Imperialsim
Japan
-Modernized quickly -countries failed to imperialized Japan
China
-Opium wars -Sphere of influence(open door policy) -taiping rebillion -defeat by japan in the sino-japanese war -boxer rebillion
The causes of New imperialism( political, economical, social, technolgical)
Economic; In ability of the small population, small territory Europen economies to exopand economically and become wealthier unless they have more lands, more natural resources and more people's hard work to exploit. So to be wealthier, theroyal families together with ambitious, greedy but adventurous merchants combined to exploit other countries- militarily weaker and commercially less organised population. Social; The prisons were getting full and they neededc to be utilized. Best way of doing thuis would be to put them on ships for exploration *** military voyages to distant lands. This was a perfect solution to a social problem created by limits of territorial expansion within Europe. Moreover, scientific passions led to appetitie for exploring the geography of the World and search for wealth elsewhere amongbmany young Europeans. Religious The Church was crying for expansion. New territories and people were required. As imprealism made some initial success, this itself gave further impetus to spread uimperialism for the same reasons. There was additional reason later: to control the spread of communist and anti- monarchy ideas to different parts of the World. For details read on below: Although the Industrial Revolution and nationalism shaped European society in the 19th century, imperialism — the domination by one country or people over another group of people — dramatically changed the world during the latter half of that century. Imperialism did not begin in the 19th century. From the 16th to the early 19th century, an era dominated by what is now termed old imperialism, European nations sought trade routes with the Far East, explored the New World, and established settlements in North and South America, as well as in Southeast Asia. They set up trading posts and gained footholds on the coast of Africa and China, and worked closely with the local rulers to ensure the protection of European economic interests. Their influence, however, was limited. In the Age of New Imperialism that began in the 1870s, European states established vast empires mainly in Africa, but also in Asia and the Middle East. Unlike the 16th- and 17th-century method of establishing settlements, the new imperialists set up the administration of the native areas for the benefit of the colonial power. European nations pursued an aggressive expansion policy that was motivated by economic needs that were created by the Industrial Revolution. The expansion policy was also motivated by political needs that associated empire building with national greatness, and social and religious reasons that promoted the superiority of Western society over a backward society. Through the use of direct military force, economic spheres of influence, and annexation, European countries dominated the continents of Africa and Asia. By 1914, Great Britain controlled the largest number of colonies and the phrase "the sun never sets on the British Empire" described its vast holdings. Imperialism had consequences that affected the colonial nations, Europe, and the world. It also led to increased competition among nations and to conflicts that would disturb the peace of the world in 1914. State policy, practice, or advocacy of extending power and dominion, especially by direct territorial acquisition or by gaining political and economic control of other areas. Because imperialism always involves the use of power, often in the form of military force, it is widely considered morally objectionable, and the term accordingly has been used by states to denounce and discredit the foreign policies of their opponents. Imperialism in ancient times is clear in the unending succession of empires in China, western Asia, and the Mediterranean. Between the 15th century and the middle of the 18th, England, France, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain built empires in the Americas, India, and the East Indies. Russia, Italy, Germany, the United States, and Japan became imperial powers in the period from the middle of the 19th century to World War I. The imperial designs of Japan, fascist Italy, and Nazi Germany in the 1930s culminated in the outbreak of World War II. After the war the Soviet Union consolidated its military and political control of the states of eastern Europe (see Iron Curtain). From the early 20th century the U.S. was accused of imperialism for intervening in the affairs of developing countries in order to protect the interests of U.S.-owned international corporations (see United Fruit Co.). Economists and political theorists have debated whether imperialism benefits the states that practice it and whether such benefits or other reasons ever justify a state in pursuing imperialist polices. Some theorists, such as Niccolò Machiavelli, have argued that imperialism is the justified result of the natural struggle for survival among peoples. Others have asserted that it is necessary in order to ensure national security. A third justification for imperialism, offered only infrequently after World War II, is that it is a means of liberating peoples from tyrannical rule or bringing them the blessings of a superior way of life. See also colonialism; sphere of influence. Domination or control by one country or group of people over others. The precise nature and the causes of imperialism, the clearest examples, its consequences, and therefore the period which exemplifies it best, are all disputed. The so-called new imperialism was the imposition of colonial rule by European countries, especially the 'scramble for Africa', during the late nineteenth century. Many writers construed imperialism in terms of their understanding of the motivating forces. Among these, Hobson, Luxemburg, Bukharin, and especially Lenin focused on economic factors, the rational pursuit of new markets and sources of raw materials. Lenin argued, in Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism (1917), that imperialism is an economic necessity of the industrialized capitalist economies, seeking to offset the declining tendency of the rate of profit, by exporting capital. It is the monopoly stage of capitalism. Schumpeter (1919) defined imperialism as the non-rational and objectless disposition on the part of a state to unlimited forcible expansion. Imperialism is rooted in the psychology of rulers and the effects of surviving pre-capitalist social structures, not the economic interests of nation or class. Alternative accounts view imperialism as: an outgrowth of popular nationalism; a device to underwrite the welfare state, which pacifies the working class (notably in Britain); personal adventurism; an application of social Darwinism to struggles between races; a civilizing mission; and as simply one dimension of international rivalry for power and prestige. The latter implies that socialist states too were prone to be imperialistic. All these 'push' versions share an endogenous or Eurocentric focus. Competing views emphasize pull factors: the contribution made at the periphery by local crises such as a power vacuum (perhaps induced by foreign intervention) and the collaboration of indigenous elites. Imperialism becomes a matter of accident as well as design. 'Informal imperialism' is said to render direct political control unnecessary, in the presence of other ways of exercising domination, for example through technological superiority or the free trade imperialism of a leading economic power, and cultural imperialism. Therefore, for modern neo-Marxists, capitalism in the West has been able to survive the process of decolonization; imperialism outlives the age of territorial annexation. Economic, financial, and social structures of dependence remain, and are reproduced by multinational corporations especially. The Third World is still exploited and is subjected to indirect political control. Ghana's first President, Kwame Nkrumah, depicted this imperialism without colonies in Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism (1965). Some analysts argue that the idea of imperialism loses its usefulness when equated with international capitalism, where asymmetries of economic power and integration are inevitable. They reject monocausal explanations, and stipulate that the political relationships must be specified closely before imperialism can be inferred from the existence of economic inequalities.
Social Darwinism
Social Darwinism, term coined in the late 19th century to describe the idea that humans, like animals and plants, compete in a struggle for existence in which natural selection results in "survival of the fittest."
Scramble for Africa
The Scramble for Africa (1880-1900) was a period of rapid colonization of the African continent by European powers. But it wouldn't have happened except for the particular economic, social, and military evolution Europe was going through. In the end Britain and France had the most colonies and Germany lost out so it was also a major contributor to tension in Europe.
extraterritoriality
is an exemption from local laws. That means that an individual with extraterritoriality who commits a crime in a particular country cannot be tried by the authorities of that country, although often she or he will still be subject to trial in his or her own country.
India
-The declining Mughal empires made it easier for the british to take over India. -British exploited India's diversity -the east India company (British trading company) helped take over India. -The British east India company used Indians to fight in Britain's army:sepoys -Discontent among the sepoys led to the Sepoy Rebellion in 1857 -As a result, of the rebellion India was put directly under British rule -the British built roads,hospitals,railways
New Zealand/cananda/austraila
-got self rule easily:no burden because they were all white, still part of british commonwealth -Natives were killed
Iran
-oil -Britain:india -Russia:bigger borders
Southeast Asia
-open sea lanes between china and india -profitable crops -natural resources -spread chistianity
egypt
-suez canal:access to india and china by britain -becomes a protectoreate
what were the causes of new imperialism? how did this differ from the causes of old imperialsim? when and where did each occur?
1...Industrialization: Raw materials could be extracted from the colonies and manufactured into finished goods inside the factories of Europe. 2...Markets: Finished goods produced inside European factories could be sold exclusively to the colonial markets. 3...Racial supremacy: The belief that the white race was supreme to the black and yellow races. old imperialsim was only for trade old imperialsim:1450-1650 new imperialsim:1870-1914
Define the four types of imperialism? Identify countries or regions we discussed in class as examples of each type of imperialsim
1.Colony-country or territory governed internally by a foreign power, india 2. Protectorate-country of territory with its own internal governemtn but under the ex:egypt 3.Sphere of influence:many countries control different in one contries ex:china 4.Economic imperialism:depedent on another country ex:honduras
Sepoy rebillion
A sepoy was an Indian soldier in the army of the East India Company, which held a charter from the British government to run Britain's Indian empire. The officers of this army were white British, and again worked for the East India company rather than the British army.The Sepoy rebellion is better known as the Indian Mutiny, and ran from 1856 -1857. The Mutiny was an attempt to throw the British out of India and restore the Mughal emperors to power. It began when the sepoys became convinced that a newly introduced rifle cartridge, which required biting the paper end off to load, was greased with cow or pig fat.(It was in fact greased with sheep fat because of concerns about religious sensitivity amongst the sepoys). The cow was sacred to Hindus, the pig unclean to Muslims, and clever propaganda by Indian agitators convinced the sepoys that the cartridge was a secret ploy by the British to forcibly convert them to Christianity, thus damning their souls forever under their own religious beliefs. After much savagery on both sides, the Mutiny was defeated and the British government withdrew the East India Company's charter and ruled India direct, taking over control of the military in India through the regular British army.
Opium wars
Britain wanted vast amounts of Chinese tea and porcelain,but the Chinese government wouldn't accept trade goods in exchange,only cash.Cash at this time meant silver coins,and evntually this caused a severe currency shortage for the British in the Asia-Pacific region - for example in the British colony of Australia,alcoholic spirits were used as currency due to the cash shortage. Britain therefore needed a trade good which the Chinese would accept in exchange for their tea and pocelain,and decided that opium was the answer.Easily produced and shipped from nearny India,opium is highly addictive and therefore creates its own market once it becomes widely available in an area. Soon, Chinese merchants were only too willing to accept opium in exchange for tea and porcelain. The result of this was an increasing number of Chinese opium addicts,so in 1839 the Chinese emperor banned the opium trade.This led to British attacks on Chinese coastal ports to reopen trade with China by force.The First Opium War of 1839-1842 ended with British victory,the Chinese being forced to sign the Treaty of Nanking,under which trade between Britain and China was opened up on a much wider scale. The Second Opium War of 1856-1860 began when the Chinese emperor refused to open up trade with Western powers completely;France and Britain attacked China to compel the emperor to agree. The result of these wars was: To open up trade between China and the West fully. To show how weak the Qing dynasty in China was;in effect,it was powerless to effectively resist the demands of Western powers. (Britain used opium to addict the Chinese and open the door for their trade. China was closed to outsiders for most of its history (for a large part, it still is). Britain wanted to have a trading partnership with China and used drugs to weaken the population so they could move in.)
Belgian congo
Colonialism incorporates a variety of subjects, not just physical treatment of native peoples. It includes giving people political freedom, rights, religious rights, infrastructure, reform, independence, all that. Yes, Belgium was ruthless in their physical treatment of the Congo people, ie. Co-operate or we will sever a part of your body, but think about the British as ruthless pirates, conquering countries like India and China, not even by force, but by an even sneakier method- political colonialism. They placed themselves into the politics, (I mean, are you just going to say no to an army with guns and cannons?) and forcibly pushed the natives out of ruling class. They did not reform for the greater good of the nations, ie. India had a great famine at one stage, killing 10 million, but the British did not do a single thing about it.
Complare and Contrast Japanese, Chines ,and Indian imperialsim
Differences: China: sphere of influence good trading system boxers rebillion open door policy India: Britsih colony sepoys Internal rebellions Japan: powerful country modernization able to defeat european powers Comparing: China and Japan: -tried to become more liberal -individual governemnt -sino-japanese war -isolation -not formally colonizied -self suffient iNDIA AND jAPAN: -strict class system China and india: -decling dynasties -opium wars -cultural rebillions -britain
French v. British rule
Direct(France) v. Indirect(Britain)
Direct Rule vs. Indirect rule
Indirect rule: the mother country rules the colony from far away, often through a native leader. This might seem like the nicer way, but it created great differences between the races. The white treated the inhabitants of the colonies as tools for their Business. example: Great Britain Direct rule: the people in the colonies were under direct rule of the mother country. The natives of the colony were like inhabitants of the mother country. This gave them many more opportunities, but the pressure to be "civilised" ruined the original culture. example: France
Consequences of imperialism
Much of the land was taken by other countries. There was little land that belonged to any native Africans. Splitting up ethnic groups into separate countries, combining enemy ethnic groups into the same country. More powerful weapons introduced to existing warring factions. Deaths from foreign diseases. Social division and racial strife. Countries are left underdeveloped Destruction of traditional culture. One of the most unfortunate effects is that after the imperial powers started pulling out after World War 2 there was a power vaccuum. In many African countries the imperialists were replaced by home-grown dictators. It lead to the first world war
Boxer rebillion
Rebellion in China in 1900: an unsuccessful rebellion in China in 1900, the objective of which was to drive out all foreigners, remove all foreign influence, and compel Chinese Christians to give up their religion
White mans burden
Rudyard Kipling's "The White Man's Burden" is a deeply racist poem in praise of imperialism. Kipling is saying that "white" nations such as England and the United States have an obligation to educate and uplift and civilize the primitive dark-skinned people of the world. He calls that obligation a "burden" because he says that it is often a thankless task, that the savages won't always appreciate the great favor their white benefactors are doing for them.
How was imperialism in Africa similar to imperialism in Southeast Asia and the Pacific islands ?how wasit different
Similar: -both were built to open trade systems -Natural resources -missionaries -introduced modern technology -colonail powers Differences: -Berlin Conference -
The berlin conference
The Berlin Conference regulated European colonization and trade in Africa during the New Imperialism period. Called for by Otto von Bismarck, the first chancellor of Germany, its outcome, the General Act of the Berlin Conference, is often seen as the formalization of the "Scramble for Africa." The European powers literally divided Africa up between themselves, often creating quite artificial states that lacked any cultural or linguistic or ethnic coherence. Most of the European powers, although they justified their acquisition of African colonies in terms of civilizing, ended up exploiting them. When de-colonization took place in the mid-to-late twentieth century—often reluctantly, following armed freedom struggles—the economies left behind were ill designed to cope with independence, being mono-crops designed for European markets, not products for local people. Implied in the initial division of Africa was the idea that Africa did not belong to anyone, and so could be claimed. No Africans sat at the table. African states were not regarded as legitimate, legal entities. Africa is still coping with the consequences of the European scramble. The notion of dividing up the world was not new; Pope Alexander VI's papal bull of 1493 divided the world between Spain and Portugal, giving these Christian nations permission to invade 'barbarous nations' and bring their people into the true faith. When the scramble to parcel out Africa began, 80 percent of Africa was free of European rule. At the end, only Ethiopia and Liberia were independent.
What was the scramble of Africa ?how did it impact imperialism on the continent?
The Scramble for Africa (1880-1900) was a period of rapid colonization of the African continent by European powers. But it wouldn't have happened except for the particular economic, social, and military evolution Europe was going through. In the end Britain and France had the most colonies and Germany lost out so it was also a major contributor to tension in Europe.
Taiping rebillion
The Taiping Rebellion was a widespread civil war in southern China from 1850 to 1864, led by heterodox Christian convert Hong Xiuquan, against the ruling Qing Dynasty. About 20 million people died, mainly civilians, in one of the deadliest military conflicts in history.
Latin America
economic imperialism depedent on America for good economy
Africa
imperialism was all about building up a great nation through occupying the most territory. so the europeans saw africa as prime real estate. the movement they created was called the Scramble for Africa. picture africa as a giant untouched pie. all the european nations want a slice of that pie (the bigger the better) but there is only so much pie to go around and its not enough for every nation. hence the 'scramble' part where the nations scramble to claim a piece/slice of territory in africa before its all gone. now it was really unfair to the indigenous tribes who lived there because they were considered inferior and had no say at all when the europeans conquered africa. european nations took away their land and imposed their form of government on those people. and since they also owned the land, they also owned the natives too and could sell them for slavery. and to help with the slave trade, they made deals with certain tribes. the europeans would say "we'll give you guns and steel if you kidnap your neighbors and bring them to us so we can sell them".... and of course these traitorous acts caused more fights between the tribes but to the europeans that was even better because the tribes weren't united and therefore were weaker/easier to conquer.
Roosevelt Corollary
it means that Roosevelt told the world to stay out of the western hemisphere (North and South America, plus the Caribbean). We were the policemen of our own area.
New Imperialism vs. Old imperialism
old imperialism was about trade, countries just wanted to trade with other countires, so there would be trading posts everywhere around the world. they wanted to buy off the natives and get all the supplies they could get. new imperialism wasnt just about trade, it was money, they went into countries setting up factories and plantations, all countries were battling against each other because they all wanted the most power, and they thought having the most control, meant having the most power. some of the bigger countries would of been the U.S. England, Spain, France, etc. they all had the motives of greed.
why did the Europeans put so much development and infrasctruture in their colonies?
to benifit european living there better access for europeans
