For over half a century, the Ivory Coast has been a consistent symbol of political strength and security as well as of solid economic infrastructure. Much of Ivory Coast’s stability is due to the strong figure of Félix Houphouët-Boigny, the country's leader since his ascent to the position in 1944. He scrupulously created a system of federal economic controls and slowly built and sustained close relationships with European countries, particularly France. Since Côte d’Ivoire’s successful independence movement from France in 1960, the direction of the nation’s development became increasingly reliant on external factors. The lucrative goods exported to western countries continue to ensure the former French colony the highest annual economic growth rate of Africa's non-oil-exporting countries as well as a sustained Western interest. Starting with the late 19th century, France drafted an aggressive colonial policy. Incited by the increasingly competitive Western sphere fighting for colonial influence, as well as by the promise of lucrative trade and settlement found in the countries of Western Africa, French explorers, church officials, trading corporations, and troops expanded their dominion and exacted greater influence over colonial territories. They gained control over the populace, often through illegal or illegitimate ways, by signing pacts with tribe leaders, who agreed to enter French dominion in exchange for favors (particularly in foreign markets) and protection from nearby countries. Following the Ivory Coast joining into the French dominion in the late 19th century, the country began a “pacification operation” with the intent to bring the native peoples under their control and exact greater influence in domestic affairs. P... ... middle of paper ... ...nd its foreign markets strengthened afterwards. From its independence to to the 1980s, the French population in the Ivory Coast almost multiplied by two, to nearly 60,000, in effect creating the largest non-European French populace. In the late 20th century, eighty percent of the French population residing in the Ivory Coast had been there for at least half a decade. Members of the French community joined positions in the government (those figures, however, are gradually decreasing) and were seen in positions of influence inside the private sector as well. Up to the mid-1980s, the Ivory Coast had the most French enterprises in the whole of West Africa, the greatest portion of imports from France and the most West African imports, and, with the exception of Senegal, continued to receive the most significant French foreign aid measures direct at bettering its economy.
During the imperialism of Africa, many of the same things occurred. The English took control of the African countries in different ways, but they still took control. With the Africans, the English just went to war with the countries or tribes. They would either defeat them or force them to give up partial or all control of the government. Either way, the English gained control and power because of their strength politically and militarily.
However, French lost its territory to the Spanish and the British, but most of France’s colonial wealth were extracted from their colonies in Africa, especially from its vast wealth of gold and diamond. “Like the Spanish the French preferred to rule their colonies under a direct rule, which urge more metropole culture spread upon colonized land. While Spanish colonial cities have plazas, the French colonial cities have Paris grid town planning and architecture that often remind one of France. They also introduced education system using French language, to help further brainwash and spread their own value” (Quora). “The French also wanted to spread their “French value” to its subject as part of their “civilizing” mission, to bless the barbaric of indigenous Africans and Asians with enlightenment (admittedly they were less successful than Americans, but did manage to spread the French language all over Africa)” (Quora). While Africa became more “France”, this failed in Indochina because the locals find French difficult to learn. The Africa colonization was pure and simple, to benefit the metropole at most while limiting the development of industry as to make Africa reliant on European
Europe, in the late 1800’s, was starting a land grab on the African continent. Around 1878, most of Africa was unexplored, but by 1914, most of Africa, with the lucky exception of Liberia and Ethiopia, was carved up between European powers. There were countless motivations that spurred the European powers to carve Africa, like economic, political, and socio–cultural, and there were countless attitudes towards this expansion into Africa, some of approval and some of condemnation. Europe in this period was a world of competing countries. Britain had a global empire to lead, France had competition with Britain for wealth and so did other nations like Germany and Russia.
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”.
Throughout the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century, almost every country in Africa was imperialized by other countries in Europe. To imperialize is to conquer another country, whether it be in the means of politics, economics and/or culture, and control that land. The aftermath for the imperialized country was either beneficial or harmful. The amount of African countries that a European country imperialized varied. Great Britain imperialized fifteen countries in Africa, including Egypt in 1882, Sierra Leone in 1808, and the Union of South Africa in 1910. Although Great Britain’s reasons to imperialize were selfish, Britain helped each country progress afterwards.
A. Adu Boahen's African Perspectives on Colonialism neatly classifies African responses to European colonialism during both phases of invasion and occupation during the 19th century with precise labels according to their nature or time period. However, the reactions can also be loosely grouped into two diametric characterizations: peaceful and violent. Although creating this dichotomy seems a gross generalization and oversimplification of the colonial African experience, it more importantly allows for a different perspective- one that exposes the overwhelming success of the typically peaceful or pacifist reaction in contrast to the little gain and large losses of the violent response.
Many factors contributed to the colonization of Africa by European powers between 1895 and 1905. Among these factors were the effects of European history, the growing capitalist economy, and the growing competition between European powers. Most important was the belief that European culture was superior to African culture. During the height of imperialism, the vast majority of the African continent was controlled by Europe (ìExtentî 19). It is important to understand what gave the momentum for European dominance at the time.
With Europe in control, “the policies of the governing powers redirected all African trade to the international export market. Thus today, there is little in the way of inter-African trade, and the pattern of economic dependence continues.” Europeans exported most of the resources in Africa cheaply and sold them costly, which benefited them, but many Africans worked overtime and were not treated with care.
For most of the Africans they change they wanted to see after independence were economic. The problem is the economy that the Europeans left behind. Europeans left Africa in worse shape when it comes to the economy then before they came. The European abused the Africans they tricked them into thinking they were there to help, but that was not the case. They used their resources for their own benefit. But the worse thing the Europeans did was put the African in dept. African leader inherited economies that were reliant on on the international market. Agricultural crops and mineral due to colonialism limited colonies to production of just those raw materials. Therefore each colony on exported a few different goods so they were subject to a rise in prices. According to Watson “most goods that newly independent countries exported earned less than the goods they imported. This imbalance- paying more for imports than a country earns in exports-drove many African countries into dept.”(Watson). By the European not caring about the better good of Africa they drove them right into dept... Going back to education, the new African leaders had no idea how to properly deal with a felling economy. The European powers made each African colony dependent on the production of only a handful of goods. Which in the end made European grate profits. So now that African leaders are in charge they have all this dept. on their hands. As stated in the article “Colonization and Independence in Africa”, “Africans were at grate disadvantage in this trade, because prices for raw material were significantly lower than the prices of manufactured goods”(Colonization). The money that was coming in was less than the money going out. Africa was left with an economic unbalance. Also the population went up but not enough jobs. Therefor Africa had to work harder to work
It is thought-provoking, in the sense that Africa’s need for foreign created a race to the bottom, much like what Pietra Rivoli described in The Travels of a T-Shirt in the Global Economy. Due to some African states’ reliance on foreign aid in order to mine and profit on their resources, they allow business standards to be lowered and for Chinese firms to tip the contracts moresoever in the favor of Chinese firms. This lowers the potential earnings of African states by lowering royalty rates, for example. Additionally, Burgis’ research was thorough and transparent. When he did not receive a response or if his questions were dodged, he made it obvious to the readers. Sure, some could view this book as too anecdotal to be used as a credible source of Africa’s situation. However, this is due to the nature of the system Burgis is writing about; after all, they are shadow states for a reason. Some readers will be saddened by this text, others angry, most curious to learn more, but above all, everyone will be intellectually stimulated and
The "DBQ Project" What Is the Driving Force Behind European Imperialism in Africa? (2012): 257. pp. 177-177. Print.
Imperialism is the domination by one country of political, economic, or cultural life of another country or region and occurred during the 1800’s in Africa. Imperialism in Africa was caused by four factors in Europe: economy, politics/military, humanitarian/religion, and Social Darwinism (Ellis). The Industrial Revolution in Europe caused the need for oversea expansion because the manufacturers needed things like: rubber, petroleum, and palm oil all of which Africa had. Europe moving into Africa was also caused by nationalism, when France went into Africa so did Britain (Ellis). The difference between France and Britain was the way of rule they used. There are four different methods of imperialism: direct, indirect, protectorate, and sphere of influence. The most popular were direct and indirect. The French used direct, they sent officials and soldiers from France to administer their colonies and their purpose was to inflict French culture on their colonies and make them into French provinces (Ellis). The British, however, used indirect, they used chiefs to oversee their colonies and encouraged the children in the colonies to get education in Britain. The British “Westernized” their colonies and only used military force when threatened (Ellis).
If it wasn’t for the French their agricultural system would not have been as productive and advanced. Because the French introduced these crops, they are still playing a large role in the Modern day Malian Economy. For Example they would not have known how to harvest new crops if the French had not educated them on the procedures. Although they have been independent for over 50 years they have not been able to structure themselves into a developed country. If they had still been under French rule they most likely would be a modern developed
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...
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.