Understanding Modern Imperialism
Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview by Jurgen Osterhammel, is a brief but extensive overview of the origins of imperialism/colonialism. Osterhammel uses classic cases of colonialism/imperialism to give the reader a broad overview of colonialism.
According to Osterhammel, there are three defining features of modern imperialism. One defining feature of modern imperialism occurs when”… an entire society is robbed of its historical line of development, externally manipulated and transformed according to the needs and interests of the colonial rulers.” (Osterhammel, 15) In other words, one defining attribute of modern imperialism is the defilement of an entire society, followed by a ‘rebirth’ of a society to fit the needs of the vast, and often European rulers that rule over them. Also, it should be noted that Osterhammel quotes that this transformation is done “externally”, which implies that the foreign leaders did not necessarily survey or assess the people in which they were transforming. The disregard of the original inhabitants to fulfill an ulterior motive is a defining feature of modern imperialism.
However, there are colonial rulers who choose and do survey and assess the people in which they are transforming. King Leopold II of Belgium used explorers such as Henry Morton Stanley. According to Hochschild, “for five years, Stanley was Leopold’s man in the Congo. The explorer’s combative energy was now directed mainly against the territory’s forbidding landscape, not its people. (Hochschild, 67)
Another defining feature of modern imperialism is “the unwillingness of the new rulers, [the mother country] to make cultural concessions to subjugated societies.” (Osterhammel, 15) Modern imperialism does not allow the oppressed nation the opportunity to share their culture with the ruling nation. This means that the transfer of knowledge is only coming from one direction, when it should be coming from both directions. In hindsight, this prevents modern imperialism of being wholly successful. This is because as previously mentioned, a defining attribute of modern imperialism is the [manipulation of a society to fit] the needs and interests of the colonial rulers.” (Osterhammel, 15)However, one can argue that if the oppressing nation does not assimilate or take into consideration the culture of the oppressing nature, it would be harder to transform the society in which it is trying to dominate.
The third defining feature of modern imperialism is the “interpretation of [the] relationship [between the mother country and the colony.” (Osterhammel, 16) This simply means the way in which the mother country perceives their relationship with the colony. According to Osterhammel, some countries feel that it is their obligation” to “civilize” the “barbarians”. (Osterhammel, 16) Therefore, this unequal relationship between the mother country and the colony is a prime feature in modern imperialism. This sort of relationship gives the mother country some form of justification to their actions pertaining to the colony.
However, King Leopold did not have any intentions of civilizing the colony. Leopold’s main intention was to secure a colony for himself and strip the country of its valuable resources at any cost. This resulted in “[b]urned villages, starved hostages, terrified refugees dying in swamps, and orders for “extermination”…” (Hochschild, 233) Leopold was not interested in helping the Congo. He was far more interested in obtaining the vast amounts of rubber and ivory that would help him pay off his loans to the Belgian Parliament.
In ancient and early modern versions of imperialism/colonialism there are instances when colonies were ‘transferred’ between varying world powers. For example, many of the Caribbean colonies became the possession of the English or the French in the 1600s. These nations include “… (Barbados in 1627, Jamaica in 1655), or the French (Guadeloupe and Martinique in 1635…” (Osterhammel, 30) In contrast, Osterhammel notes the massive decolonization that occurred in the 1940s and 1950s. In this era, the transfer of power when released by the mother country was returned to the colony instead of another nation.
Another distinction between early modern versions of imperialism/colonialism and modern imperialism/colonialism is the level of intimacy between the mother country and the colony. In the 1500s, the main goal of the Europeans was to have “the most efficient form of large-scale commodity production…” (Osterhammel, 31) However, in the 1920’s as Osterhammel mentions, the ruling nations began to invest heavily in other sectors to supplement the “large-scale commodity production.” (31) The stark difference however is unlike the 1600s and the 1700s, the investment into other sectors did not result in “enormous human misery” (31) but an “infrastructural development of many colonial regions.” (Osterhammel, 36) This level of investment was not present during early/modern versions of modern imperialism.
A defining feature of modern imperialism is the advancement of technology that came as a result of the industrial revolution. According to Headrick, when the Honorable East India Company battled the Kingdom of Burma in 1824, the East India Company emerged victorious because of the steamboat turned gunboat. (Headrick, 236) This technological innovation were armed with cannons and carronades. (Headrick, 236) In addition, these boats moved with tremendous speed. Headrick stresses that the Honorable East India Company was able to win with less causalities and injuries was because of the new and improved steamboats. Imperialism now had the capability to move with increasing speed. Colonial rulers were now able to conquer new territories sooner with less deaths.
The technological innovation of gunboats reveals another defining feature of modern imperialism: the Colonial’s power large superior complex. According to Headrick, during the Opium War “the British willingness to attack one of their best trading partners lay the knowledge that they now had the “few gunboats” they needed to make a mockery of the “thundering fire” of the Chinese forts.” (Headrick, 240) Previously, colonial rulers were concerned with the massive and often expensive damages and causalities associated with going against the territory’s inhabitants. Due to technological innovations, the British and other rulers were now boasting how easy it would be to conquer new territories.
According to Burbank and Cooper, a defining feature of modern imperialism is the incorporation of private and public enterprises within a territory. In the past, mother countries would obtain all the resources for itself, but in modern colonialism states allowed private companies to come into the territory and conduct business. This way of business benefitted not only the mother country but companies that saw an opportunity in the colony. According to Burbank and Cooper, “[t]he growing opium trade expanded networks of traders linking India, China, and places in between…” (Burbank, Cooper, 295) This interaction between private and public enterprises is a modern feature of modern imperialism. States would often instigate wars in order to make commerce more valuable for companies in the colony. For example, “Britain’s two “opium wars” with China in 1839-42 and 1855-60, are classic cases of a state using military means to make another state engage in a form of commerce it did not want.” (Burbank, Cooper, 294)
In conclusion, modern imperialism continues to evolve with the introduction of new technologies. Imperialism becomes more mechanical and European states are able to conquer new territories with relative ease. The introduction of private companies and the need to supply large quantities of large resources causes competition and sometimes tension between Europeans states, colonies, and the individuals who must provide these resources.
Working Definitions
Colonialism: Colonialism is when a foreign power systematically breaks down the indigenous people emotionally, economically, and spiritually by imposing its interests onto the indigenous people and their land. In other words, colonialism is the defilement of a country’s resources, people, and culture for the mother country to improve the welfare of its own state and people.
Imperialism: Imperialism is the act of a country exerting one’s superiority to ensure its colonial possessions stay in check. This is primarily achieved through politics at varying levels, starting from the international realm, to the local/colonial realm.
Colony: A colony is an area of land separate from its “mother country”. The area of land exists solely to benefit the mother country in some way, shape, and/or form. The colony may exist for military, agricultural, and/or pure domination purposes.
Empire: An empire is a vast or sometimes small network of colonies that are all connected to the mother country.
Colonialist Ideology: Explanations used by foreign powers to exert their control onto colonies.
Indochina: The area in Southeast Asia that was dominated by France. Countries such as Vietnam that were in Indochina gave up large amounts of their sovereignty and ruling powers to France, but were still able to maintain their respective rulers.
The “Scramble for Africa”: A term used in reference to note the time in which European rulers sought to control new territory in Africa for their own personal gain.
Opium: A poppy that causes hallucinations to the user. The British Empire introduced opium to the Chinese and traded it for Chinese goods such as porcelain.
Extraterritoriality: Granting foreigners the right not to be subjugated to the laws of the colony, but by the laws by which the foreigner originated from. This undermines the colony’s power to effectively administer laws and it gives foreigners the potential to evade harsh punishment dictated in colonies’ penal codes.
Questions for Further Inquiry
How has imperialism evolved since the 1960s after decolonization?
What were the effects of imperialism in regards to the colonies’ economy?
About the Image
The image which I selected depicts the mauling of a tiger by an elephant. The tiger can be viewed as the colonies and the elephant can be perceived as the nation which inflict its control upon the colonies. In the picture, the elephant has pierced the tiger right in the center of its body. This can be directly related to the damage colonialism inflicts upon its colonial possessions.
Title: Les jeux du cirque en Annam: combat d’un éléphant.
Date: 1904
Link: http://via.lib.harvard.edu/via/deliver/fullRecordDisplay?_collection=via&inoID=754549&recordNumber=106&fullgridwidth=5&method=view&recordViewFormat=grid