Similarities Between Indochina And The Congo
Imperialism in Indochina and the Congo
Throughout the 1890’s – 1910’s the imperialists ideas remained similar around the globe. Many European countries such as the Netherlands, France, Germany, and the United States proposed similar ideals regarding the importance of imperialism through acquiring of raw materials and territory. Specifically, regarding the conquests of and King Leopold II of Belgium, and Napoleon III it is evident that the root cause of European imperialists was to discover foreign territory in hopes to find raw materials that could potentially reap economic benefits.
After taking the throne in 1865, King Leopold’s motives were centered around annexing Congolese territory to profit from the ivory enterprise. King Leopold,
though eager to gain control of vital minerals and materials, was not the only European power interested in colonizing African territory. France, Germany, Belgium, and other involved countries, quarreled over the distribution of African territory resulting in what historians called the “Scramble for Africa”. The Scramble for Africa was a rushed “imperial conquest of Africa by major powers of Europe.” The intense altercation between European powers resulted in the creation of the Treaty of Berlin. The treaty was administered to mediate the conduct of the European regions wishing to imperialize and industrialize African Territory and addressed trade regulations in the Basin of the Congo, religious liberties, navigation, and slave trade. As stated in the Treaty,“the trade of all nations shall enjoy complete freedom” , King Leopold was able to traffic which ever products he saw fit. Rubber, a natural resource that was forging its own industry by means of mass production, “covered nearly half of King Leopold’s Congo.’ The treaty of Berlin enabled him to profit from the manufacturing and transportation of the raw material in his territory resulting in immense economic benefits for King Leopold. The idea of seizing territory for the sake of profit by means of natural resources became a common theme not only to Belgium and the Congo but to other reinforces the argument that the root cause of European expansion was a common thread between imperialists.
Napoleon III, the emperor of France pioneered France’s expansion into Southeast Asia into a colony called Indochina. Indochina was a region South of China and east of Thailand consisting of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, renowned for its raw silk which lured French investors and adventurers to colonize enable to derive a profit from the exclusive good. Hundreds of Frenchmen settled and colonized in Indochina, abusing their environment for silk worms, and infiltrating their educational system by means of creating schools. The young indigenous people of Indochina were forced to learn how to read and write in French. European powers used raw goods to promote expansion and conquer foreign territory served as imperialism in Indochina. As Albert Beverage once said, “we govern our territories without their consent, we govern our children without their consent. How do they know what our government would be without their consent?” Though Albert Beveridge’s “March of the Flag” reflects the thought processes of imperialism in America, one can observe the similarities between both the ideals of imperialists in Europe and the United States. Beveridge argues that expansion makes America more powerful than surrounding countries because they have direct connection through protectorates. Similar ideals are reflected on Europe as many European countries imperialize regions for the sake of profit from raw materials leading to the betterment of their economy.
To conclude, imperialists in Indochina and King Leopold II of Belgium’s reign over the Congo and Indochina were examples of raw materials pioneering European expansion for economic benefit. These examples support the argument that the primary cause of European imperialists was to discover exclusive goods for economic benefit.
Throughout the 1890’s – 1910’s the imperialists ideas remained similar around the globe. Many European countries such as the Netherlands, France, Germany, and the United States proposed similar ideals regarding the importance of imperialism through acquiring of raw materials and territory. Specifically, regarding the conquests of and King Leopold II of Belgium, and Napoleon III it is evident that the root cause of European imperialists was to discover foreign territory in hopes to find raw materials that could potentially reap economic benefits.
After taking the throne in 1865, King Leopold’s motives were centered around annexing Congolese territory to profit from the ivory enterprise. King Leopold,
though eager to gain control of vital minerals and materials, was not the only European power interested in colonizing African territory. France, Germany, Belgium, and other involved countries, quarreled over the distribution of African territory resulting in what historians called the “Scramble for Africa”. The Scramble for Africa was a rushed “imperial conquest of Africa by major powers of Europe.” The intense altercation between European powers resulted in the creation of the Treaty of Berlin. The treaty was administered to mediate the conduct of the European regions wishing to imperialize and industrialize African Territory and addressed trade regulations in the Basin of the Congo, religious liberties, navigation, and slave trade. As stated in the Treaty,“the trade of all nations shall enjoy complete freedom” , King Leopold was able to traffic which ever products he saw fit. Rubber, a natural resource that was forging its own industry by means of mass production, “covered nearly half of King Leopold’s Congo.’ The treaty of Berlin enabled him to profit from the manufacturing and transportation of the raw material in his territory resulting in immense economic benefits for King Leopold. The idea of seizing territory for the sake of profit by means of natural resources became a common theme not only to Belgium and the Congo but to other reinforces the argument that the root cause of European expansion was a common thread between imperialists.
Napoleon III, the emperor of France pioneered France’s expansion into Southeast Asia into a colony called Indochina. Indochina was a region South of China and east of Thailand consisting of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, renowned for its raw silk which lured French investors and adventurers to colonize enable to derive a profit from the exclusive good. Hundreds of Frenchmen settled and colonized in Indochina, abusing their environment for silk worms, and infiltrating their educational system by means of creating schools. The young indigenous people of Indochina were forced to learn how to read and write in French. European powers used raw goods to promote expansion and conquer foreign territory served as imperialism in Indochina. As Albert Beverage once said, “we govern our territories without their consent, we govern our children without their consent. How do they know what our government would be without their consent?” Though Albert Beveridge’s “March of the Flag” reflects the thought processes of imperialism in America, one can observe the similarities between both the ideals of imperialists in Europe and the United States. Beveridge argues that expansion makes America more powerful than surrounding countries because they have direct connection through protectorates. Similar ideals are reflected on Europe as many European countries imperialize regions for the sake of profit from raw materials leading to the betterment of their economy.
To conclude, imperialists in Indochina and King Leopold II of Belgium’s reign over the Congo and Indochina were examples of raw materials pioneering European expansion for economic benefit. These examples support the argument that the primary cause of European imperialists was to discover exclusive goods for economic benefit.