What was the worst Imperialist Power

[Zuni]

I would say Belgium, Japan or Russia----very brutal, very greedy.
Belgium especially from the late 1880s to about 1910 in the Congo, Russia in either Tsarist or Soviet times (the Soviet Union was an empire itself, not to mention all the territory controlled, occupied or heavily influenced by moscow from Berlin to the 38th Parallel in Korea)
Japan during the 1930s and 1940s, especially in China, Korea, Vietnam, Phillipines and Indonesia.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

1. Belgium for the Congo, certainly. Maybe the Russians

If you count the Nazi's, then there's your winner.

[Zuni]

3. I didn't include the Nazis

because they were more than just imperialist--they were the devil's foot soldiers.

[NWHarkness]

2. That's a tough call!

The Japanese were pretty brutal, as were the Russians. I believe it was Marx who called Russia "The Prisonhouse of nations" which was pretty apt. But the Russians did allow for some expression of local culture, while the belgian occupation of the Congo was little more than outright genocide. So, given the more limited scale, I think I'd have to point to the Belgians among your choices. The Portugese and Spanish were pretty awful as well.

[Zuni]

8. Japan in China was perhaps even more genocidal

than the Belgian Congo. Certainly far more died---and chemical and biological weapons were used( it has been proved in japanese Court )Death toll is probably more than 20 million in China alone.

I am not even going to get on the inhuman repression, slavery and genocide in the USSR(1918-1956) of the central asian republics and eastern europe, plus Russia, Siberia and Ukraine. My grandparents grew up there, and to them living under Stalin was worse than the war, where they were both prisoners and forced laborers in Germany.

But there is something so creul and calculating and devious about the incredibly greedy King Leopold that made me put them on the list. His Congo colony was a buisness venture, for Rubber. I have never seen such uncontrolled greed in modern times in all that I have read. The Congo free State truly was The Heart of Darkness.

[smirkymonkey]

17. I think the Chinese death toll was more like 40 million

according to Iris Chang, who wrote The Rape of Nanking. And that wasn't the least of it, either - exceptional brutality.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

4. How about most useless Imperialists?

Got to be the Italians.

[Zuni]

11. I would have to agree

The best they got was Ethiopia, and even they lost to the Ethiopians in 1896!

[Screaming Lord Byron]

14. I had a theory once that the Italians made poor imperialists

because Italy had good food,a good climate, culture and beautiful women. The British made great imperialists because Britain is a small island with bad weather and terrible food.

This may not hold up under scrutiny, though.;)

[Zuni]

38. Italians are generally a laid back,

want to party kind of folk. They are fun and good humored, but they are pretty bad fighting wars.

[NoPasaran]

5. The Mongols

Genghis Khan was worse than Hitler.

[Zuni]

9. Tamerlane was worse than Genghis

Genghis's legions at least gave captured provinces a measure of autonmomy after they were done with their slaughter.

I would say hitler was worse, but that might be only because he had modern technology

It is hard to believe that 700 years ago, Mongolia was the most powerful nation on eart.

[HereSince1628]

6. Didn't we do this topic this morning???

[Dirk39]

7. Maybe Germany?

I mean, we would never forgive the world for being a bit late and missing imperialism at first, although we did a few blueprints for Ausschwitz in Africa. Common girls and boys: two World Wars - anyone here, who wants to compete?
Now we take the whole EU and collect money for the third attempt, while the dying Dinosaur goes a bit wild in countries, who can't fight back...
That's called "theatrical micromilitarism" by our french friends, who's dreaming of regaining their old empire like status with their new comrades.
Wait 20 years...
Hello from Germany,
Dirk

[Zuni]

10. I ruled out the Nazis

because they were an abberation. They were beyond Imperialist. The kaiser's armies never did things like the Japanese, Russians or the Belgians---we are talking major killing and repression.

[Dirk39]

13. Sorry, but this is one of the key points in understanding...

german history. And - on the other hand - there is an incredible dark chapter about german colonial history in Africa during the 19th century, but I would have to check it again, before talking BS. But I'm serious about the situation now, but it doesn't fit to the Lounge.

Dirk

[mobuto]

20. Oh no? The Germans were very very bad.

In many ways worse than any other imperial nation in sub saharan Africa, and that includes Belgium.

They exterminated tens of thousands people, in modern-day Namibia they effectively genocided the Herero people - the principle tribe - out of existence.

Now the Germans didn't kill as many people as other imperial powers, because they got into the land-grabbing game late, and because by the time they came, most heavily populated areas had already been colonized, but their rule was marked by brutality of a sort that shocked other Europeans. Slave labor in Cameroon and Togo was as harsh as it was anywhere.

I think if you extrapolate what they did in their relatively brief and limited span as a colonial power and compare it to the much larger French and British colonial empires, I think you'll find that the Germans were far worse.

[Dirk39]

22. Hi Mobutu!

I guess this is the part of german history, I did mention above. And it seems to me that this part of german history isn't well known. Thanx for posting this.
Greetings from Germany,
Dirk

[Zuni]

30. I know about the Herero

and other German atrocities in Africa. But Germany's colonies were not anything like the Belgian Congo between 1890-1910. The whole colony was a vast slave labor enterprise and millions died. King Leopold II created an army to run the Congo, the original Force Publique, and recruited mostly from tribes that practiced cannibalism and ritual mutilation. They were among Africa's most brutal killers, ever.
The German atrocities are simply not on the scale or the cruelty of the others on this list.

[Dirk39]

36. You're right...

but you have to see the relationship between Germany, having the feeling to "miss" colonialism and to try to get their share in the 20th century. This is a key to understand the Nazis.
But on another scale, somehow I wish that one day, Africa gets back, what we did steal from them and what we commited to them. Without what we did steal from Africa, Europe wouldn't exist and the USA wouldn't exist. If we would have to give back, what we have taken from them on a level, comparable to the way, they have to pay their "credits" back, the gold alone would weigh about five times the weight of this whole planet.
Dirk

[HEyHEY]

12. Canada

We have a very evil side bwahahahaha

Seriously I'd say the British/in SOuth Africa

[Zuni]

39. Canadians are a pack of bloodthirsty wolves

If there are one people that I truly despise, it is the savages up north...:) just kidding

[madddog]

15. hello...

How about ENGLAND? Is there any place on the planet those folks haven't tried to steal/exploit/ruin politically. They left their footprints over half the earth at one time or another, and not for the better.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

They never tried colonizing Iceland.

I guess Puffins had no part in the colonialist masterplan.

[izzie]

18. All countries leave their marks.

England left its laws with us and they are not the worst laws in the world. And look back at just who wanted Eur to be under one form of govt. My God was he right? And Japan has always used the best of what these countries brought to them. So sometimes this can be used for the good of people.

[SiobhanClancy]

25. The English certainly left their mark...

ask any Irish person,or anyone of Irish ancestry.

[Dirk39]

19. The difference between England and France is somehow...

interesting. Nearly all africans I know, from countries being colonized by England, are christians, while France wasn't so interested in colonizing the minds of the people they've colonized.
Dirk

[mobuto]

23. But also

France created more civil institutions and much more of a civil society than you see in the other colonial powers. I think the result of that is that despite profound ethnic divisions, Senegal, (until recently) the Cote D'Ivoire, and even Mali have been some of sub-Saharan Africa's most stable and democratic countries. So while all colonialism was bad, I think it can well be argued that French colonialism was by-and-large the least bad. And you just don't see large-scale slavery, genocide, or attrocities the way you do elsewhere.

[Dirk39]

27. You might be right...

I don't know enough about colonialism in Africa to judge this, but it makes sense, according to the Africans, I had the pleasure to know so far. One of the saddest things so far is, that a lot of the nonsense, the missionairies told them, is still in their heads. I posted this before on DU, but I just felt somehow helpless, when the sister of a friend of mine, who grew up in Liberia and later Jamaica, told me if I think it's true, that "god" created black people as a kind of punishment for a - whatelse should be the reason? - sexual sin commited by one human being. And all of his sons and daughters are black ever since...
She's about 23 years old and apart from not having much education, she's very intelligent. But this nonsense is still engraved in african people, who are the sons of the daughters of the sons...
Due to the fact, that we're all of african origin, it's just incomprehensible,
Dirk

[Zuni]

41. Actually, French colonies

were very brutal. They did good things too, but there was slavery, massacres, torture etc.
Look up the French colonial wars and there are some absolutely savage tales.

[Dirk39]

43. O.K o.k.: I surrender...

somehow, I was with you right from the start: I propose some Realpolitik: All DUers abstain from half of their income for about a year, in the mean time, we build groups of about ten DUers and rob banks all over Europe and the USA and transfer the money to Africa. But it's really important that simultaneous other even moderate anti-colonialists DUers EAT, and I say EAT, all the members of the IMF, the Worldbank and the WTO. At least this would be some kind of moderate starting point...
Dirk

[Zuni]

44. Dirk

I think more people should be voluntarily donating money to Africa to help fight AIDS and such, just because it is the right thing to do. I have given money to the UN Foundation to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria.

[Dirk39]

45. It will not help...

for every dollar or euro we give, our beloved corporations and IMF and Worldbank will take ten dollars out. And in a way, although I know that a lot of people doing this have "good intentions", it's about politics. It's not about giving donations to these poor african people.
Just study, what we were told all over Europe and the USA about the "conflict" between the Hutus and minority Tutsis and then go back to colonial history and ask yourself, who made the Tutsis and Hutus.
And as I mentioned before, if we would have to pay back our debts under the same conditionos, the african nations have to pay their "credits" back, we - Europe and the USA - would have to give them everything we own now. And we would still have debts for about 1000000000 years.
Dirk

[Zuni]

28. Think about this

UK rule was far more humane than the japanese or Russians, and they actually left good things behind in many cases. Think about if Ghandi had been an Armenian or an Estonian living in the USSR circa 1938? My guess is he would have ended up in a slave labor camp in Siberia.

[izzie]

16. I think Russia.

What they did to the Alaskan was hard to believe. I do think all have done some pretty bad stuff. You can do anything to people if you class them as not as good as you are.

[Kamika]

21. Soviet.. nothing else compares

They killed millions and millions.. much much worse then the nazis

[mobuto]

24. I disagree - I think they were actually pretty good

I think "colonialism" - assuming you're referring to Central Asia and whatnot, was one of the few things the Soviets did quite well. Look at Uzbekistan and Pakistan as studies in contrast, if you want.

Pakistan has 33% or so literacy. Uzbekistan has 100% literacy.

Pakistan has exteremely limited access to healthcare. Uzbekistan had, until recently, a health care system superior to just about any in the third world.

The same contrast exists when you look at roads, police stations, airports, sewerage - any and all infrastructure. The Soviets killed millions of people everywhere - Stalin may have been the worst mass murderer in human history - but I think you can still argue that they were the best rulers Central Asia ever had. Which is sad.

[The Magistrate]

26. You Can Indeed, Sir

Central Asia sets the bar pretty damned low.

A pleasure to see you about the place again, my friend!

[mobuto]

33. Pleasure is all mine

Sir.

[Kamika]

29. ehm

Yeah but they still murdered tons of ppl dude.

[mobuto]

32. I guess I am playing devil's advocate

And to be fair, the Soviets screwed up the environment in Central Asia more than I think anybody has ever done anywhere.

I'm not trying to minimize the crimes of the Soviets - and in fact, if you want to count the great purges as imperialist acts, then you cannot possibly exclude Hitler from the calculus.

[Kamika]

34. but he was nothing to stalin

I read stalin killed ATLEAST double the amount of ppl hitler killed

[Zuni]

37. The purges were not imperialist

They were a tyrant's bloody repression of an already existing empire. Now Stalin dividing Europe with the Nazis in 1939 was Imperialist, as well as invading Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Roumania, Finland in 1939-1940.

[Kamika]

40. Ok..

It was done by an empire though..

[Zuni]

35. A few facts about the USSR's Asian Republics

They had and still have some of the highest death rates in the world. The planned economy reserved massive tracts of land for cotton plantations, which destroyed the ecosystem. Pesticides and the fact that the Soviets dumped massive amounts of toxic wastes makes the soil in many areas toxic. Pollution from the massive factory complexes creates areas with black snow. The water from the rivers is toxic in many areas. The Aral Sea, once a large inland sea, is practically non existent anymore.
Even before 1991, the infant mortality rate was as high as parts of Africa.
Soviet 'Health Care' might have been universal but the quality, even in Russia was abysmal. Trust me, I have family in Russia. If you got to see a doctor, he was most likely a party hack. Medicines were always short and the technology was not even as good as the US had in the 1950s and 1960s.
People died of easily curable diseases, or were not even diagnosed properly.
In addition, the working and living conditions were as bad as the health care, making it even worse healthwise.

[Johnyawl]

31. How about Spain?

A brutal, brutal empire that wiped out peoples and cultures from the Rio Grande to Terra Delfuego. They delibertly destroyed the evidence of the advanced cultures so that thwey could tell history the people were just savages.

They looted the Incan and Aztec empires (which were in themselves pretty brutal empires), and sent the silver, gold and precious jewels to Europe to make themselves rich. They killed off the native populations in the silver and gold mines, then imported african slaves to work them, sending all the wealth home to Spain.

They looted the cultures they found in the Phillipines; native malay kingdoms, and principalities, wiping out their cultures and religions, and sending the wealth to Spain. The "Manila Galleons" were yearly convoys that brought the wealth across the Pacific to Mexico, were it was than transshipped to Spain. These were fabulous treasure ships that brought great wealth to the two English seadogs that captured one of them; Woods Rogers, and Francis Drake.

Spain became the wealthiest, most powerful nation in Europe on the bases of this stolen wealth. They used much of that wealth to suppress protestanism, terrorizing their own population, and much of Italy; and fighting religious wars in Holland and England.

[Zuni]

42. Good points

I forgot about the Conquistadores and the Inquistion and the Pirates.
They were definetly the worst of the early European Empires. I was thinking more late 19th---20th Century.

Good points about the Spaniards.