
When You Kill Ten Million Africans You Aren't Called 'Hitler' (2010) - dsr12
http://www.walkingbutterfly.com/2010/12/22/when-you-kill-ten-million-africans-you-arent-called-hitler/
======
alexeisadeski3
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!

~~~
gverri
Yeah, but his victims were not rich jews.

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.

~~~
Gobitron
You are very clearly being anti-semitic. I don't have the power to downvote,
but comments like this should always be repudiated. Putting the word
"community" in quotes, talking about "rich Jews" as the only victims of the
Holocaust, and strongly implying that Jews control the media narrative because
of some unified global economic power make you an anti-semite of the worst
kind. You can't just say "not trying to be anti-semitic" and think that gives
you a pass. You are anti-semitic based on what you are saying. Everything you
are saying is unfounded and based on bigoted tropes that have been around for
centuries. Own what you say and what you explicitly imply, and defend it if
you think it's true.

You are the worst kind of coward.

~~~
gverri
I put the 'community' in quotes because I really don't know if the jewish
culture could be considered a community, as it's bigger than that.

Again, where in my post do I say that the Jews where the only victims of the
holocaust?

Do you really have any doubt about the influence of the jewish people?! For me
this is just common sense.

Just explain to me what's particular about the holocaust that makes it much
more important than any other genocide in our recent history.

I really don't believe there's anything.

~~~
Gobitron
Look, this isn't the right forum and I'm not the right person to engage in
this. Though I appreciate that your are engaging in a civil manner, I don't
think you're being honest with yourself here either, and I recommend you take
a deep look at the precise words of your post to understand why.

------
andrewvc
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.

------
mtgx
What are you called when you kill 100,000 Iraqis?

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
There's a reasonably narrow definition of the term "genocide". Since it
started with Lemkin, I recommend starting here:
[http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raphael_Lemkin](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raphael_Lemkin)

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
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.

------
GnwbZHiU
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".

------
pella
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congo_Free_State#Humanitarian_d...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congo_Free_State#Humanitarian_disaster)

