lot but you got to prove it. So, give us a clue
NB.David Livingstone was not an Englishman . He was Scottish
yo wus good my negmacks... chilling like a villian !
I'm sick of hearing this stuff, we have to start moving forward and stop looking back, history or not, let's have a better future together!!!!!
That's why we need to go to church. Keep praying for one another
1914, the invasion of Belgium by the imperial German army wasn't for occupation or subjugation. It was the Schlieffen Plan to invade Belgium to get to the Northern border of France. They would've passed through and left Belgium alone. It was the Belgians that held up the Germans and shifted the front of the battlefield from France to Belgium. No tears shedded here.
How impudent of the Belgians to object to being invaded and offering resistance.
@readmylisp how very pretentious of the Belgians to pick a fight with a superior army passing through, while crying foul and labeling it as the "Rape of Belgium." All the while, the Belgians are literally raping, pillaging, and exploiting a land and its people that they have actually occupied. No tears shed. 🚫 😢
Congo free state was an independent state with Leopold as head of that state. Congolese worked together with him, most of the atrocities were carried out by other Congolese (lik zap zap as mentioned for example) No Tears shedded here.
I went to Belgium and the museum about what they did in the Congo. It was horrifying
Belgium is a country that never should have existed. The Congo free state was Leopold Free State. It had nothing to do with Belgium or the Belgium population. Leopold II
had no problem unleashing the army on the Belgian population when they demonstrated against child abuse in the coal mines. The Belgian parliament refused to take over Congo from Leopold II.
We are talking about a time when only 10% of the population had the right to vote. Strange that I don't hear anything about all this in this pseudo documentary..
Correct.
Ahh something to watch and eat, love to you friend
HAVING A FRIEND OVER FOR DINNER?
@@normanzimmerman5029 sadly no
I’ve lived long enough to discover the truth! And I thank GOD APTTMH! ☝🏽🤓
I was shocked to see American Jeeps in use in the late 1800's. I always thought they were invented during WWII.
Thank god for channels like this to get the facts right.
Jeeps were invented in 1940. The willy jeep. Check your facts 😂
@urgumskurgum7570 - Check my facts? They are shown in use in the late 1800's in this video.
@@MrYfrank14 🙄🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
That is a situation where your private colony is so bad, even the other colonial empires tell you to stop and hand the thing over to parliament.
Oh and the "King of Belgium" vs "King of the Belgians" distinction in the description also exists elsewhere. For example Napoleon was "Emperor of the French" but never "Emperor of France" and the monarch of the UK is "King of the Scots" but not "King of Scotland"