Beginning in the 1850’s, European states engaged in an intense scramble for overseas territories. This “new imperialism” led Europeans to carve up parts of Asia and nearly all of Africa and create colonial empires. Within these empires, European states exercised complete political control over the indigenous societies and regularly redrew political boundaries to meet their needs. During the scramble for new markets and territories, the indigenous peoples were often subjugated, dominated and marginalized. In return, countries in Africa and Asia gained the technology and capital that, over a period of time and development, improved their quality of life. Justifying imperialistic actions often caused tensions in political, economic, and social spheres of influence during late modernity.
By the end of the nineteenth century, those who desired to validate imperialism and the colonial regimes it fostered in Africa and Asia found pseudoscientific validity from the concept of Social Darwinism. Social Darwinism maintained that only societies that moved aggressively to adapt to changing circumstances would survive and prosper in a world governed by the Darwinian law of “survival of the fittest” (SAY, 1105) Some people, however, were uncomfortable with such a brutal view of the law of nature and sought a moral justification that appeared to benefit the victim. Here again, the concept of social Darwinism pointed the way. By bringing the benefits of Western democracy, capitalism and Christianity to what they considered the “tradition-ridden societies” of Africa and Asia, the colonial powers were enabling primitive peoples to adapt to the challenges of the modern world. (SAY, 1107) Buttressed by such comforting theories, sensitive West...
... middle of paper ...
...n economic one. As the case of Lenin and the Bolsheviks showed, economic concerns were inevitably tinged with political overtones and questions of national grandeur and moral purposes as well. In terms of British rule in India was concerned, economic wealth, national status, and political power went hand in hand with the possession of a colonial empire. In the years leading up to the First World War, the Western imprint on Asia and African societies, for better or for worse, appeared to be a permanent feature of the political and cultural landscape. Ultimately, the fundamental weakness of imperialism was that it was ultimately based on the self-interests of the citizens of the colonial powers, not the colonizers. The ultimate result was to deprive the colonial peoples of their intrinsic value and the right to make their own choices about their own destiny.
One country that had imperialism was India. By the mid-1880s, the British East India Company controlled three fifths of India. The cause of British domination was that the land was very diverse and the people could not unite and that the British either paid local princes or used weapons to get control. Positive effects of imperialistic rule in India were that the British set up a stronger economy and more powerful industries. They built roads and railroads. British rule brought peace and order to the countryside. They revised the legal system to promote justice for the Indians regardless of class. Indian landowners and princes, who still owned territory grew rich from exporting cash crops such as cotton and jute. The British introduced the telegraph and the postal system as a means of communication. These improvements and benefits from British rule eventually lead to Indian nationalism. The exposure to European ideas caused an Indian nationalist movement, the people dreamed of ending Imperial ...
Not only did the inequality and separation of the Indian society frustrate the citizens of India, but the imperialism Britain had upon them as well. In the early 20th century, Indian nationalists wanted to take a stand against the British rule and make India independent. The British created unfair laws that created a nationalist movement in India to regain their freedom. He believed that there should not be a Caste System because of one’s birth.
In the past, lives were controlled by European imperialism the practice of a country extending its political power, over conquered territories. The country and the lands it controls were called an empire. The empire enforced its rule on people of different cultures, ethnic backgrounds, and different political systems. The empire had one supreme ruler; sadly, the conquered territories lack effective representation in the empire’s government. Therefore, the conquered countries natural raw natural resources were exploited and their economic growth suppressed. This was evident in Africa, South Asia, Latin America, and North America countries.
Conquest and colonization has always played a role in the history of European powers. Throughout the centuries many different European empires have attempted to make their mark on multiple different continents. Some have found success, while others have failed. One case in particular, in which European nations could not quite find stability, was in North America. Factors such as the American Revolution, U.S. westward expansion, and the Monroe Doctrine pushed European nations out of North America. Afterwards, the late 19th century marked the beginning of New Imperialism. As New Imperialism began, Africa became important to European nations in their “Scramble for Africa”.
Introduction: The epoch of imperialism cannot be defined simply as a proliferation of inflated egos tied to the hardened opinions of nationalists, but also a multi-faceted global rivalry with roots of philosophies tainted with racism and social Darwinism. The technique of each imperialist was specific to the motivations and desires of each combative, predominantly Western power and subsequently impacted the success of each imperialist and its colonies. Driven by industrialization, Europeans are aware of the urgent need for raw materials and new markets to maintain a constant rate of expansion and wealth. Imperialism became a competition; in general, the European countries led with fervor while the non-Western regions deemed likely to be stepped on.
The sociology of imperialism seeks to define this phenomenon as an atavism in the social structure, in the specific person, in their psychological habits, which thus triggers an emotional reaction. According to Joseph A. Schumpeter - "The word imperialism has been abused as a slogan to the point where it threatens to lose all meaning. For whenever the word imperialism is used, there is always the implication - whether sincere or not - of an aggressiveness" (Conklin & Fletcher, 1999, p. 44). The history behind this word has lead us to view the corruption and destruction it has caused at the hands of people with perhaps to much power. This statement goes with debate because like it or not history in essence; has shown us that nations have pursued war for the sake of winning and expansion for the sake of expansion, we ...
A common phrase people say is “learn from your mistakes” but it seems throughout history we never have. We often see similar actions recur throughout history, including the rise of Imperialism, Revolutions, and advancement in technology for warfare.
The United States saw its territory more than double in the first three decades of the 19th century. Bursting with nationalist fervor, an insatiable desire for more land, and a rapidly increasing population, the western frontiers of the United States would not remain east of the Mississippi. The eventual spread of the American nation beyond the Mississippi into Native and French land, referred to as “Manifest Destiny” by John O’Sullivan, was rationalized as a realization of their God given duty. The Louisiana Purchase set the precedent for unrestricted westward expansion in America, and allowed for others to follow in his footsteps. Characterized by racist overtones, a lack of the “consent of the governed, and ethnic cleansing, there is no valid distinction between this American continental expansion and the international expansion sought by Europe in the late 19th and 20th centuries, and is clearly imperialist in nature.
New imperialism was the mid nineteenth and twentieth centuries cultural equivalent to a modern day mafia, its roots entangled in the economic, cultural, and humanistic aspects of life. The sole objective of the nations entailed the exploitation of their controlled state. Gestating from the change in control of Asian and African nations to the Europeans by means of political deviance, malicious sieges, and strategic military attacks. The juxtaposition to the modern equivalent endures as the aforesaid is sheltered by the fairytale that these nations were in need of aid and by doing so the Europeans were the good guys. The ideas of new imperialism are greatly influenced by those of the enlightenment. Taking place during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the enlightenment was an intellectual movement with the goal of social progress (Genova, 1/11). Armed with scientific thought and reason, enlightenment thinkers set out to explore the fields of science, economics, and human nature. Brilliant minds such as Voltaire, Kant and others all across Western Europe collaborated to further knowledge. The enlightenment laid the foundation on which new imperialism sprung, embedding the ideas of an incessant need to explore not only the scientific world but the physical world as well. The enlightenments goals and ideas significantly influenced new imperialism, because the enlightenment created a need for new means and a purpose to accrue them.
There were two different time periods where Imperialism occurred. The first wave of imperialism, called the 'Old' Imperialism, lasted from around 1500 - 1800. The 'New' Imperialism lasted from around 1870 - 1914. The three main differences that we will discuss today are the differences in economics, politics, and the motive behind all of this.
Imperialism was a time period in which more developed nations colonized less developed nations. The developed nations took advantage of the less developed nations resources, people, lands, and much more. Many countries lost their freedom and independence due to imperialism, however, they also received new technologies and innovations.
British imperialism on India had many positive and negative affects on both the mother country, Britain and the colony, India. Many people would argue which effects were more prominent in these countries and some would agree that they were equal. But in both cases there were actually both.
Although there are many other important factors, the main cause of the rise of imperialism was most certainly economic. The Age of Empire, by Eric J. Hobsbawn, provides an interpretation of New Imperialism. Hobsbawn calls imperialism “a natural by-product of the international economy” (Sherman pg 177). He is basically saying that imperialism is dependent on the rivalries of competing industries, which continually drive the international economy. Hobsbawn also dictates the need for external markets. The Industrial Revolution created many products that needed markets, thus creating a need of colonies. Hobsbawn believed that the overproduction of the Industrial Revolution and the Great Depression could be solved. He also realized that many businessmen knew that they could make a large profit off of China’s large population. For example, if every one of the three hundred million Chinese purchased one box of tin-tacks the businessmen knew that there would be a huge profit, consequently increasing the desire for colonization of weaker countries.
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...
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 ...