There was always a “backward” race dependence upon a “civilized” power as a colony or sphere of influence, Hobson stated. During competitive the scramble for land, the great European powers abused their colonies—politically and economically oppressed them—took their resources to produce goods only to sell it back to them and made many enemies in the process—foreign and domestic. Hobson suggested that powerful nations simply utilizing the natural, undeveloped resources of their colonies would be more acceptable than compelling its dwellers to utilize the resources themselves. It would be unfair to make someone who has done little labor and has a low standard of life to do more complex work although we don’t consider it so. He was not against the idea of imperialism, just the ruthless way that they were going about it at the time, for it was inhumane—they had no concern for the feelings or needs of the countries or the people they cruelly colonized and dominated.
A historical event would be Hitler’s rise to power. The three mains causes the treaty of Versailles, the failures of the Weimar democracy and the economic situation all contributed to Hitler’s rule. There were many consequences from Hitler’s rule, the main consequences were the effects on groups of people, Hitler’s growing power and anti-Semitism. A major cause that resulted in Hitler’s growing power was the treaty of Versailles. The 1919 treaty of Versailles required Germany to pay war reperation to France.
New groups like merchants and townsmen gained in stature and wealth. The balance of power had moved definitively, and in many ways the Middle Ages set the tone for the travails of the Early Modern period and the regicidal civil war that nearly tore the country apart. So, what forces caused these enormous changes? To suggest that this was all brought about chiefly by economic pressures is naïve. A multiplicity of factors worked together to fashion this new political order.
It was often blamed for the Panic of 1819 and was seen as advantageous to the wealthy and oppressive and harsh to the poor. When Jackson campaigned for reelection, he and his opponents focused heavily on the issue of the US Bank. Jackson was against it, and when he was reelected, he interpreted this as a mandate to abolish the bank. He thought of the interests of the states and the people in them when he carried out this move. With the end of the US Bank came some terrible consequences.
The Wall Street Crash in America in 1929 had a great impact on Europe in the subsequent years. It left countries with stockpiles of unsold goods along with the production of goods being greatly reduced resulting in unemployment soaring to extremely high levels and also leading to many national financial crises. Britain and Germany were two of the key European economies which both had extremely high levels of unemployment. In the British case the high levels of unemployment were mainly due to intensely severe deflation which was induced by the authorities. They wanted to depress prices and rise the value of the pound to what it was compared to the dollar before the war.
In order to achieve this a production revolution of sorts took place in many advanced economies, countries shifted from Fordism to Post-Fordism. Fordism was based upon Henry Ford's use of production lines and mass production. This model de-skilled the workers involved and made flexibility on the production lines difficult. During the early 1960's a larger range of products were being demanded which meant that companies were losing profits as they could not keep up with demand due to the inflexible production process. The changes which came with the adoption of Post-Fordism were largely implemented to increase flexibility on the production line and consequently boost profits, as Mitchell stated “Post-Fordism has been portrayed as a
| The Military Revolution | The Beginning of European Global Dominance | | [Type the author name] | 11/14/2012 | History 111 (AS 01) Bohdan Somchynsky History 111 (AS 01) Bohdan Somchynsky | From the 16th Century to the 19th century Europe underwent a period of incredible military evolution and development commonly referred to as the military revolution. This “revolution” drastically altered the way armies fought, no longer was the mailed fist of the Knight what defined armies ability. The introduction of gunpowder transformed European society and economies it had direct and often dire consequences on the rest of the globe as colonial competition took hold. From its humble beginnings in 1405 when Berwick-upon-Tweed surrendered from a single shot from an English bombard to the dazzling military reforms enacted by Maurice of Nassau. Gunpowder transformed combat in a dramatic fashion, swords were replaced by muskets, pikes and spears by the ring bayonet.
To what extent were economic concerns responsible for the outbreak of revolution in 1789? While the economic concerns present in France in the 1780’s contributed to the outbreak of revolution in 1789, the political concerns played a larger part in its commencement, encouraged by the ‘enlightenment’ ideals arising around this time. The French Revolution began on 14th July, 1789 with the storming of the Bastille and lasted until the abolition of the monarchy in 1792. However, the discontent that sparked this radical change had been building up for years before hand. This discontent lay largely within the 3rd estate, as the politics of the time were unpopular amongst them, particularly as the economic crises hit nearer to 1789.
England lost. Money is another reason Charles I was having problems with Parliament. On the coast people had to pay something called ship taxes for the country to build ships etc for war. But Charles was short for money. He introduced this tax to the whole country and misused it by not using it for ship money.
Although finance played a significant role in the deterioration of the relationship between Crown and Parliament, it was not the lone reason, due to the fact that there were other more important factors including foreign policy and Buckingham which caused the collapse in the relationship between Crown and Parliament. Firstly, finance was a critical factor in the breakdown in the relationship. For example, the Forced Loan caused a great amount of tension between Crown and Parliament and therefore, worsened relations. It worsened relations because Charles enforced illegal taxations on his subjects without any form of consent from Parliament. He required that his subjects “loan him the equivalent of five subsidies” and although it was “opposed by significant numbers in the localities,” the taxation still occurred as the government had “employed all its powers to eliminate resistance”.