Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

1. Discuss the role of women in the New Imperialism.

Did their roles differ


from the roles of men? If so, how?

Not only was there a new renewal of the Christian mission effort, but also a
need to spread “civilization” to “barbaric” areas of the world. They felt the need to
teach the indigenous peoples of the places they settled proper social standards of
hygiene, education, marriage, etc. Many of the people who served as
missionaries were women who served as nurses and teachers. These women
who mostly only took part in peaceful colonization joined these mission societies
hoping to gain more authority and autonomy than they could get at home. These
women helped to soften the harsh colonial rule by calling attention to important
issues like maternity and women’s health; issues that would otherwise be
overlooked by the male-dominated leadership.
2. Discuss the sense of moral duty and cultural superiority felt by the
Europeans toward non-Western peoples. How was this manifested in
European relationships with indigenous people? Give specific examples.

Many missionaries, colonial expeditions, and just the general population


from Europe and America felt technologically and culturally superior to the
indigenous population. Some people thought that these people had to be
educated before they could be as good as the “civilized” people. Others were
extreme racist and believed that the natives were permanently inferior to them.
They believed that the white people were at the top of the biological pyramid with
the native people always at the bottom. Because of their attitude towards the
indigenous people, they acted in a very brutal way, using conquest over
diplomacy and imposing heavy taxes. They believed that the local populations
were good for nothing besides manual labor and therefore they received mixed
reactions from the African countries.
When Europe began to colonize Africa, it contained many different kinds of
society. Some countries lived with a well-developed economy dominated by
commercial towns and the merchant class aristocracies, while others lived in
small agricultural villages with no outside rule or government. There were even
remote areas of hunters-gathers and pastoral nomads. Some of these societies
welcomed the Europeans as allies against local enemies. They would seek
government jobs and send their kids to missionary schools once colonial rule was
established in return for protection, clinics, and roads. Other cultures, especially
those with a warrior or pastoral background were not as accepting. Tribes like the
Zulu and Ndebele fought fiercely against the German invaders in the 1900s losing
over 2/3 when they finally gave in. Other tribes with strong roots in Islam led
jihads against the Europeans. They were ineffective however and they were all
defeated. The only known successful resistance to the European colonization was
with the Ethiopians in 1889. Ethiopia was under the rule of an emperor named
Menelik who was smart enough to buy new and modern weapons when
European expansion started. The Ethiopian military training and tactics were
superior to those of the Italians who tried to conquer them, ending in a surprising
Ethiopian victory.
Some countries in response to growing European dominance, tried to
ignore them and continue living their lives as they had been. They found this
becoming harder and harder to do though as the colonial rule disrupted the
commercial, economic, and social aspects of the colony. New taxes on seized
land put an especially large burden on the African farmers and herders who
needed land. In other places European rulers seized the land and gave it to
private European landowners, forcing the indigenous people onto reserves. The
tax forced on upon the Africans was usually so harsh that few of the Africans
could maintain a living on it. European jobs did not offer high enough wages to be
attractive to Africans, but it was the only way that the indigenous people could pay
these harsh taxes. These taxes were often counter productive and forced African
people to move away.
3.Discuss Imperialism in Latin America. How was it different from
imperialism in Asia and Africa?
Imperialism affected different areas in different ways, and they were often
dramatically different from one another. For example Latin America had a very different
experience with imperialism than Asia and Africa. In Latin America, Imperialism was
accepted and in fact often encouraged by the locals and local elites. In Africa and Asia
Imperialism was strongly resisted by most and the local tribes and countries would wage
wars against the Imperialistic nations, often with disastrous results. In Latin America no
such resistance was found, and the people were more than willing to let the Imperial
nations come in and “modernize” their country. Also unlike in Africa and Asia, the
European countries avoided territorial expansion and were only able to penetrate and
exploit Latin America economically using what was called a free-trade system.
Latin America’s rich resources made it perfect for imperialism and the only thing it
needed was a way to open up its interior to new development. They could not conquer
the areas throughout the country for two main reasons. America stated in its Monroe
Document that it would attack and wage war with any country that tried to imperialize
Latin America, and all of the European powers wanted to avoid this. The second reason
was that unlike in Africa and Asia, the Latin Americas had a somewhat efficient
government and a strong army that would have been capable of fighting off the
Europeans, and along with the threat of the Americans, the European powers could not
subject Latin America to Imperialism. The railroad would prove to be the answer to the
problem. European and American entrepreneurs, as well as foreign banks helped to
financed and built large railroad systems in order to exploit Latin America and its
abundance of mineral and agricultural resources. They called it the free-trade system and
the local elites encouraged this process because it would help modernize their country
and spread wealth to them. Many of them encouraged competition among the different
countries in an effort to benefit themselves. This was very different from the violent
African and Asian response. Some of these societies welcomed the Europeans as allies
against local enemies. They would seek government jobs and send their kids to
missionary schools once colonial rule was established in return for protection, clinics, and
roads. Other cultures, especially those with a warrior or pastoral background were not as
accepting. Tribes like the Zulu and Ndebele fought fiercely against the German invaders
in the 1900s losing over 2/3 when they finally gave in. Other tribes with strong roots in
Islam led jihads against the Europeans. They were ineffective however and they were all
defeated. The only known successful resistance to the European colonization was with
the Ethiopians in 1889. Ethiopia was under the rule of an emperor named Menelik who
was smart enough to buy new and modern weapons when European expansion started.
The Ethiopian military training and tactics were superior to those of the Italians who tried
to conquer them, ending in a surprising Ethiopian victory.
Latin America was different from Africa and Asia because they not only were able
to avoid territorial expansion and open warfare, but also because they were the only
country that the Americans and Europeans were forced to manipulate Latin America in
order to exploit it. They had to spend millions of dollars building expansive railroads
before they could start exporting raw goods back to their countries and even still they had
to be very careful about how they did it. In Africa and Asia it was a free for all. Countries
were seizing land all over the place and practically flattening cities in order to get what
they wanted and often crushing opposing armies.

Вам также может понравиться