...no Leopold II, and, thus, no Belgian Congo. Countless suffering averted; yes, a great work of art (Heart of Darkness) is also averted, but the larger suffering is, to me, the better thing to avoid.
Actually in a twisted sense they're even less evenly matched: a Winfield Scott who's able to conduct a war in the field against the CSA just two years after his Mexico City campaign with the ability to wage classic Napoleonic War will give the CSA one of the greatest asskickings in the long, glorious history of kicking ass.
Well, Leopold II was the only one to do it on his own dime, which makes him alone completely culpable in the atrocities; I think that's why it's gotten the most notoriety, aside from Heart of Darkness.Leopold II was indeed an evil man. However, the exact same policies of slavery, torture and hostage-taking of families happened in both the French Congo and northern Angola. In fact the death toll was just as high, per capita, in the French Congo, and it probably was in northern Angola, although we do not have official statistics. Similar atrocities also happened later in the Amazon, although the more thinly-spread population there meant the death toll there was not as catastrophic. Sadly, it was the nature of European colonialism in rubber-producing regions, no matter who was in charge.