Book Review
The one interesting aspect that I was surprised with my three authors was the little detail given on nationalism in the decolonization process. Before reading these three books, I thought that nationalism played a key factor in decolonization. However, my assumption was incorrect. The author, John Darwin, brought nationalism into question, but ultimately Darwin felt that WWII had weakened the British, which subsequently lead to a problematic post-war economic situation. All the authors discussed nationalism and its part in decolonization, but all came to a conclusion that nationalism may have played a part, but it was insignificant in the entire process of decolonization. Most colonies had a wide variety of communities that had very little in common. Therefore, mass nationalistic movements that would be strong enough to throw out British colonial rulers was much more difficult than one might think. Ultimately, all of the authors and their books I used for the essay-review focused on the aftermath of Britain in WWII to describe the reasoning for decolonization.
One key difference in content between the three books was on the British welfare state. Holland wrote on the cost of the welfare state and how the British people were becoming more concerned at sustaining a welfare state. For example, Holland even believed that, “one reason why colonies were hustled towards independence, was precisely to release west European resources for domestic welfare spending.” While, both James and Darwin did not speak of domestic welfare spending. Rather, all three centered a main cause on decolonization on the weak post-war economic situation in Britain and the result it had on the cost of the empire.
One interesting difference in in...
... middle of paper ...
...say that Darwin’s approach was the most logical, but Holland’s explanation about how Britain was more concerned at sustaining a welfare state completed the cause. If Darwin had discussed the welfare state, then I would believe Britain and Decolonisation, would have answered my question to the best ability, but without it, Darwin’s argument lacked a key component. Therefore, if Holland and Darwin’s books were somewhat combined that would establish the best answer for my essay-review question.
In conclusion, each author brought in an interesting perspective in the causes of British decolonization after WWII. There is not one single cause that led to British decolonization. However, each author seemed to agree that the process of British decolonization began as a result of WWII and developed into a vicious cycle that culminated with the demise of the British Empire.
The colonists were in every right, aspect and mind, not only justified but also it was about time that they stood of and actually take action against the British. The choice of going to war with them, was the only choice that they had. All diplimatical options that they had ceased to stand a chance against the tyrant Britain. From the very beginning when the colonists felt upset against their mother country and the way that they went about the law making, up until the beginning of the war, they tried all diplimatical options that they had, by sending letters, you name it. When they didn’t work then they had no other means but to declare war.
Even before War with Germany was accredited, the British government felt that it was necessary to shield the civilian inhabitants, especially children; pregnant mothers, disabled people and teachers accompanied them. The government decided to evacuate children from the major cities into rural areas. They had many reasons for doing this, each of them mainly linked to fear of civilian casualties.
Throughout the years, humans have constructed many unique civilizations; all which follow a distinct social, economic, and political structure. Even so, there is one characteristic that prevails among these societies, the concept of nationalism. In short, nationalism refers to the feelings people have when identifying with their nation. This simple notion possesses the ability to divide or unite collective groups, and has played an important role in many historical events.
After the Declaration of Independence was signed the colonies felt like they had written down what they needed to in order to declare themselves independent states from Britain. While not calling themselves a unified country, they did know that on their side, the tie was formally broken between them and Britain. Due to this Britain obviously saw this as treason in all lights, and sent troops, and fleets over to combat this “revolution.” This Declaration paved way for a new country to be formed, which would obviously later become the United States of America. The whole idea of now being separate from Britain gave the colonists a sense of “nationalism”(if you could call it that because they are still separate states) that they are no longer tied to the “shackles” of Great Britain.
"The Allied and Associated Governments affirm and Germany accepts the responsibility of itself and her allies for causing all the loss and damage to which the Allied and Associated Governments and their nationals have been subjected as a consequence of the war imposed upon them by the aggression of Germany and her allies. "(Treaty of Versailles, Article 231)
This investigation seeks to discover whether or not the Sepoy revolution in 1857 had a sufficient impact on India’s rise to independence and separation from the British Empire. The Sepoy revolution was a revolution of the Sepoy soldiers in 1857, and complete independence from the British Empire was not achieved by Indians until 1947. Therefore, did the Sepoy revolution catalyze their rise to independence, or was independence inevitable? The impact of the Sepoy Revolution will be found by looking at the effects of the Sepoy revolution and determining whether or not they were key factors in the rise to independence. A variety of sources will be used. Two important sources that will be used during this investigation are Indian Summer by Alex Von Tunzelmann and Empire: How Britain Made The Modern World by Niall Ferguson.
In the second half of the twentieth century, started a process of decolonization, first in Asia and then in Africa. In 1949, India was one of the first country to gain its independence, followed by Burma, Malaysia, and Ceylon. In Africa the decolonization started a few years later, first in Libya and Egypt, and in the rest of the continent afterwards. The main colonists were the Great Britain and France. The history has shown that Great Britain succeeded to decolonize generally in peace while France had much more problems to give up its colonies, which led to numerous conflicts opposing the colonists and the colonized. It has been the case especially in Algeria where a murderous war lasted almost eight years. The philosopher Frantz Fanon has studied the outbreak of this conflict as he was working in Algeria and he spent some time working on the question of colonialism, drawing the conclusion that violence was the only way to get rid of colonists. This essay will analyse who was Fanon and why he came to such a conclusion along with the reasons why it could be said that he is right ,and finally, the arguments against his statement. Finally, it will aim to prove that even though Fanon had valid points, diplomacy could have been for efficient and less tragic rather than his support to violence.
Nationalism has a long history although most scholarly research on Nationalism only began in the mid-twentieth century. Some scholars point to the French Revolution of 1789 as the birth of Nationalism. The French Revolution is seen...
...aust. He saw his race as superior because of its ability to concur not its strength to survive. Herbert Spencer also believed that human advancement was taking from, or destroying other less advanced human races. Examples of this are the colonisation of Australia and India by the British in which they had no problem treating the people of these countries in a bad way. Colonial Britain could justify this racism with Social Darwinism on the basis that they had the power to take over therefore had the right. These ideas were popular in the west in the 19th century because it was a time of much colonisation and Social Darwinism justified the mistreatment of others. Social Darwinism was basically an excuse for racism and although based very roughly around Darwin’s Origin of Species it was used putting the person writing as the superior subject, never in a scientific way.
This theory of economics said that colonies are only here to serve and glorify their mother country, in this case Britain. This lead to Britain's passing of the Navigation Laws. These laws mandated that all goods from the colonies had to be carried by British ships, thus making British merchants rich and important because everybody wanted goods form the New World and now they would have to go threw Britain to get them. The Navigational Acts were tolerated to a certain extent but also disobeyed by the common people when necessary. In 1763, the Seven-Year War in Europe and the French and Indian War in the colonies was over, and with the end came a British debt of ove...
The concept of Social Darwinism was a widely accepted theory in the nineteenth-century. Various intellectual, and political figures from each side of the political spectrum grasped the theory and interpreted it in various ways. In this paper, we will discuss three different nineteenth-century thinkers and their conception of Social Darwinism. The conservative, Heinrich von Treitschke, and liberal Herbert Spencer both gave arguments on the usefulness of competition between people on a global scale. The anarchist, Peter Kropotkin, refuted the belief of constant competition among members of the same species and emphasized mutual aid.
The definition of decolonization differs from person to person, from nation to nation, and from past experience to past experience. In my opinion decolonization is a thought out active resistance of colonial forces with a goal of eventually obtaining indigenous liberation. Colonialism has brought forth many problems with it. As more time passes the problems keep getting worse. Problems such as crimes being committed on Natives and loss of tradition.
...n only be understood in the context of his belief in the need for improvement, enlightenment, and civilization. Therefore, Darwin is not a purely anti-conquest writer. His compassion, his tendency toward explication instead of mere registration, his attitude of improvement and belief in the “philanthropic spirit of the British nation” (Voyage of the Beagle, 376) break the frames of Pratt’s definition of 18th century anti-conquest writing. With 19th century Darwin, 18th century anti-conquest writing evolves in a new type of travel narrative.
It’s 4:30am on September 1st, 1939 and the German battleship Schleswig-Holstein awaits for the order to open fire on the Polish garrison of the Westerplatte Fort, Danzig in what was to become the first military engagement of World War II. Meanwhile, sixty two German divisions supported by 1,300 fighter planes prepared for the invasion of Poland. Fifteen minutes later the invasion would take place and spark the beginning of World War II. Two days later at 9am Great Britain would send an ultimatum to Germany, demanding that they pull from Poland or go to war with Great Britain. Four hours later the Ultimatum would expire and Great Britain would officially be at war with Germany on September 3rd, 1939. Six hours later France would also declare war on Germany.
There is a distinct difference between popular Indian nationalism, that is the nation believing in a state independent of Britain, and Indian nationalist movements, for example the Muslim League or the Hindu revivalist movement. These movements fought for independence but were far more religiously orientated and were fighting in their own interests. Although Indian nationalism initially found expression in the Mutiny of 1857, its deve...