Could the Congolese people go Extinct? What then?

[Helltanz98]

But say one believed in "Anglias oblige" (pardon my bad Latin) - the duty of England to civilize the world.

(Substitute your chosen country) That sort of racist would find the idea of the people being exterminated rather appalling - he'd still be racist, probably, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't be shocked and horrified.

On the other hand, someone who is racist in the sense that "The Africans are all just sub-human savages and that's that." probably won't care at all.

But not everyone was #2.

I was actually just pointing hey colonialist powers tended to be assholes to their subjects in general

 

[Socrates]

I think people are being unduly unfair on the social attitudes of the late 19th Century Western public. A very large number of people WERE offended by such brutality and thought very badly of it, but for a large part, people just didn't know about it. Or if they did know, it wasn't given enough media attention for them to feel enraged enough to demand action. But when a concerted campaign did happen - see the slave trade ban for example - public concern did go through the roof. It just was that there wasn't much impartial reporting from Africa in this day and age.

In the case of the Congo, Leopold had a huge and very successful propaganda campaign to suggest firstly that he was being humanitarian in the Congo, then that nothing bad was going on, and then that bad stuff was going on but he was striving to fix it. It was only due to the meticulousness of Edmund Morel as a journalist that this was successfully combated (eventually). The terrible case of the Herero simply didn't have a Morel to draw attention to it.

As for the overall discussion, complete depopulation did certainly take place in the Western part of the territory (excluding the enslaved of course). It's quite possible that some ethnic groups were made extinct - we don't have sufficient knowledge of the different pre-colonial ones to know. However, the massive size of the overall territory is just too large, and the Belgians did not have enough reach, for them all to be killed.

 

[Derek Pullem]

I think people are being unduly unfair on the social attitudes of the late 19th Century Western public. A very large number of people WERE offended by such brutality and thought very badly of it, but for a large part, people just didn't know about it. Or if they did know, it wasn't given enough media attention for them to feel enraged enough to demand action. But when a concerted campaign did happen - see the slave trade ban for example - public concern did go through the roof. It just was that there wasn't much impartial reporting from Africa in this day and age.

In the case of the Congo, Leopold had a huge and very successful propaganda campaign to suggest firstly that he was being humanitarian in the Congo, then that nothing bad was going on, and then that bad stuff was going on but he was striving to fix it. It was only due to the meticulousness of Edmund Morel as a journalist that this was successfully combated (eventually). The terrible case of the Herero simply didn't have a Morel to draw attention to it.

As for the overall discussion, complete depopulation did certainly take place in the Western part of the territory (excluding the enslaved of course). It's quite possible that some ethnic groups were made extinct - we don't have sufficient knowledge of the different pre-colonial ones to know. However, the massive size of the overall territory is just too large, and the Belgians did not have enough reach, for them all to be killed.

+1

Without the very outcry that occurred in OTL Leopold would have continued on to beyond the First World War and there would be a very significant depopulation of Congo

What would stop him would probably be the falling profitability of Rubber due to higher cost of labour and other competing sources in the 1920's (Malaysia, Sri Lanka, synthetic rubber). But Congo has tremendous resources of gold, colbalt, copper and other resources so in theory the state could survive providing a source of workers could be found

Leopold's state never moved beyond a pillage economy, first ivory and then rubber. A more farsighted economic strategy would have netted him even more wealth (and as a by product mitigated the worst of the genocide) but then the Free State wouldn't have been the Free State

 

[Socrates]

Leopold's state never moved beyond a pillage economy, first ivory and then rubber. A more farsighted economic strategy would have netted him even more wealth (and as a by product mitigated the worst of the genocide) but then the Free State wouldn't have been the Free State

Not convinced about this. Just like in the Southern USA, slavery was very profitable for the capital owners, even if, economically, its worse for everyone overall. The Free Congo State was extremely profitable, while most other colonies were net drains on the metropolis. It's worth bearing a mind that the same economic strategy was pursued in the French Congo and neighbouring parts of Angola.

 

[kasumigenx]

I was watching a documentary about the brutality of King Leopold's Congo. One thing that stood out to me was a quotation by a news reporter from the time, who said that if Leopold continued his actions, the Congolese people would become extinct within 20 years.

Say Leopold lives longer and doesn't give up the Congo. Could that actually happen? What would end up happening to the colony if it didn't have any people? A League of Nations Nature Preserve?

In the Philippines...

This reminds me Spanish have resettlement policies in the areas they committed genocides (whether unintentional or intentional) that is why it is not really obvious that they committed them like what they did in the Eastern Luzon and in Zambales, they resettled those areas with people from other parts of Luzon making the survivors a minority, they did the same in Mindanao which suffered the same fate as well, this is one of the things that I am working to butterfly in one of my timelines.

I was actually just pointing the colonialist powers tended to be assholes to their subjects in general

I agree on that, I think these colonialists are assholes especially when they brain wash the natives..