Europe wanted to set up and colonize in Africa, mainly because of Africa's raw materials it was purely economic. . (Iweriebor, 2011) The African's did not take kind to this, and it provoked not only African political responses but also diplomatic responses and military resistance. A lot of treaties of protection for the leaders of African societies, states, and empires went out. There was a lot of controversy about these treaties and eventually the military had to step in.
Document 4 says that not only were they unable to keep up the utilities, they didn’t have skilled administrators to govern their new independent nations. This shows, in a way, that colonialism actually benefited the Africans by giving them security and stability, and by making use of their resources which otherwise would have been undetected and undeveloped. But, it would be wrong to suggest that imperialism was very positive for Africans. Many African men were killed and overworked, as described in Document 6. This left Africa with a reduced supply of capable workers and leaders when they became independent.
Some of the first civilizations started in Africa, and forever after other civilizations wanted to conquer Africa as a means of showing their global superiority. Africa's worst domination, however, came from the Europeans. European colonization set the stage for imperialism that Africa deals with to this day. Before the resurgence of imperialism Africa was a resourceful continent. During imperialism, Europeans went into Africa and stripped its land of its resources and this also changed the climate negatively.
These inventions (refer to Document C for examples) caused great economic expansion across Europe. Yet at the same time, these exact inventions caused for a need of more raw materials. This is where Imperialism began to take shape, because before Imperialism in Africa had begun, there were still many examples of Europeans who’d enslaved africans on their own land. Which meant that once raw materials for machines that needed simple labor in a factory rather than the fields were needed to maintain their great economic boost; whichever European country had the most property in Africa, got to conquer the most land in its entirety (Scramble for Africa). Meaning these now obsolete slaves were being subject to have to watch European countries take over their lands and began industrializing on african soil because of how rich in materials the African land is.
To what extend was the colonisation and decolonisation of Britain’s Africa driven by individuals within Africa? Before the 1870’s Africa was largely unknown to the outside world but, in the 1880’s the scramble of Africa began, where European counties, especially Britain all wanted to colonise Africa. Was the whole reason for British colonising Africa economically or strategically driven or was it led by individuals in Africa (men on the spot) or was it more of a top down process led by the government in Britain? And even though Britain fought so hard to control large parts of Africa it is clear that after World II Britain’s empire was declining especially after India gain independence in 1947. However, the British did try to revive their African empire in the late 40’s and early 50’s but their sudden fall into a steep imperial decline with the Suez crises saw individuals like Macmillan to acknowledge that decolonisation was the only way forward, as it would be more beneficial for Britain to decolonise than to resist the rise of nationalism.
The Haitian Revolution was global in its processes due to its continual struggle against European colonial powers, slavery and the Atlantic economy, and racist European/American altitudes. The Haitian revo- lution was global in its inspiration or legacy by inspiring abolitionists, philoso- phers, poets as well as descendants of slaves around the world 10 fight for their own freedom. 'Ille Haitian Revolution had its roots in the abuses of slaves in the Atlantic economy. Haiti (San Domingue) was the most lucrative colony for the French , and this weas due entirely to the slave labor force. The French Noir code may have given rights to freed blacks and guaranteed food rations, but it's doubtful that there were many freed slaves, or that anyone oversaw the food rationing either (DOCUMENT 1), Data on freed slaves and food rationing would be useful to determine if the Black codes were actually enforced.
Nationalism was a unifying force, but it also led to intense competition between nations. The competition was for materials and markets. Nations of Europe often competed for colonies In Asia and Africa. In the Second Battle of the Marne, American troops joined forces with France to help them fight against the Germans. The dispute led to a sense of mistrust which deepened overtime.
CCOT essay Sub Saharan Africa Taylor Nowak During the 20th, the region of Sub Saharan Africa, wars with Europe to decolonize Sub Saharan Africa were coming about and a struggle for independence. The struggle for power in Africa from Europe was declining as world wars were becoming bigger problems for Europe, but the influence of western style and nationalism caused an internal conflict in the region itself. During the year of 1914, world one war was coming about, and Africans gained a new sight on just how powerful Europeans were in the region. Most of the time during the war men and women were taken from their homes and were forced to do labor for European enterprises or join the military. Ghana was the first sub Saharan
Imperialism: 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. Nationalism: Triple Entente, an informal alliance among Great Britain, France, and Russia in the period before World War I. It opposed the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy.
Colonialism: The One-Armed Bandit In every essay that we have read over the past few weeks, all of the authors talk about how colonialism has ultimately destroyed Africa and their hopes of ever being as great as the other leader nations. Authors like Maria Mies, Walter Rodney, and Jerry Kloby all contribute different explanations as to how the European colonizers have basically destroyed Africa. Mies explains how Africa has no chance of “catching-up” to the other developed countries because of European colonialism. Rodney disputes the claims that colonialism has modernized Africa and how the new advancements being brought in by the colonizers were being more used against Africans than to help them. Then Kloby helps us look at real examples of different times in which colonialism has hurt Africans more than helped them.