Ipmerialism DBQ

Awadalla, Marwan HGN22X
Period #1 1/09/15
During the 19th and early 20th centuries, “New” Imperialism accelerated due to economic, political, and social factors within Europe. Firstly, the Industrial Revolution stirred the ambitions of European nations, with such advancements in technology, caused these nations to spread their control over the less-developed areas of the world. These economic, political, and social factors were mostly responsible for this spreading of control from the world powers. Economically, the new Imperialism of the 19th and early 20th centuries were accelerated and had many factories in which caused many the strengthening in the inspiration of Imperialism. According to Parker T. Moon, Imperialism and World Politics, it is stated how “The Makers of cotton and iron goods have been very much interested in imperialism…. Demand of giant industries for colonial raw materials”. Not only does Parker show an example of how factories of cotton and iron goods were interested in imperialism, he also gives a reason of why they promoted imperialism. The demand of raw materials, in which can be found in colonies that are conquered, promoted imperialism. American Senator A. J. Beveridge in 1898 also demonstrates how economic factors accelerated European new imperialism. He states how “American soil is producing more than they can consume…the trade of the world must and shall be ours”. Since America has prospered economically greatly they had a huge surplus of goods, causing them to establish trading posts throughout the world, in turn inspiring them to imperialize. Imperialism was also accelerated due to political factors within Europe. According to Raymond Aron’s book The Century of Total War, the suggestion of how political factors was another cause for imperialism is a huge part of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Raymond explains how “colonial undertakings…originated in political ambitions…glory or national greatness”. What Raymond conveys is that the undertaking of colonies was created due to political ambitions and for the acquirement of prestige of one’s nation. In addition, the evidence of how politics also contributed to the origin of Imperialism is seen in President William Mckinley’s explanation of why the U.S took over the Philippines. “They were unfit for self-government…uplift and civilize and Christianize them…”. Mckinley explains how the motivation of their undertaking of the Philippines was due to their government, as for since they believed that their politics would be for the better in the Philippines, they decided to take over. In a letter sent by Phan Thanh Gian in 1867, it also demonstrates the origin of Imperialism tracing into political factors. This letter explains the French imperialism in Indochina in 1867, stating how the French came with powerful weapons of war, and that the strongest ramparts fall before them. This is to show that the French imperialized due to the fact that they had a enormous and strong naval force, as for their politics supported military building.

Social factors of countries also contributed to the upbringing of new imperialism in the 19th and early 20th century. According to Cecil Rhodes in Confession of Faith, he states how that he is apart of “…the finest race in the world…It is our duty to seize every opportunity of acquiring more territory …” Cecil Rhodes believes that the reason for imperialism is that the race of “Britons” is the superior race, and because of this social superiority, they must take every opportunity for acquiring land. Evidence of how social factors also contributed to the origin of imperialism is seen in William L. Langer’s book, The Diplomacy of Imperialism, states how the education of society “…justified competition and struggle … introduced an element of ruthlessness…”. Because of the evolutionary teaching of “survival of the fittest”, Imperialism was brought up due to the justification of rather harsh actions. The explanation for imperialism socially is also found in Rudyard Kipling’s “The White Man’s Burden”, conveying the same idea as Cecil Rhodes, it states how the White man is the superior race of the world and that they must spread and conquer all the others and to “civilize them”. Furthermore, the economic, political, and social forces of the world where responsible for the new imperialism that began in the late 19th and 20th centuries. As the economy of various countries prospered as well as the growth of politics, the countries became more and more lustful for new lands and colonies to satisfy their needs and fulfillment of their own desires, such as acquirement of materials, the need to achieve worldwide prestige, and to spread your faith unto others.

Awadalla, Marwan HGN22X
Period #1 1/09/15
European Imperialism in the late 19th and 20th centuries resulted in the carving up of areas of Africa and Asia into vast colonial empires. This was the case for British colonialism in India. As imperialism spread, the colonizer and the colony viewed imperialism differently. They saw both positive and negative effects of imperialism. With Imperialism, came forth negative and positive effects on both the mother country and the colony. Such example of said relationship may be found with the British and India.
The positive effects of imperialism for India, the colony, are evident in many sources during the late 19th and 20th centuries. In O. P. Austins “Does Colonization Pay”, Austin states that “…bring people of those spots the food-stuffs, and manufacturers…develop the territory…establish schools…blessing of civilization”. This shows that the colony of any European colonizer actually benefits the colony, as for they are brought food, education, and even a greater society that was present before hand. The theme of how imperialism benefits the colony can also be seen in Romesh Dutt’s The Economic History of India Under Early British Rule, stating “They have introduced Western education…modern sciences and modern life…wise laws and have established courts of justice”. This shows that the colonization of India by the British lead to India to prosper politically as well, as for it introduced wise laws and a proper court system, while also providing a proper education and modern sciences. The benefit of India can also be seen in J. A. R. Marriott’s book, The English in India, in 1932. It states how the benefits of imperialism included the Development of communication, the increase in agricultural wealth, the introduction to Industrialization, the improvement of sanitation and standard of living, and the creation of a transport system. Aside from this, British writer Sir Reginald Coupland points out the social and economic impact of imperialism on India, stating how “British rule brought with it from the West certain standards of humanity that Indian society has not yet reached…stop infanticide…slave trade was ended…” This shows that the imperialization of India allowed for moral and ethical rights to substantially increase.
However, with positive effects of imperialism for India, the colony, also came forth negative effects from its mother country, Britain. In a speech from Dadabhai Naoroji, he stresses the negatives aspects of imperialism on India. Dadabhai states how “Europeans occupy almost all the higher places in every department of government…they carry all they have gained”. Dadabhai explains how the Indians are not allowed to their own government positions of their own land (Also expressed by Mohandas Gandhi in his complaint about imperialism), and that the British people can take whatever they want from India and claim it as their own and bring it back to Europe. Another negative effect of Imperialism is shown in The Discovery of India by Jawaharlal Nehru, explaining how India became a “typical” colonial economy. Jawaharlal explains how the economic development of India was stopped and the growth of new industry was prevented due to the imperialism of India. He also states how India became an agricultural colony of industrial England, in which caused for unemployment rates to increase vastly, leading to a impoverished country.
The mother country of colonization, Britain in this case, also experienced positive and negative effects. According to O. P. Austin’s “Does Colonization Pay”, Austin states how “Under their direction, these places can yield tropical produce that their citizens need…”. This shows a positive for the mother country, as for the colonization of India allowed for Britain to harvest the produce unique to India for its citizens back in the mother country. However, a negative also came via imperialism, as for they had to experience many revolts from the Indians due to disagreements with the way Britain ruled, such can be seen in Gandhi’s criticism of imperialism
In the late 19th and 20th centuries, England and India demonstrated the common relationship between mother country and colony, with positives on both sides while harboring negative impacts from imperialism on both sides as well. Containing education, politics, and economy, the positives of these aspects may be seen on both sides, whilst the colony experiences many forms of oppression and poverty and the colonizer witnesses many rebellions and loss of resources from imperialism.

Awadalla, Marwan HGN22X
Period #1 1/09/15 The new imperialism began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In imperialism, the country colonizing the other is the colonizer and the country being colonized is called a colony. One of the areas that was most effected by the new imperialism was the continent of Africa. With the imperializing of Africa, many positive and negative effects occurred to Africa, as well as the colonizers of Africa. The negatives of the colony during imperialism in late 19th and early 20th centuries are demonstrated in the new imperialism in said centuries in Africa. In a excerpt from J. A. Hobson, negativities of imperialism is shown, as for he states how “The white rulers wof the colonies live at the expense of the natives…the foreigners take wealth out of the country. All the hard work is done by natives…” . This shows that the conditions of labor for the natives were cruel and harsh, and after completing this labor, the colonizers of Africa would keep the wealth of the colony to themselves. Another negative of imperialism in Africa was, according to the All-African People’s Conference in 1958, was the fact how the colonizers were “…reducing Africans to pverty in the midst of plenty… whilst freedom of speech, association, movement, worship, and the right to live a full and abundant life are denied to Africans”. The oppression of Africans from their prosperity to their own basic human rights came with the new European imperialism. The effect of imperialism in Africa is also seen in an African proverb; “…we had the land and they had the Bible, now we have the Bible and they have the land”. This is to show that the colonizers took the natives lands while using the process of Christianizing as a proxy. The imperialism of the colony has many positive effects upon said colonies during the late 19th and 20th centuries in Africa. One of these positive effects is seen in George H. T. Kimble “Colonialism: The Good The Bad The Lessons”, as for he points out how the colonizer in this instance supplied and were largely responsible for the opening of the region to lumbermen, miner, planter,etc. Supplying jobs for the Africans, this allowed for the region to prosper. George also states how the colonial government provided security of person and property in lands that had known little of either. ‘ The imperialism of a colony also affects the colonizer in many ways, both negative and positive during the late 19th century and early 20th centuries. On the positive aspect, imperialism allotted, according to J. A. Hobson, to acquire the most fertile lands and minderal resources of a colony. This allows for the white rulers to benefit greatly when undertaking acolony. Since they take wealth out of the country, the imperialists prosper vastly, as for they also live at the expense of the natives. However, with these positives, also came negatives. The colonies, according to Grover Clark, were a negative financial drain on the Europeans. An example is given, aso for Italy’s colonies made about 5,561million lire, while its’ expeditures on the colony was 6,856 million lire. Both the colonizer and the colony experienced dramatic effects as a result of imperialism. For example, the colonizer lost money in terms of trade with the colony and the colonists were discriminated against heavily. The imperialism of Africa in the 19th and early 20th centuries led to drastic changes for both the colony and the colonizer.

Awadalla, Marwan HGN22X
Period #1 1/09/15 During the 19th and 20th centuries, geography played an important part in the development of imperialism. Geography is the location of any land and countries such as Britain and Germany, in which geopolitics was very intriguing to said countries. The evidence of the heavily influecial geopolitical powers are seen over the fight over Africa during the 19th and 20th centuries via imperialism. Countries disputed over the geography of regions for many different reasons such as wanting to expand trade in the region or trying to make space for their growing population, and even for global prestige. Geography influenced the develop of imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries, as for it allowed certain countries to come into contact with one another that ultimately lead to greater conflicts, and various of other cultural diffusions. An example of this may be seen in President Fillmore’s letter to Japan, as for the United States’ whale fishing industry was mostly pursued near the shores of Japan . The United States threatened the Japanese by sending U.S steamships to Japan. The exposure of ex-isolationist Japan also lead to the modernization of Japan and increase trade with Asia, eventually leading up to the European’s involvement in Chinese affairs and gave Westerners spheres of influence in China. The role of geography can also be seen in the map of Africa and the interference between British and German possessions of Africa. The British and Cecil Rhodes would be angered by German acquisition as for Germany was threatening the British territories in Africa by bordering onto East Africa. There are many different ways how Geography impacted the development of imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries . The growth of trade was one way in which it was heavily affected. Many colonizing countries imperialized another country and undertook them in order to achieved a strategic advantage in geopolitics, including economic and military positioning, allowing the mother country to gain profit and trade from these countries and to be able to deploy troops around the world efficiently. The colonizer could gain an access to a much larger market to sell their goods to if they could imperialize these countries. This can be supported by the document showin the population of the mother country and the population of their colonies. The United Kingdom had a population of 40,559,954 and the total population of their colonies was 345,222,239, which is almost nine fold the amount of people in the United Kingdom. This statement can also be supported by the documentation of exports from Great Britain to the colonies, as for it expresses how the percentage of the total value increases from 31.5% to 36% in just 50 years. There were plenty of other reasons how geography influenced imperialism of the 19th and 20th centuries. For example, the British imperialized Egypt because they wanted control and the ability to build the Suez Canal, which could grant them control of increased trade around the Mediterranean Sea, this can be supported by The Colonial Problem. Another reason can be that the overpopulation of the mother country, such as the relationship between Japan and Korea; stated so by Ryusaku Tsunoda, as for Japan was suffering from surplus amounts of population and no other country would accept Japanese immigrants. Furthermore, the geography involved within geopolitics helped influence the growth of imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries. Whenever it was for economic or militarily strategic positions, the need to expand territory to find space for increasing population will also cause competition over geography, influencing new imperialism heavily.

Awadalla, Marwan HGN22X
Period #1 1/09/15 After the Berlin Conference of 1884 on African Imperialism, European powers occupied and colonized areas in Africa, undertaking all the countries in the event of the “Scramble for Africa”. The Europeans took no sympathy, as for they never thought about the colonial citizens thoughts on the imperialism of their own lands. The Africans had a variety of different feelings on the topic of the European Imperialism, some filled with Anger, while others stuck in the past of how they lost to the Europeans in general. A reaction of the African people to the European imperialism in their countries include hostility to the situation and sometimes confusion upon said colony building. The leaders of certain African groups were offered protection by European powers, as we can see in the document written by Prempeh, his Ashanti tribe was offered protection by the British if they cooperated with them and gave them control of his tribe, Prempeh refused, stating that “The kingdom of Ashanti tribe will never commit itself to any such policy”. This sows a sense of hostility in Prempeh’s tone, this could also be applied to the document written by Menelik the Second, where Menelik states that “I have no intention at all of being an indifferent spectator; if the distant Powers hold onto the idea of dividing up Africa”. Menelik would go on to successfully defend Ethiopia from Italian attempts at conquest. Some Africans attempted to make sense out of the whole situation and this resulted in both the Maji Maji Rebellion and the Africans realizing why they lost the battles to the Europeans in the first place. In the document written by a German military officer in 1905, it states that there was a rebellion in German East Africa and how there were many Africans rebelling by pouring water unto themselves believing that this water will prevent any harm from bullets. This shows the confusion of the Africans as they are now attempting to resort to any belief to cling onto the little hope that they have left. However, the Africans truly realized why they were losing battles to the Europeans, as seen from Ndanshi Kumalo, where he states that the reason why the Ndebele Rebellion failed was because of the superior military techonolgy that harbored within European warfare, such as the automatic rifiles that outclassed the spears and outdated single-shot rifles that the Africans were using. Another reaction amongst the Africans upon the Scramble for Africa was mainly a mix of anger within immense amount of hostility. For example, Samuel Maherero, a leader of the Herero people, stated that each day the Germans kill one of their people for no reason and they should rather die fighting than for no reason at all. The reaction upon the Africans was so strong that the women in some tribes, such as the Ashanti (as seen by Yaa Ashanti) were willing to go to battle with the Europeans because they saw that the Europeans now had the authority and power to disrespect the Ashanti tribal chief. Other Africans harshly criticized the Europeans as seen by Mojimba, and African chief. Mojimba claims that the Europeans are hypocritical in that they call his people “wicked” when they in fact are the ones who are “wicked”. He also states that the Europeans have “Sickness in [their] heads, for this is not justice” Lastly, the Africans reaction to the Scramble for Africa can also be found in the letter that Witbool wrote to the colonial administrator Theodore Leitwin, who accused Witbooi of “recalcitrance”. Witbooi pleaded with Leitwin for peace and to “Leave us [Africans] alone and withdraw… you have the guns, you force the right on your side”. Despite Witbooi’s please, the Germans defeated the Nama and the Herero. This document shows that Witbooi, a symbol for the African people, also reacted in a scared/fearing way, as for they begged and pleaded for the undoing of European imperialism, as for he states how the Africans were powerless and could not prevent anything from the Europeans, and that they had no voice and/or action to do anything against it. The African’s reaction to the Scramble for Africa varied depending on the citizens of the colonies. Many reacted in a angry and hostile way, as for they saw that they must act strong in order to prevent from total conquering of their lands. However, some feared for their lives, confused and wondering about the Scramble for Africa as for they were powerless and suppressed during this time of harsh imperialism.