Enemy tribes were often forced to live together, which resulted in civil wars over the years. These wars, however, were not the only effects that European imperialism had on Africa. Some effects were great for the Europeans and Africans, but others only benefited the mother countries at the colonists’ expense. Document 1 clearly illustrates how the mother countries benefited at the expense of the
This was positive for the British, because they achieved raw materials to trade, but it was negative for the Africans, because they were forced to work. Some other negative effects were explained in Document 8, such as the fact that hospitals were only available to a minority of people. Education was also limited to the privileged. This was racial segregation and discrimination. The British really harmed
“Mississippi Masala” review Racism has been a hindering problem in virtually every society ever since there has been variation in the human genome. Most people tend to prefer the company of people who are more similar to them, whether they consciously realize it or not. Problems begin when that preference is applied only to superficial traits, such as skin color. This can stifle progress, because prejudice limits resources that a society can use, lowers their versatility, and creates hostility. Mississippi Masala, directed by Mira Nair, explores the problem of racial oppression of Indian people by blacks in African Uganda and the racial segregation and prejudice against blacks in Mississippi, of the United States.
For this same reason the public opinion is divided with some people recognizing more negatives outweighing the positives while some suggest the opposite. Many people see the negative impact as being more significant because British rule in India resulted in impoverished, poor people and food shortages in India. Many people see the positive impact as being more significant because Britain brought infrastructure and technology to the Indian people. Because these viewpoints can both be supported, there is a great complexity to this issue. The position that should be taken on this issue is that British rule in India was a positive impact on the Indian people to a small extent.
De’Ja Moore African-American Slave Trade 25 January 2012 11:00-11:50 De’ja Moore The African slave trade was made to dehumanize and demeaned the black man but I can’t figure out why people believe it was so harsh. Although I may have not been able to live in such harsh conditions but at the same this slave trade makes me who I am today. Although I don’t know where from, I am a decedent of an African slave that was once in slavery. I do believe that slavery was harsh and unimaginable but why should we only focus on the negative. The Europeans must had felt some type of superior to the Africans because why else would you want to dehumanize a person.
Although creating this dichotomy seems a gross generalization and oversimplification of the colonial African experience, it more importantly allows for a different perspective- one that exposes the overwhelming success of the typically peaceful or pacifist reaction in contrast to the little gain and large losses of the violent response. Throughout history, European powers have tried and succeeded in imperializing lesser developed countries, countries that did not fall under or follow the European standards. This was the case with China and Japan. Both China and Japan were self-sufficient countries that only trade with neighboring countries. They had the necessities they needed to live and did not want trifle gadgets.
With the changing of culture and passing of time, the fallout that was (and sometimes still is) hardest to cope with in the United States was racism. As time progressed and things would move from more primitive to more sophisticated design and ideas, slavery did the same. Slavery my have just been the most primitive form of racism, and as it was abolished the idea of another race being subordinate to another didn’t seem to dissipate. Instead it would seem that the “abolitionist movement” became the “civil rights movement”. Instead of the government allowing slavery, it looked like it found a loop hole to not treat people of color equally for anything whether it was sports, school or public facilities blacks were still treated as inferior.
4) They also provided “security of person and property in lands that had known little or either.” (Document 4) D) For the colonizers, there were multiple positive effects Lachman 2 1) African colonies provided raw materials that boosted supply in Europe, improving the economy 2) Colonizers benefited through trade because foreign trade routes were introduced through the colonies III) Negative Effects E) The African peoples who were colonized were economically exploited by the invading Europeans. 5) “The white rulers of the colonies live at the expense of the natives” (Document 1) 6) The Europeans would not only take the natives’ land, but take hold of their resources, made the natives work them, and “take the wealth out of the country” (Document 1) 7) Africans were reduced “to poverty in the midst of plenty” (Document 3) 8) Although Africa was abundant in resources, the colonizers used and benefited from them for their own good,
Sanders (2001) argues that fear of witchcraft is a result of the structural adjustment programs in Tanzania. Privatisation strategies after Julius Nyerere African socialism led to increasing disparities, despite the belief that a free market economy would be better for all of society (p. 162). Those changes contributed to the rise of the occult and witchcraft discourse for two reasons. First, the structural adjustment programs and changes are considered immoral. Second, the fact that they were imposed on ordinary Tanzanians makes them quite inexplicable.
Similarly to the situation in Congo, colonial settlers in Kenya established borders that "failed to properly deal with the region's ethnic diversity [and] cultivated deep seated ethnically based mistrust and inequalities." The haphazard borders drawn by British colonialists were established with little regard to the ethnic and cultural boundaries that historically existed. This had a persistent influence on relations between ethnic groups in the region that ultimately led to the eruption of conflict following the 2007 election. Upon settlement into Kenya, the British colonialists took claim over the Rift Valley, causing the displacement of ethnic groups already residing in the area. This caused several ethnic groups to resettle in the surrounding areas that were already claimed by another ethnic group, fueling ethnic tension in the area.