1. In Imperialism J.A. Hobson claims that imperialism is not motivated “by the interests of the nation, but by those of certain classes, who impose the policy upon the nation for their own advantage.” What group do you think Hobson was talking about? Why? The groups that Hobson was talking about were the certain classes that portray the part of imposing policy is the upper tier society in Britain due to the fact they have military, politics, and financial resources. I believe that is an advantage to the upper tier society in Britain due to the fact people because having military and financial resources can defeat what they must overcome. 2. Why does J.A. Hobson argue that imperialism is dangerous and a detriment to British nationalism? Hobson argues that imperialism is severely threatening and a disadvantage to the British nationalism because the policy they have adopted puts people in charge of the right accreditation. The British nationalism accordingly divides the classes explaining that people who are separated and from other groups based on their wealth. This basically states that the British society has much more faith a belief to imperialism. Document two: Cecil Rhodes, Confession of Faith 1. How did Rhodes justify imperialism? Why was it the duty of the Anglo-Saxon race to subdue “inferior” populations? Rhodes justified imperialism …show more content…
For example, the way Kipling describes the White Man’s Burden is quite similar to Orwell due to the fact he was a police officer in an imperialistic nation, making Orwell participate in a similar situation to Kipling’s idea. Kipling felt like imperialism is wrong because it’s an advantage for the White Man to have power over the lower-class citizens. Orwell’s experience in Burma fit with Rhodes idea of imperialism because Rhodes believes that have that imperialistic power is right and that Orwell should just obey that
Parliament’s aggression towards the colonies reinforced the fact that colonist’s political ideas varied significantly with those of the
In the late 1800s, Europe was scrambling to conquer vast amounts of land. Imperialism had swept the continent by storm, with many countries vying for pieces of Africa and Asia to control. From 1880 to 1900, Britain, France, Germany, and Italy fought for African possessions and by 1900, nearly the whole continent had been split and placed under European rule. There was plenty of motivation for Europeans to conquer the world, and while some supported it, others didn’t. Most people in Europe at this time held ethnocentric views toward the “uncivilized” cultures in the world.
Countries like America and Britain, believed they were well off and the best. That other countries should follow their ways and traditions, and with doing so, they would improve. American Senator A.J. Beveridge states that the U.S. has resources in surplus, and that the country should be the leader in trades by establishing trading posts and selling their products (Doc. Two). According to Cecil Rhodes, the British were the best race, and that the more colonies that they conquered, the better it is for the world (Doc. Five). Race also played a role in Rudyard Kipling’s poem
Imperialism is a policy of extending a country's power and influence through diplomacy or military force. It is a great way to strengthen the economy and gain power and territory for countries that practice it, though it often failed and resulted in war and the deaths of innocents. Four intellectuals that played a big part in influencing American imperialism were Frederick Jackson Turner, Alfred T. Mahan, Herbert Spencer and John Fisk. All of these influencers had different ideologies and came together to justify American imperialism. They believed America needed to expand power and gain territories.
The social aspect of Imperialism was extremely racist, where “White Man’s Burden” was the major reason for Imperialism for some. White Man’s Burden, was attempting to colonize the
Anti imperialists had the better arguments than imperialists. Imperialism violates the peoples rights to vote/ the declaration of independence. White business leaders forced king kalakaua to amend Hawaii's constitution limiting voting rights to only wealthy land owners. Congress also proclaimed Hawaii as an american territory, although Hawaiians never had the chance to vote. Imperialism goes against ideals of self government for an example the military controlled Puerto Rico until congress decided otherwise.
Expansionism in America during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century shared many similarities and differences to that of previous American ideals. In both cases of American expansionism, Americans used the theory of manifest destiny to justify their conquests for new territory. Later, Social Darwinism was added to the mix, which made Americans even more big-headed. Both of these theories caused Americans to believe that the United States was superior to other nations and that all lands were theirs for the taking. However, there were also many differences between the two expansionist periods because some people supported imperialism while others were highly opposed to the idea.
For those who supported imperialism in the 1900s followed three vital reasons in the encouragement in which were Economic Factors, Military Factors, and Cultural Factors. In the United States officials have direct or indirect affects in the jurisdiction between other countries. In fact, the United States in this case wanted to acquire new markets in which goods are to be sold. Imperialism pertains a crucial military factor in which enforcement and overall involvement of imperialism. A key factor in the opposition of imperialism is the moral belief of democracy and the laws we abide to as citizens in the United States.
Between the era of Mahan Beveridge, Schurz, and Bryan, there have been many outlooks and opinions about whether or not imperialism is good or bad; some similar, some different. One is the speech by Obama being similar to Bryan’s opinions in relations to them both believing that imperialism is pointless, and overall not a good decision since there can be other ways to solve the problems they may have for imperializing in the first place. They both saw the same effects that can come out of imperializing; the consequence being an unnecessary war that can be avoided in the first place. Webb’s is also similar to both Bryan and Obama’s opinion because he also believes that it is an unnecessary thing to do in order for us to get what we want. They
Colonialism and Imperialism affected our world both positively and negatively. On one hand, Imperialism has often been linked with racial segregation, manipulation, and hardship. On the other, it has been said that many colonial powers contributed much in terms of schools, roads, railways, and much more. Whether this time period was constructive or harmful, it has played a large part in shaping our lives today. European Imperialism started long before the 1800’s.
He appeals to the empathy of the audience by stating the actions of the Burmese people: “if a European woman went through the bazaars alone somebody would probably spit betel juice over her dress” (Orwell, 1), “When a nimble Burman tripped me up on the football field and the referee (another Burman) looked the other way, the crowd yelled with hideous laughter.” (1). Actions with which would be more expected of the European imperialists rather than the Burmese people themselves. He clearly states his contempt for Imperialism through the following statement on his life and job: "All I knew was that I was stuck between my hatred for the empire I served and my rage against the evil-spirited little beasts who tried to make my job impossible.”
At these times, and even in today’s society; The more money you have, the more say you have in government and what goes down. (Document 3) In conclusion, imperialist use imperialism to take control over other colonies/countries to expand the borders, or to acquire vital resources. Imperialism was good because although certain leaders came around who were power hungry, many leaders wanted to build and help civilize their country. Imperialism has been the most powerful force in world
Have you ever had a strong negative attitude towards a person that everything about them seems bad? In Rudyard Kipling’s novella, The Man Who Would Be King, this is exactly what he was doing. The novella is a story about imperialism in the British Empire and how it impacted its citizens and countries they conquered. Kipling portrayed his negative attitude toward the British Empire through the use of figurative language and diction.
Her article, Britishness, and Otherness: An Argument, uses ethnohistory, nationalism and cultural methodologies to express how those in the British Empire rattle and are protective of their identity. In her article, she discusses how British identity waves since identity exists in a ven diagram and not in the black and white roles of the past. Religion, gender, race, ethnicity and many other identities exist in various combination depending on the individual. She asks why little attention has been focused on how or why the British population defines themselves against both real and imaginary enemies. That identity seems most important when being threatened.
Rhodes’s biased thoughts about nationalism are expressed when “[he] thinks that we all think that poverty is better under our own flag than wear under a foreign one.” Under nationalism, land can be thought as “locked” to one territory, under a government formed by similar people. Rhodes supports imperialism due to the way control and power can be spread. Do you think that Rhodes would have viewed indigenous peoples as equals once they had become part of the British Empire? Provide examples of his statements regarding the addition of foreigners into the British Empire and share your own ideas and analysis.