Psychology of Conquest

The account of the Congo's conquest in King Leopold's Ghost is original in its approach. Facts and dates are handy but a psychological profile of the players involved can be more useful and interesting. It is easy to forget that these sweeping periods of history were often largely orchestrated by a handful people (wealthy, white men) and that these major leaders and influencers were human with very human flaws and motivations. By looking at the background of those involved, it is easier to understand motive and the human element of historical events such as the conquest of the Congo.
I was not shocked to learn that most the key players here are disturbed people. Sure, maybe a little surprised at the extent or caught off guard by taking a peek behind history and the people involved, however, it makes sense. Leopold's early life and his family and other personal relationships largely influenced who he was as a ruler and what drove him to seek out colonies. Men such as Stanley sought an escape from their desperate lives in the unknown of the African wilderness where they themselves would be unknown and could rewrite themselves as daring men of conquest and courage.
Historically, many conquistadors and commanders have been notably unstable and have been motivated by personal lives and psychological hang-ups. From explorers such as the greedy, immoral Hernan Cortes who disobeyed his mother country for personal gain to the leaders in charge of such exploits, many have layered psychological profiles which, in a way, explain their actions.
Today, I would believe this still largely holds true. Let's take a look at politics for example. Someone interested in politics must be willing to subject their careers as well as personal lives to media and public scrutiny. They must be able to handle public opinion well and posses a certain amount of confidence and self-assurances the common person may not posses. This article  outlines some of the typical psychological profiles of those who seek office, so in effect, those who ultimately rule and make decisions are narcissists and extroverts.
This is certainly a different position from a time when rulers were placed on a throne by biological happenstance (a position, as we've seen, rife with its own, separate burdens  however it is still fascinating to look at the more human side of history and those involved in the decision making.