African American Imperialism Analysis

Throughout history, nations have tried to ‘compete’ with each other in almost every respect, trying to become the biggest world power. One way to do this is by developing colonies: this increases land supply as well as the abundance of resources, thus improving the economy. Africa was a generally underdeveloped continent with weak, decentralized political structures that could be easily conquered by western militaries, who wanted to colonize there to use the raw materials and human labor to improve their economy. While Belgians who were imperializing the Congo in the 19th century believed and justified their actions by saying they were helping the conquered peoples to advance and “catch up” to the West technologically and culturally, in reality
Whether it was for tires or waterproofing clothes, all Leopold knew was that there was a demand, and Leopold could provide it. Unlike other African and Asian countries that were attempting to catch up with the rubber boom, the Congo already had matured rubber trees, so Leopold wanted to stay ahead of the game while he still could (Hochschild 159). While in the past workers could be chained together and whipped to make them obey, rubber trees were scattered across the forest and vines were located in spots that required careful scaling of trees, so a new strategy had to be used (Hochschild 160). Making rubber was a difficult, painful process involving travelling deep into the forest in a desperate search for vines, cutting them open and waiting for the vines to tap, and then spreading the rubber syrup across one’s body to make the rubber dry; and the Congolese eventually realized this long, difficult process really wasn’t worth their effort. Europeans disagreed, knowing the potential profit, and established a forced labor system in the Congo (Hochschild 161). European soldiers would arrive in a village and then take the wives and children of the villages as hostage, refusing to give them back until the men met a rubber quota. Once enough rubber was collected to satisfy them, the soldiers would sell the women back for a few goats or other small
While they said they were fighting these “savage wars of peace” (Kipling) to allow the Africans to become civilized, in reality they were being the uncivilized ones, treating the Africans as less than human and murdering entire villages when things didn’t go their way. They were colonizing Africa in the name of progress, but demolishing entire villages and destroying innumerable forests doesn’t seem like a radical reform for the Congo. Kipling asked imperialists to “search their manhood” for a reason to let the Africans suffer in their uncivilized bubble, but which was worse: living in a low-tech world where everyone was generally happy and close with their family, or being forced to work through terrible conditions that encouraged fatal health problems to free the wives and mothers that white soldiers had taken hostage (Hochschild 161)? Is it really more shocking that the Africans found a way to survive in a world without industrialization than the fact that countless innocent lives were lost so Europe’s consumerism could continue to flourish? Hopefully the answer is clear: while the Europeans argued otherwise, they were the real barbarians, both directly and indirectly murdering Africans for mere consumer goods and the money it would