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... ... middle of paper ... ... reasons.
In the end, Okonkwo’s failure to convince Umofia to go to war leads him to hang himself (Achebe 46, 144). Likewise, European imperialism’s attempts to combat degeneration were usually incredibly harmful to the Africans, as shown throughout
Because of this takeover, imperialism brought both positive and negative effects to Africa. One major factor in beginning imperialism in Africa was the end of the slave trade because this was how Europe was making most of their money during the 18th century. If revenue was not being brought in through the slave trade, other “products” (formerly humans) had to be traded. Greed was why Europeans could overlook the “disease, political instability, lack of transportation, and the generally unhealthy climate” (Duiker & Spielvogel 620) of Africa. If some of these off-putting factors such as transportation could be changed by the Europeans occupying Africa, then why not occupy it?
There are many actions taken by the Europeans of the late 19th and early 20th centuries that, in retrospect, modern people view as abhorrent. Among these practices, and possibly at the top of the list, is European imperialism in Africa. Really beginning in the late 1870s and early 1880s, European imperialists managed to subdue an entire continent of people in less than 40 years. However, before one dismisses these actions as a lapse in human reasoning and morality, he or she must consider the motives and attitudes of the Europeans towards their imperialistic actions in Africa. Though to the modern observer these actions may appear wretched and evil, Europeans of the time did not see them as such.
The economic and political effects were also great, but nothing could measure up to the stark social consequences of Social Darwinism, and how that still affects Western Society today. Imperialism has taken many forms, one of the most heinous being the Social Darwinism occurring in Africa in the late 1700's. Europe's sudden swell of power lead it to invading and exploiting Africa, its people, and its resources. This effect of Imperialism in European Colonies in Africa sent a lasting social message to Western civilizations. While the political and economic effects of this tragedy cast a large shadow, the social repercussions of Social Darwinism are by far the most prominent.
Becoming modernizers is beneficial because it was impossible for native people to conquer the West. The advances in military development especially in weapons were overwhelming compared to that of African and Asian t... ... middle of paper ... ...s, 2009). Many of these things did happen in Asia and Africa through time, but without people willing to accept new ideas and stronger government structures nothing would advance. Modernizers by accepting part parts of imperialism paved the way for the search and willingness to test new ideas and to change government to benefit their home lands and people. It is obvious that imperialism was not fair to Asia and Africa, but there is no doubt that in some ways these lands did benefit from western ideas.
Social Darwinism, a theory that Darwin’s “Survival of the Fittest” applied to society; this was advocated in order to justify imperialism. Before the industrial age, during the age of Exploration (1450-1750) Various countries had trading posts along the African coast, including the British. However, these posts were used solely for trading and not as bases for conquest. It was not until the 1870s that European powers began seeking for new resources and markets in many parts of the world, including Africa. Prior to the 1870s, European powers had little interest in Africa; this was primarily due to diseases such as malaria, which killed many Europeans.
The Negro's providence of habits and moneymaking capacity is incomparable to that of the whites. Had they remained in Africa, they would become idolatrous, savage and cannibal, or be eaten by other savages and cannibals (Fitzhugh, 247). They should thank us for relieving them from the far more cruel slavery in Africa. Although they are inferio... ... middle of paper ... ...avage lifestyle and taught them Christianity and gave them things free laborers will never have or own. They are inferior to the Anglo-Saxon and if they are freed they will eventually die off since they are certainly weak-minded.
Stated blatantly, the "conqueror" is a European, and he is commanding an African to serve him. Forcing Africans into slavery certainly doesn?t justify European imperialism in Africa, however, there are many reasons as to why imperialism actually was justified. One reason, is the fact that the raw materials the Europeans took from Africa were unused. As stated in Lord Frederick Lugard's, The Dual Mandate in British Tropical Africa, "Who can deny the right of the hungry people of Europe to utilize the wasted bounties of nature..." Lugard shows that Europe had the right to take raw materials from Africa because they were unused. This means those who argue that European imperialism in Africa was not justified because the Europeans simply took raw materials, are obviously mistaken.
Also at that time Europeans didn’t have much information about Africa. The only information they had was that of explorers, for example from Stanley. He wrote stories about his expeditions to the Congo that sometimes were sensational and not even true. He even describe Africans as savages that wanted to killed him despite the fact that he wanted to help them. That was the image he was selling about Africa.