Popular enthusiasm for the Second Boer War Britain really did rule the waves throughout the 1900 century. By the start of the Second Boer War, Britain controlled a quarter of the Earth’s land surface, largely controlled the Earth’s oceans with her vast fleet and London was the finical capital of the world. The second Boer War started with huge popular enthusiasm, in fact the patriotic fervour reached a climax with the news of the Relief of Mafeking in May 1900. Nevertheless, the tide was about to turn. Towards the end of the war however, people had problems with supporting the war when there was national problems which should be dealt with instead of the war.
Joe Marinaccio Mrs. McCarthy English 10 21 March, 2015 The Flag Raising at Iwo Jima World War II was one of the greatest and bloodiest wars in world history. When characterizing it, one normally thinks of Hitler’s domination and the Nazis. Although, that was a major part of the war, the war on the Pacific was as significant, yet unrecognized to the public today. The Great Depression was in full effect in the US when World War II began, giving many unemployed men a job in the army. This resulted in a surge of patriotism and national pride.
It is therefore threatening the cultural identities of many countries because this one culture is being largely promoted due to the dominance of the western media and media imperialism. However Curran argues the concentration of media ownership has been about for ages. In the 1930s half the UK media was owned by just 4 corporations. It is therefore not a new thing and so it’s not necessarily the concentration of the media that is threatening cultural identities as they would have been threatened a long time ago if this was the case. Marxists argue against Curran’s view and state that it must be the media imperialism that is threatening cultural identities; with new media and globalisation, media companies have immense power and so can and are threatening on a larger scale.
Research Paper 4 Question: How did imperialism help and eventually hurt powers in Europe? Imperialism helped European powers by giving confidence to the European government. It hurt them by bringing conflict with the British and china causing the Opium war, also a major part of European imperialism was the colonization of Africa and India... The Europeans made a big name for themselves during the late 1800s, early 1900s, they ran through countries like Africa for the fact that they could. They caused a lot of hatred towards them that evolved into more… Along with expanses, there came abusive power from the European countries.
The outcomes of these are considered a significant part of British history and play a key role in future events such as world war 1. Firstly the welfare reforms were extremely significant and could be argued that they were down to the liberal party. Source 5 talks about the liberal’s rise to power in 1906 when it says ‘The liberal government’s legislative programme indicated that at last the thorny problem of physical consequences of poverty was being tackled in earnest’ In the General Election of January 1906 the Liberals swept to victory in a landslide result, which saw the party win 400 seats. Henry Campbell Bannerman capitalised on the unpopularity of the previous Tory administration, which had been replaced by his new Liberal government in December 1905. The link between the liberal party and the welfare reforms is that all the social reforms in Britain were under the Liberal government.
The First World War increased rather than narrowed political divisions within Germany. How far do you agree with this judgement? Although initially it seems that the First World War narrowed the existing political divisions in Germany of the pre-war decade, as the war progressed, the resentment grew, in part because of the huge losses and the economic crisis that hung over the country. Therefore because of this the political divisions increased, to the point that by the end of the war the polarisation of German politics was clear. To begin with, despite the demonstrations against war held on the 28th and 29th of July in Berlin, with crowds of 100,000 strong, once the war had broken out there was a general consensus on the side of national duty and what was considered to be morally right, largely because the government presented it as a defensive campaign against Slav aggression.
How important was the Second Boer War (1899-1902) in changing attitudes in Britain to imperialism during the period 1880-1902? The Boer War of 1899-1902 was vital in regards to changing attitudes towards British imperialism in the time period of 1880-1902, as despite the early populist view during the war seeming to be pro-imperialist, following notable events such as mafficking (1900) and potentially even the 1900 General Election, there was a real sense of antagonism towards the brutal methods employed by the army and, as a result, towards Imperialism. To measure the levels of public opinion regarding this, phenomena such as music halls, religious instruction and the press will be considered, as well as the views on key events such as the death of Gordon (1885). However to assess fully [split infinitive] the effect of the Second Boer War in changing British attitudes to imperialism, we must first note the attitudes before the War. [Worth starting with the Midlothian campaigns, 1879-80] The First Boer War (1880-81) was a major shock to many in Britain, as, unlike the easy victory many had expected, the British forces were crushed following a series of tactical blunders, notably at Majuba Hill where Sir George Pomeroy Colley led his 405-strong infantry to camp at the top of the hill, and in the night they were stormed by Boer forces, suffering 285 casualties to the Boers 6.
On the other hand, source 5 suggests that imperialism was ok, but the way the Boer war was fought was not. I agree with the view that the public got swept away with the ideas of imperialism because everyone else seemed to be believing in it, but I also think that this generalisation is fairly unreliable because it shouldn’t be applied to the whole population, because there must have been some people who were against it, or saw through the press and propaganda; how they were trying desperately hard to influence people’s opinions. Firstly, Source 4 suggests that the capital of England, London, were overjoyed at the news of the relief of Mafeking, supporting the view in question that the public were enthusiastic about the Empire’s advances: “celebrated”, and words such as “fireworks” and “brass bands” give connotations of happiness and festivity. However, this Source also implies that the root of people’s merriment (imperialism) was spread and emphasised by the “new halfpenny press”. From my own knowledge, I know that there were numerous newspapers that were ‘pro-war, such as The Daily Mail, The Daily Telegraph and The Morning Post and their
Analyze the causes and effects of the Boer War The turn-of-the-century Boer War (1880–1881) also known as the South African War was fought between the British and the Boer people in an unequal power struggle in South Africa. The war came as a result of British restrictions which had been placed on the Northern expansion of the Boers in an effort to placate the native African population, who were at this time resisting any European expansion. The Boers resisted and defied British rule and continued their Northern expansion, and the power struggle evolved and progressed until serious hostilities erupted. Some of the concepts we have to define before answering the question are analyze, causes and results. Analyze means to examine methodically and in detail the constitution or structure of (something, esp.
‘The rise of nationalist movements was the primary motive behind British decolonisation after 1945.’ The British Empire was the largest empire in history. At its peak, it consisted of 14 million square miles of territory and 400 million people. Yet, even though it had a history of over 400 years, it became redundant in 40. Imperialists such as Cecil Rhodes believed that the destiny of Britain was to colonise the world. Unfortunately, similar to the Roman Empire, its fall was both unanticipated and catastrophic.