In trying to analyze the link between colonial rule and nationalist rule, one cannot discount the influence of the past on the present. Analyzing nationalist actions and decisions without taking into account how society got to that point, and the situation of society when power was transferred would be asinine. The effects of colonization on various African countries through border setting and defining ethnic groups, the morphing of ethnic group disputes into class-based struggles, and the stunting of economies through failure to diversify national economies is intrinsically linked to the paths followed by leadership after attaining independence.
Previous to colonial rule, African governance took place at the local level. Political power functioned similarly to the theory of a social contract. Individuals submitted themselves to a local chief that was to represent their interest in matters both inside and outside their community. If the chief’s constituents were not pleased with his performance it was relatively easy to ouster him and promote a replacement. Once colonial power began infiltrating the continent this dynamic began to change. Colonial powers enlisted the local chiefs as their local liaison, rewarding the chiefs for their cooperation with favors, money, and protection from uprisings. In my opinion this is the beginning of the social change necessary in Africa to permit this despotism we later see under nationalist rule, but I’m getting ahead of myself.
Colonial powers utilized a technique known as ‘divide and rule,’ which originally involved dividing the population along ethnic lines and generally pitting these different divisions against each other. This led to conflicts among the population, keeping them busy and t...
... middle of paper ...
...l morphed a statist society into an authoritarian one. Even if no atrocities were committed under these self-declared supreme leaders, it would not change the fact that it was an authoritarian rule. Even if the newly elected leaders had great aspirations of doing well for their country, they held all the power and as the saying goes, Absolute power corrupts absolutely. There are many men that would be corrupted if they were to gain this amount of power and influence.
Works Cited
Badru, Pade. “Chapter 4-7.” Imperialism and Ethnic Politics in Nigeria: 1960-96. Trenton, NJ: Africa World, 1998. 65-128. Print.
Worger, William H., Nancy L. Clark, and Edward A. Alpers. Africa and the West: A Documentary History. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2010. Print.
Elkins, Caroline. Imperial Reckoning: The Untold Story of Britain's Gulag in Kenya. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 2005. Print.
A. Adu Boehen, one of Africa 's leading historian traces the colonial experience in Africa from an African perspective that is, through the eyes of an African and not the Europeans. He further looked at the period of African History from the 1880 's to the 1900 's hundreds when most of Africa was seized and occupy by the imperial powers of Europe. Boehen also offers a view of the crucial question of how Africans perceived colonialism, how they responded to it and above all how they reacted after they were colonized.
Whilst there is some debate on the differences between colonialism, imperialism and ‘informal empire’, this article is more concerned with the period of ‘high’ imperialism in Africa from the 1880s - more commonly known as the scramble for Africa. Unlike earlier models of colonialism, high imperialism was more concerned with gaining spheres of influence. These spheres were gained through treaties, local agreements or by force if necessary. This facilitated the development of new trade networks to offload the surplus of production and to procure rights of access to raw resources. The availability of cheap labour was exploited, strategic land and maritime locations were acquired and the national prestige of the imperial power became elevated. The rhetoric to ‘stamp out the evil’ of slavery and slave-trading and the mantra proclaiming a ‘civilising mission’ on the ‘Dark Continent’ were also functional aspects of European imperialism. However, this article is primarily concerned with the process and experience of decolonisation in Africa.
Africa has had a long and tumultuous road of colonization and decolonization the rush to colonize Africa started in the 17th century with the discovery of the vast amounts of gold, diamonds, and rubber with colonization hitting a fever pitch during World War I. However, the repercussions of colonization have left deep wounds that still remain unhealed in the 21st century. Early on, European nations such as Britain, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Germany and Belgium scrambled for territories. Countries wanted land so they could harvest the resources, increase trade, and gain power. The European colonization of Africa brought racism, civil unrest, and insatiable greed; all of which have had lasting impacts on Africa.
Labor unions strengthened and the men at the head of politics granted the working class far more power than they were given previously. Africa had seen new advancements in leadership. New African leaders began to emerge where there had previously not been any. These newly appointed leaders called for Africans to reexamine their heritage and learn from and take pride in their past. In addition, there was a call for Nationalism. Africans wanted to end all forms of foreign control and influence to be able to take charge of their political, social and economic affairs. Africans above all wished to rid themselves of any form of influence from Europe and stand alone as their own country. Moreover, Nationalism laid the basis for African independence
A true saying is “Colonization often does more damage than contribution.” Colonialism encouraged Africa’s development in some areas, but in many others it severely damaged the natural progress of the continent. If colonialism was never imposed on Africa, Africa’s developments would be significantly different and many of the problems that the continent faces now would not exist today. In conclusion, at first it seems that colonialism has both positive and negative effects, but the truth is it only damages the colonized nation.
In the early 1880’s, the powers of Europe started to take control of regions in Africa and set up colonies there. In the beginning, colonization caused the Africans little harm, but before long, the Europeans started to take complete control of wherever they went. The Europeans used their advanced knowledge and technology to easily maneuver through the vast African landscape and used advanced weapons to take control of the African people and their land. The countries that claimed the most land and had the most significant effect on Africa were France, England, Belgium, and Germany. There were many reasons for the European countries to be competing against each other to gain colonies in Africa. One of the main reasons was that the Europeans believed that the more territory a country was able to control, the more powerful it could become and the more powerful it would be seen as by other countries. Other reasons for the desire to control African land included the many natural resources that could only be found in Africa, such as diamonds, gold, and as time progressed, rubber. It also provided new markets in surrounding places so that manufactured goods could be sold for a larger profit. The Europeans had many motives for imperialism in Africa. Yet the true motives were often shielded as they tried tom present themselves as humanitarians when in reality they were making Africa a terrible place to live with brutality and harsh treatment of the African natives. The ways of the Europeans had many physical and emotional costs for the people of Africa. The imperialism process also took a toll on the people of Europe. The European imperialistic colonization in Africa was motivated by the desire to control the abundant natural resources an...
From the end of the nineteenth century until the attainment of independence in the early 1960s, the countries of East Africa were under the colonial administration of European empires. After decades of foreign rule which saw unparalleled transformations within society, the post-colonial states that emerged have been blighted by ethnic conflict. It has been argued that the beliefs of British, Belgian and German administrators led them to completely reorganise the societies they governed based on a fictitious ‘tribal’ model, and in the process they invented ethnicity. There is a great deal of debate on this matter, though, and its continued relevance to contemporary politics only makes it more vigorous.
In terms of political changes, European imperialism negatively affected Africa. Firstly, European colonization created enormous conflict between colonists and the African people. African resistance to “The Scramble for Africa” lead to the instability of Africa’s political structure. There was ineffective resistance of the African people against the Europeans. In an attempt to regain their independence, Africans took up arms against their colonial masters as soon as they perceived them to be at a disadvantage. In southern Africa, in The Republic of Namibia, the Herero people rose against German rule in 1904, killing over 100 German settlers and traders. German commander, General von Trotha, retaliated with a war aimed simply at extermination. This resulted in the decline of 70% of the Herero population.1 Nowhere else was colonialism quite so brutal, but almost everywhere it tended towards unrestrained brutality as soon as it was challenged.2 Warfare created considerable unrest among African people. Afterwards, the people of Africa came to the realization that the consequences of resistance against European colonists could be devastating. As well, the Europeans demonstrated that they had the technology and resources to gain control. Secondly, colonial expansion changed the face of Africa’s political structure. The Berlin Conference of 1884-85, attended by 13 European nations and the USA, set the ground rules for partition of Africa. When the conferenc...
As the Europeans started to invade Africa and split up the land, they paid no attention to the already existing natural boundaries. Over time, villages with different cultures had set these boundaries. The Europeans ignored these invisible borders as they invaded. This caused soci...
Tucker, Carole. "African Nationalism and Liberation in Post World War II Africa." Suite. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2014.
Africa’s struggle to maintain their sovereignty amidst the encroaching Europeans is as much a psychological battle as it is an economic and political one. The spillover effects the system of racial superiority had on the African continent fractured ...
The New Imperialism and the Scramble for Africa 1880-1914. Jeff Taylor, n.d. Web. 19 Mar. 2014.
Hopkins, A. G. An Economic History of West Africa. New York: Columbia UP, 1973. Print.
Colonialism, which was a major cause of the north-south gap that occurred in the period following the Second World War, is the takeover by a nation of foreign territories; making them part of it to aid its own economical, social and political structures. The mother countries succeed in doing that by using the colony’s natural resources, money savings, and their lands, which leads the colony to rely on the mother country and therefore, leaving the country underdeveloped. Hence, the world wide scramble for colonies, particularly in the late 19th – early 20th century, had a tremendous negative effect on the economic, social, and political structures of indigenous, non-industrialized peoples.
An overwhelming majority of African nations has reclaimed their independence from their European mother countries. This did not stop the Europeans from leaving a permanent mark on the continent however. European colonialism has shaped modern-day Africa, a considerable amount for the worse, but also some for the better. Including these positive and negative effects, colonialism has also touched much of Africa’s history and culture especially in recent years.