Learned about Leopold II in high school, Heart Of Darkness was a book we read in class, King Leopold's Ghost is a popular book today.
You could just as easily say that 'No one calls Mao Hitler' as well (though of course many do), as his horrors aren't given the same focus either.
What about Genghis Khan? His exploits killed a significant integer percentage of the entire human race! Yet he's more likely to be revered than compared to Hitler.
The presumption that only black mass murders are skipped over, then, is utter nonsense. Why some are focused on whilst other ignored (or in the case of Genghis, revered) is a mystery. And let us not forget that Genghis even killed white people, just like Hitler!
Do you really believe we would still be so interested in the Holocaust if only black people were killed?!
Ps.: Not trying to be anti-semitic. But the fact that Israel and the Jew "community" are powerful players in the world economy does add to the perceived importance of the holocaust.
As much as I agree with the individual points in this article, the idea that this is a conspiracy is somewhat overblown. The fact is that violence on the scale of the Holocaust is scarily common throughout human history. The thing that is most special about it however is its ghastly efficiency, ideology, and modernity. It wasn't the scale of it, 30 million people died on the eastern front, and millions more were raped and terrorized in the territories it covered. It was the character of the Holocaust, its ghastly efficiency and modernity, that makes it so remembered today.
Additionally, in the western wold there is a large population of holocaust survivors keeping the memory alive. There are no currently living Congolese who were alive under King Leopold's reign around today, and their descendants do not have much of a voice in the western world either.
An extreme example of this indifference to things happening far away and long ago is the wars of the ancient world, where the brutality is rarely spoken of today. For instance, the fall of Carthage in the 3rd punic war, wherein the Romans literally destroyed the entire city and killed the vast majority of the entire population, some 445,000 people, a truly massive city in the ancient world.
It's probably relatively easy to dismiss 100,000 vs 1 million or 10 million, since in a way it just looks like "statistics". But look at it another way. How did you feel when someone close to you die? Just that one person, not 5 more, or 100x more. Now multiply how you felt by 100,000 times, and think about the damage to human life that was created.
Does it really matter that 1 million is 10x bigger than that, or is 100,000 "enough" to think the damage is immense?
Couldn't it just be cultural spotlighting? People in western Europe and the US look at Hitler as the greatest evil because his actions were committed within their zone of influence and left a mark on their culture.
In Congo, I'm sure, the name "Leopold" is a bigger evil then Hitler. In the west, Hitler is the greatest evil because the victims are much closer to them. In Congo, I'm sure, not everyone knows who Hitler was. So, yes, in the west Leopold isn't called "Hitler" as true as in Congo Hitler is not called "Leopold".
[+] [-] alexeisadeski3|12 years ago|reply
You could just as easily say that 'No one calls Mao Hitler' as well (though of course many do), as his horrors aren't given the same focus either.
What about Genghis Khan? His exploits killed a significant integer percentage of the entire human race! Yet he's more likely to be revered than compared to Hitler.
The presumption that only black mass murders are skipped over, then, is utter nonsense. Why some are focused on whilst other ignored (or in the case of Genghis, revered) is a mystery. And let us not forget that Genghis even killed white people, just like Hitler!
[+] [-] gverri|12 years ago|reply
Do you really believe we would still be so interested in the Holocaust if only black people were killed?!
Ps.: Not trying to be anti-semitic. But the fact that Israel and the Jew "community" are powerful players in the world economy does add to the perceived importance of the holocaust.
[+] [-] andrewvc|12 years ago|reply
Additionally, in the western wold there is a large population of holocaust survivors keeping the memory alive. There are no currently living Congolese who were alive under King Leopold's reign around today, and their descendants do not have much of a voice in the western world either.
An extreme example of this indifference to things happening far away and long ago is the wars of the ancient world, where the brutality is rarely spoken of today. For instance, the fall of Carthage in the 3rd punic war, wherein the Romans literally destroyed the entire city and killed the vast majority of the entire population, some 445,000 people, a truly massive city in the ancient world.
[+] [-] mtgx|12 years ago|reply
It's probably relatively easy to dismiss 100,000 vs 1 million or 10 million, since in a way it just looks like "statistics". But look at it another way. How did you feel when someone close to you die? Just that one person, not 5 more, or 100x more. Now multiply how you felt by 100,000 times, and think about the damage to human life that was created.
Does it really matter that 1 million is 10x bigger than that, or is 100,000 "enough" to think the damage is immense?
[+] [-] wrongc0ntinent|12 years ago|reply
It's become a little more complicated since, but intent was pretty much a constant condition, so I doubt this would qualify.
Also wanna add that scale is important to all things society, though I appreciate the humanity of your argument.
[+] [-] true_religion|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] GnwbZHiU|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pella|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smokeybourbon|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]