In the chapter 01 Hochschild introduces a disturbing theme of the book: the open, almost banal way that Europeans of the late 19th century talked about inflicting pain on African people. At the time, many Europeans believed that Africans were sub-human, little better than animals. But even as Stanley looked down on Africans, the entire English establishment looked down on Stanley for being a working-class Welshman rather than a real English aristocrat.
Hochschild begins the story of King Leopold’s greed for the Congo by sketching the earliest colonial history of Africa. Europeans were driven since the fifteenth century to explore, trade, conquer, and colonize the exotic lands they considered “empty” and up for grabs by westerners. What seemed to make Africa empty in their eyes is that it was inhabited by non-Christian indigenous people who had a “primitive” society. Tribal societies were not considered a real civilization with a recognized government. Many tribal people did not have permanent settlements and were perceived as passing through or camping out on the land, since they did not have an idea of land ownership. Hochschild points out that when Leopold ordered Sir Henry Morton Stanley,
…show more content…
He wrote of his porters, ‘”They are faithless, lying, thievish, indolent knaves, who only teach a man to despise himself for his folly in attempting a grand work with such miserable slaves’” (Chpt. 3, p. 50). In a remarkable logical turn around, Stanley, known for his brutality,makes himself look like the victim of savages who thwart his noble goals. Although Leopold pretended to Stanley that he wanted to establish a confederation of free negro republics, his aides wrote a different story to Stanley: ‘”There is no question of granting the slightest political power to negroes. That would be absurd. The white men, heads of the stations, retain all the powers’” (Chpt. 4, p.