In Heart of Darkness, Joseph Conrad offers, at least, what is perceived by many to be a critique of imperialism. Conrad himself definitely sought to critique the examples of European imperialism that he bore witness to during its height in the late 20th century, and since its conception, this text has been perceived as a scathing critique of the imperial practice itself.

Indeed, he was solicited by anti-colonialists and did engage with them, but was not part of any formative campaign against these practices. In most cases, the direct subject of the criticisms offered by Conrad focus more upon Belgian examples of colonies in Africa, and knowing that he is English, this should not go unnoticed. More to the point, the text has numerous implications about human nature and suffering, and the attitudes of Conrad reflect the social and political thought of his era.

Conrad likens the Belgian colonial practice to that of the Romans in assimilating new territories into their ‘empire.’ He does not believe that the Romans are “true colonists” but conquerors, thus further displaying that this book was not intended as a critique of the practice itself, but rather the way in which it is practiced. In many ways, this depiction of Rome is similar to the way in which Hegel describes the social system of that same society.

Hegel ultimately concludes that the Latins established rule by force and had adopted a negative life that was “afraid of all things of the Dionysian spirit.” In his description of the treatment of the Belgian natives, Hegel attributes an Apollonian type of attitude to their colonizers, much in the way that this criticism of the Latins would have proliferated throughout Europe by the time of Conrad’s text. It appears evident that the social attitudes of Conrad were at least inadvertently inspired by a Hegellian philosophy of history.