Imperialism has been a point of moral contention since its inception. The same arguments made by British imperialists in the twentieth century to justify their empire were used by the likes of Caesar and Pompey Magnus two thousand years prior. While these empires undoubtedly improved material wealth and social organization for some, the lessons of history have taught us that human suffering and oppression are as often the hallmarks of empire. The British colonization of Africa was no exception, with colonialists speaking in grand humanitarian terms that rarely mirrored reality. Niall Ferguson’s apology for British colonial rule in Africa identifies the positive influences of capitalism and liberalism as two reasons why imperialism benefited Africa; however, upon critical examination it is clear that British rule was very seldom capitalist or …show more content…
When the depression hit Africa in 1929 commodity prices collapsed, some falling sixty to seventy percent, driving wages down and increasing wide spread poverty. British economic policy exacerbated the crippling effects of the depression in Africa because it made African economies highly specialized and dependent on “export commodities,” which tied them inextricably to the collapsing international market. The British compounded this damage by insisting Africans pay their taxes in cash, which they believed provided “a moral benefit” and stimulated “industry and production.” However, in reality taxation prevented Africans from switching from paid labor to sustenance farming – which might have alleviated some of the suffering - because they would have been unable to get cash to pay taxes. Ultimately, the depression combined with the artificial hindrances that Britain imposed on African economies served to destabilize them, even forcing Africans to borrow at “exorbitant rates” or “pawn members of their
While the upper class of Africa benefited from this for a short term, the rest of Africa had a domino effect falling after the slave trade began. In a Letter to the Kings of Portugal, Nzinga Mbemba wrote: “the excessive freedom given by your agents and officials to the men and merchants who are allowed to come to this Kingdom to set up shops with goods and many things which have been prohibited by us, and which they spread throughout our Kingdoms and Domains”(Doc 1). This letter was written in 1526, only a little over 20 years after the slave trade began. At first thought the slave trade seemed like it was mutually beneficial to both Europe and Africa, but was only realized later that it would cause a ripple on the rest of Africa. The Europeans first thought that Africans will “always be tending the fire, for it is the one thing you especially looked after”(Doc 7).
Document E. “Great Britain and South Saharan Africa Imports and Exports, 1854 and 1900” is the name of the media present in Document E. The varying bars in the graph portray a message that says that another cause for African Imperialism is the wealth that could be obtained from the colonies. A. In 1854, the amount of British pounds obtained by imports from Africa is approximately 4.5 million. But by the time 1900 rolled around, nearly 7.5 million British pounds were made from imports from Africa.
So the way European nations earned their money was from selling their resources they had from their land, they would force the Africans to work long hours and were not paid at all. In a document by Trevor Owen Lloyd, “The British Empire” states that Great Britain exported 4.6 million pounds from Africa. European nations would
African communities were also educated in industry and political affairs (Doc 3). They received simpler methods of agriculture that helped them gain a surplus of products and comfortable living standards (Doc 2). Powerful nations prided themselves in these benefits they had brought to previously savage
In fact, the commercial ties between Europe and Africa operated mostly on equal, reciprocal terms: “African trade with Europe was very much the mirror image of European trade with Africa” (Thornton 54). Understanding this reciprocal nature is helpful in appreciating the equality of Europe and Africa, both being independent, autonomous characters. We must appreciate this equality in order to move past the academic objectification of Africa. As a complete contradiction to Early’s assertions, Afro-European relationships could be hurtful to Europeans. As a specific example, a British trader in the Dahomian territory of 1812 wrote with frustration about the extreme subordination Europeans in Africa experienced: “the ferocious King of Dahomey…tyrannizes over the Governor and the few people about him, as to render such subjection utterly disgraceful to the British flag” (Law 61).
“The wear and tear of a continent, nearly twice as large as Europe, and rich in vegetable and mineral productions, is much easier conceived than calculated,” states Equiano (199). Africa is a fertile country, but in order to get rid of slavery, he suggests taking advantage of the country’s production. Equiano wrote to his letter to the British in efforts to stop slavery, but suggesting they use Africa’s size and richness to expand their profits does not help the argument against slavery. In actuality, it confirms that the Africans should be used for Britain’s
British and French European countries were considered the biggest winners in the “race” to size African colonies in 1914. By 1885 the only two African countries to remain independent was Ethiopia and Liberia.(Doc A) John Ruskin announced in his lecture at Oxford University February 8, 1870 that the colonist “first aim” should be “to advance the power of England by land and by sea” This influence that John had for the European countries was a great impact for imperialism in Africa . Great Britain made about 3 million dollars from exports to South Saharan Africa in 1854 and this number increased to 20 million in 1900. This change in rate of growth for exports in Great Britain was a cause for competition in Africa among the European countries with the resources Africa was providing such as copper, zinc, lead, and coal.
The effects of imperialism was quite chaotic in the beginning causing an up rise from Africa and the Middle East. At first both resisted but over time western ways was making it’s way into a part of the daily routine. The imperialism started with Africa and eventually moved into the Middle East, but when it started in Africa it was for the natural resources the country possessed at the time. The Middle East was different due to the ruler at the time, Muhammad Ali was the ruler of Egypt and wanted to modernize Egypt the way he wanted to. He is sometimes known as “Father of Modern Egypt” although when he died they was not a leader that was as strong as he was to hold up his empire.
Marielle Apronti Prof. Oscar Williams AAFS 311 4 March 2018 The Trans-Atlantic slave trade was the most important factor when considering the early development of European capitalism. The arrival of the Portuguese to the West African Coast and their establishment of trading and slave ports throughout the continent set in stone a trend of exploitation of Africa 's labor and human resources. Europeans greatly benefited from the Trans-Atlantic trade, as it allowed them to aggregate raw materials such as sugar and cotton to manufacture products that funded the Industrial Revolution. In the book “Capitalism and Slavery” by Eric Williams he addresses the origin of “Negro” history, the economic and political impact of slavery in Great Britain, the role of the American Revolution and the decline of slavery in Great Britain.
What was the driving force behind European Imperialism in Africa? Between 1500 and 1800 the Europeans knew little about the interior of Africa their presence was to buy and sell slaves for pots, cloth, and weapons and set sail to America. Late as 1870 ten percent of Africa was under Europeans control and most was along edges by 1914 ninety percent of Africa was in control four years later. Due to the countries that held African colonies in 1914 that involved the British, German, Italian, Portuguese, Spain, and Belgian. France and Britain were the main conquer in African colonies, because there conqueror of land in Africa.
So Europe invaded Africa, took possession of Africa, and divided Africa into colonies of Europe. The period of invasion, lasting some twenty years, was more or less completed by 1900. There followed a longer period, between sixty and ninety years, of direct European rule, called colonial rule. This was a time of profound upheaval for all of Africa’s peoples. It brought irreversible changes” (4).
The Black Man’s Burden In the late-nineteen century, the term new imperialism became an element of politics implemented by many European powers to impose their supremacy around the globe. Between 1870 and 1914, as a result of the Great Depression (1873-1879), imperialistic powers such as Britain, France, Germany, and Belgium, constructed colonies and protectorates in Asia and Africa in order to exploit their resources and their labor . In 1880, France and Britain led European nations in the “scramble of Africa,” which divided the continent from 1880 to 1914. After the king of Belgium Leopold II conquered most of the Congo River with the excuse of promoting Christianity and civilization, other European nations caught “African fever.”
"The slave trade actually prevented the coming into being of an agrarian revolution in Ghana, and likewise an industrial revolution. Because before you can industrialize you need to have stable agricultural production.” (“Slavery 's long effects on Africa”, para 6) Since during that time they got attacked to kidnap people and burn places they had nothing to start living. “The period between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries was a time of economic stagnation for Africa, which fell further and further behind the economic progress of Europe as the years passed by.” (“Riches & Misery: The Consequences of the Atlantic Slave Trade”, para 5)
The Black Man’s Burden In the late-nineteen century, the term new imperialism became an element of politics implemented by many European powers to impose their supremacy around the globe. Between 1870 and 1914, as a result of the Great Depression (1873-1879), imperialistic powers such as Britain, France, Germany, and Belgium, constructed colonies and protectorates in Asia and Africa in order to exploit their resources and their labor . After the decline of the transatlantic slave trade by the late 1860s, a change occurred around 1880 when France and Britain led European nations in the “scramble of Africa,” which divided the continent from 1880 to 1914. Indeed, after king Leopold II of Belgium conquered most of the Congo River with the excuse of promoting
But that was just the opposite for the British since they themselves back in the time felt like they shouldn't be doing farming with their own hands so they had gotten slaves which would do that for them and if they didn't they punished, very harshly. The saddest part of the slave trade is that the ruler of Nigeria and other rulers from different parts of Africa worked together with the British (as well as other European countries) and helped them have and make their own people into slaves for money,glory and reputation/rank. They degraded themselves into capturing and selling their own people for money and power. They were very gullible at the time thinking that by selling their people they would gain respect or a reputation with the British and other Europeans, but they never knew that the British thought of them nothing but some things which can gather their slaves without dirtying their own hands and wasting their