When Europeans began to colonize Africa, they enforced the idea whites were superior over other races, and treated the native Africans as inferiors. Historians David Olusoga and Casper W. Erichsen explained it by saying “The white races had claimed territory across the globe by right of strength and conquest. They had triumphed everywhere because they were the fittest; their triumphs were the proof of their fitness..” () This quote exemplifies the idea that white Europeans took over the continent by force (“strength and conquest”), and because of this, they regarded themselves as the superior race. This mindset did not lead to peaceful cohabitation of the continent.
This unity is what created a uniform America instead of a bunch of individual states. America may have begun with predominantly Englishmen on the eastern coast, but immigration has molded America into being a true “melting pot” of the various cultures in which the present American culture developed around. The advances made on the frontier are what evolved the European influences into the influences of independent
A. Explain the reasons for English Colonization by doing the Following: A1. Discuss the political motivations for English Imperialism. The main political motivation for English Imperialism was due to the rivalries with its European Counterparts. Initially, European countries were looking for a water passage to China so they would be able to trade for their goods. Spain, who lead the charge, landed in Central and South America, captured gold and silver.
George Fitzhugh argues that slavery was justified. Two of his arguments in defense of slavery are the Africans are foolish, and slavery in America is safer and better than slavery in Africa. While many people believed his arguments to be right, Fitzhugh is wrong. If Africans are foolish, wouldn’t you want to teach them instead of enslaving them? Fitzhugh states in paragraph two of The Universal law of slavery, “He would become an insufferable burden to society.
Considering the small white population compared to the mass amount of Natives in North America, the French depended on good relations with Native Americans. The main person to blame the good relationship between the Natives is Samuel de Champlain, who founded the region of New France. In contrast to the usual ideals of Europeans, Champlain “insisted on religious toleration for all Christians and denied that Native Americans were intellectually or culturally inferior to Europeans,” (Foner 38). He imagined creating a civilization where people of multiple cultural backgrounds can live together peacefully. For the most part he
Aquinas’s probable view on the slave trade in 19th Century Looking at Aquinas viewpoint on slavery and his theory of just law and unjust law, it’s quite likely that he would have abhorred the African slave trade in the nineteenth century. It certainly cannot be considered as the form of natural slavery as they did not need to be enslaved for the sake of their own benefit. The forcible removal of Africans form their native land and being transported to southern United States was clearly not beneficial for them but was perhaps only beneficial for the slave traders and rich farmers who needed them for slave labour. They also did not have any debts to repay as form of justifying their slavery to the Southerners.
Another example , that was positive is that after the Berlin Conference Britain claimed Kenya they expanded the education. This was something positive for the imperialism because either way the education was limited they didn’t use to have education and with educations it could help them a lot for better opportunities. Other people argue that social is a negative effect because on document 1 by Ndansi Kumalo who is a chief from Rhodesia(Zimbabwe) in 1890s states that people were mistreated by women being raped , treated like slaves, and British stole their animals and food. Either way social is positive because got rid of slavery, worked with French to find a cure and they
According to pseudo-science at the time, Europe's economic and political strength was proof of the superiority of the European race. This statement was used as a justification for imperialism as Europeans believed it was their duty to bring civilization to the uncivilized colonies. The Europeans had a desire to spread Christianity, to protect European missionaries in other lands, to spread European values and
Moreover, Western civilization became the ideal civilization, and became way superior to African “civilization.” As a consequence, African tradition became perceived as primitive, outmoded, and sadly not welcomed by the rest of the world. Unfortunately, a lot of Africans experienced a trend of a dying out culture. (2) It can be implied that even the Africans’ self-perception dropped because the only lifestyle they knew was suddenly taken away from them and they were taught that it was substandard. Therefore, the indigenous inhabitants of the colonies, the Africans, had to adapt to a new, “superlative” culture and view it as more sophisticated than theirs.
Although it is inaccurate to limit the governance system of British imperialism throughout the 19th and 20th century as indirect, it is relevant to underline that the British majoritarly pursued indirect colonialism especially in Africa. Indeed, after centuries of settler and direct colonialism, British imperialism soon came to realize the advantage of an indirect type of rule in their newest colonies when considering the economic benefits but also the pre-colonial societies of Africa. Indeed, most of these African states were characterized by complex and highly populated pre-colonial areas and this discouraged many British settlers and more importantly perhaps, discouraged British institutional establishments in those countries. This led
Orientalism was the essential ideology that European colonizers employed to justify their imperialist actions. Edward Said asserted that Europeans claimed that they had better knowledge about the oriental than the people who lived there, and it was their white man’s burden to civilize the oriental. Ironically, the knowledge about the oriental were created by Europeans who had limited understanding about oriental culture, custom, and history. To justify their occupancy in the oriental, some European travelers, observers, or statesmen, focused on exaggerating or distorting the oriental incidents to create the sense of exotic, uncivilized, and bizarre. Colonel L. du Couret, who traveled to the Middle East and converted to Islam, and witnessed the judicial procedurals of the Arabia, was an excellent example of this kind of writers who provided orientalist description of Eastern nations.
According to the reading “Afro-Asian Solidarity and the World Mission of the Peoples of Africa and Asia, 1957”, the author illustrates the idea of Afro-Asian solidarity against the Western imperialist countries. This idea states the fact we cannot live peacefully in a world threatened by the shadow of war. African and Asian people realized the fact their weight in the international balance has now become preponderant. They had a colossal number of people, natural resources, and their strategic positions. They reached a conclusion that the outbreak of war is impossible so long as they insist on peace, especially if they do not content themselves with a mere negative
Europe, Africa, and the Americas each had intelligent societies developed in them. However, geography of the territories they lived in contributed to the development of these civilizations. Civilizations that lived close to each other often influenced or inspired each other. Moreover, civilizations often took from their predecessors. A key example of this is when the Aztecs destroyed and took over the Toltec Native American’s land.