The British colonized India to look for the spices, gold and silver but when they saw that Indians were fighting among themselves they eventually took control over India. The Indians then saw that the Britishers came to India for wealth but they are taking control of their land. The Britishers stole Indian things and became very rich. They asked Indians to give their land to them but Indians didn't agree with that and tried their best to get independent and free. One of the reasons as to why the British were able to conquer India was that they were already advanced in technology and they had more superior weapons and means of communication.
Henry M. Stanley was sent to Africa after they had lost track of Livingston to find him. Stanley also led several of the explorations through central Africa himself. Europe grew great interest in Africa and their abundance of resources after hearing of Stanley and Livingston’s reports. European countries eventually started making claims on Africa. France ordered Algiers in hopes to colonize it.
India and Korea share the attribute of both being colonized by foreign powers, Britain and Japan, respectively. Colonialism, while inherently beneficial to the colonists and detrimental to those being colonized, was used to satisfy the interests of the new regimes. While initially there were parallels between the activities and sanctions put on by the Japanese and the British, what the rulers actually intended on achieving would have the most bearing on the fate of the colony. The colonies of India and Korea were both similar in the fact that they both sought to establish a new system of government to meet their own ends at the cost of the local population, but held a key difference in the fact that their endgame goals were entirely different and thus led to two very different outcomes. The major similarity between the two rules would come in the form of encouraging domestic in-fighting.
In addition, imperialism "also brought jobs and industry to the colonies [and it] introduced the ideas of constitutional government to the Africans," (pg 578 AGS World History). Imperialism caused major negative aspects in Africa. In this case, Africans felt "they that Europeans got more of imperialism than they did," which suggests labors were treated as slaves. " The first step towards whiteness" (History Alive), this is a racist comment from an advertisement. The Europeans saw themselves as superiors over those who are not civilized.
Another difference was the difference between who did the work in developing the colony. The colonies differing views on religion also helped shape the way each colony developed economically. The Virginia and Massachusetts Companies both realized that they would need to have a strong economic system, but their views on religion and profit had too many differences and resulted in different systems. The Puritans did not feel the need for “excessive profits” and lived by the belief of self control. The use of company labor and overpricing caused a lot of problems with Virginians.
Imam B Originally secluded far away from each other, civilizations began trading with other civilizations in order to attain resources they did not have in exchange for ones that they did have. However, these traders needed a safe route from one civilization to another and therefore, trade networks that were protected by empires, such as the Silk Road, enabled traders a way to get from Africa to Europe to China safely to trade goods. Throughout history, trade has intentionally transformed civilizations by spreading religions and cultures, and by introducing new products and ideas; trade has unintentionally transformed civilizations by transmitting diseases to new places and reducing the uniqueness of individual cultures. The spread of religion
WAS THE BRITISH EMPIRE A FORCE FOR GOOD IN THE WORLD? The question I am trying to answer is ‘Was the British Empire a Force For Good In the World?’ Objectively, I would have to say that The Empire was not a force for good in the world as after all many of the positive points of The Empire are outweighed by the negative, with key issues such as the Slave Trade, exploitation of the indigenous peoples, and capital gain. Nevertheless, The Empire also brought in many western ideals (like democracy) and a new form of currency which had an aim of uniting many nations with this common ‘denominator’. The British also brought over the English language (in place of their native language) to ease communication between the lands. This ‘change’ did not really go down well with the indigenous people so one has to think ; What right did the British have?
As mentioned previously, Adam Smith, a highly regarded economist, demanded that in order for economic success, the”invisible hand of the market” must be in control, rather than the government. This notion involves the establishment of free enterprise and greater openness to international trade and investment (e.g the abolition of tariffs). Free enterprise results in the value of various goods and services being determined by supply and demand meaning that suppliers are unable to manipulate prices. It also encourages investment as people can see the potential to make a return – without the government capping prices. On the other hand, this idea of free trade is highly disadvantageous, and even harmful, to the Global South with the Global North dictating prices.
Mercantilism allowed for the belief that wealth was power and that a country’s power could therefore be measured in gold and silver—placing wealth at the forefront of their minds. Colonists were to help supply Britain with the resources Britain lacked (i.e. tobacco and sugar). The Navigation Laws, Wool, Hat, and Iron Acts, and the Molasses Act were all instituted to achieve the goal of mercantilism; they limited trade with countries other than Britain and prevented Americans from earning profit on anything that could potentially be earned for the British. All these acts, however, were loosely enforced and barely protested by colonists.
APUSH DBQ ESSAY The view of overseas expansion in the late 19th and early 20th century was mainly driven by Imperialism. With that being said, there emerged two groups with viewpoints on overseas expansion, imperialists and anti-imperialists. Although there are plenty of differences, the main one between the two was over territorial expansion. The imperialists were all for it, thinking that it would help the American market and the depressed economy from the panic of 1893. On the other hand, the anti-imperialists argued that it went against our American democracy and was harmful to the territories we were trying to acquire and our country itself.