Introduction
This essay explores the historical promotion of philosophical and religious ideologies by the state and ruling classes to establish dominance in society, focusing on the examples of King Leopold II of Belgium and V.I. Lenin of Soviet Russia. It examines how these ideologies were reflected in legal frameworks and what this reveals about the true nature and purpose of law in society. By analysing the Congo Free State under Leopold II and the Soviet Union under Lenin, this discussion will highlight the interplay between power, ideology, and law, demonstrating how laws often serve to legitimise and perpetuate the interests of the ruling elite. The essay will conclude with broader implications for understanding law as a tool of social control rather than an impartial arbiter of justice.
King Leopold II and the Congo Free State: Colonial Ideology and Legal Exploitation
King Leopold II, ruler of Belgium from 1865 to 1909, personally controlled the Congo Free State from 1885 to 1908, a territory exploited under the guise of humanitarian and Christian missionary objectives. Leopold promoted a paternalistic philosophy rooted in European superiority and Christian morality, often aligned with the ‘civilising mission’ ideology prevalent among colonial powers. This philosophy was propagated to justify exploitation, presenting the Congolese as in need of European guidance and salvation (Hochschild, 1998).
This ideology was reflected in the legal framework of the Congo Free State, which was essentially a personal fiefdom of Leopold. Laws were designed to maximise resource extraction, notably rubber and ivory, through forced labour systems. The establishment of the Force Publique, a brutal militia, was legally sanctioned to enforce labour quotas, often through violence and mutilation (Hochschild, 1998). These laws prioritised economic gain over human rights, revealing how law served as an instrument of oppression to maintain Leopold’s control and wealth. Indeed, the absence of legal protections for the Congolese population underscores the purpose of law as a mechanism to reinforce the dominance of the ruling class, cloaked in the rhetoric of religious and moral superiority.
V.I. Lenin and the Soviet Union: Marxist-Leninist Philosophy and Legal Revolution
In contrast, V.I. Lenin, leader of the Bolshevik Revolution and founder of the Soviet state from 1917 until his death in 1924, championed a Marxist-Leninist philosophy that rejected religion and bourgeois ideologies in favour of a proletarian dictatorship. Lenin argued that religion, particularly Orthodox Christianity, was a tool of oppression used by the ruling classes to pacify the masses, famously calling it the “opium of the people” (Fitzpatrick, 1999). Under Lenin, the state promoted atheism and dialectical materialism as dominant ideologies.
This philosophical shift was mirrored in Soviet law. The 1918 Constitution of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic separated church and state, nationalised church property, and banned religious education in schools (Fitzpatrick, 1999). Furthermore, laws were enacted to suppress religious institutions, with clergy often persecuted under anti-counterrevolutionary statutes. These legal measures aimed to dismantle the old ideological order and establish a new societal framework aligned with Marxist principles. However, while ostensibly promoting equality, Soviet law under Lenin also served to consolidate Bolshevik power, revealing a similar purpose to Leopold’s laws: law as a tool to enforce the ruling ideology and suppress dissent.
The Nature and Purpose of Law in Society
The cases of Leopold II and Lenin illustrate how state-promoted ideologies—whether colonial Christian paternalism or Marxist atheism—shape legal systems to reflect and sustain the interests of the ruling class. In both instances, law functioned less as a protector of societal welfare and more as a mechanism to entrench power. Under Leopold, laws facilitated exploitation under the guise of moral duty; under Lenin, they aimed to reconstruct society but equally suppressed opposition. This suggests that the true purpose of law in society is often to legitimise authority and maintain control, rather than to deliver impartial justice.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the historical examples of King Leopold II and V.I. Lenin demonstrate how dominant philosophies or religious strands, whether colonial ideology or Marxist-Leninism, are promoted by the state to shape societal norms and are embedded in law to reinforce ruling class authority. Laws in the Congo Free State and early Soviet Union reveal a common purpose: to serve the interests of those in power, often at the expense of marginalised groups. This analysis helps us understand law not as a neutral entity but as a construct deeply tied to power dynamics, prompting critical reflection on its role in contemporary society. Indeed, recognising this historical pattern encourages a more questioning approach to legal systems today, asking whose interests they truly serve.
References
- Fitzpatrick, S. (1999) Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s. Oxford University Press.
- Hochschild, A. (1998) King Leopold’s Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
