Shacquerra Hamilton November 5, 2013 HIST 102 T02 Jonathan Gantt Criticisms of Imperialism: John A. Hobson European imperialism in the 19th century was a process in which more powerful and wealthy European countries took over and dominated smaller and underdeveloped countries—either formally or informally—for economic interests, such as resources and labor. The most compelling criticism of imperialism would have to be John A. Hobson’s, an English economist and critic of industrialization and capitalism, “Criticisms of Imperialism” (1902), where he addressed imperialism as a chauvinistic business initiative where powerful nations exploited weaker nations, driven by economic greed which would eventually end in war. Hobson’s criticisms of imperialism are most compelling because they were indeed true. Imperialism didn’t begin in the late 19th century, but the brutality of it did. There was always a “backward” race dependence upon a “civilized” power as a colony or sphere of influence, Hobson stated.
British Imperialism of India The period of Imperialism is commonly viewed as an extremely profitable time in which all imperialist regimes greatly benefited. However, when analyzed in depth, Imperialism was the total opposite. The period of Imperialism, in which European powers conquered new colonies across the globe from the 17th to the 19th centuries, resulted in an era driven by greed and a complete power struggle. John Hobson, an English journalist and economist of the time, best criticizes Imperialism in his1902 book, Imperialism: A Study. In his book, Hobson clearly states, “The dominant direct motive [behind imperialism] was the demand for markets and for profitable investment”(qtd.
It could be argued that there are multiple factors that could be argued to be the primary cause of the American Revolution. These factors include social, economic, and political causes, all of which branch out into far more intricate categories. However, a major precursor of the revolution was the tyrannical control with which Britain treated the Americans as an inferior people, mainly through absurd taxes. The colonists began to see the economic restraints that Britain’s laws placed on their lives. Americans grew to believe that the many taxes were levied for the enhancement of British capital at the expense of American welfare.
The liberal capitalist US economy needed ever increasing trade and investment opportunities to overcome its endemic weaknesses, (Mccauley). The Marshall Plan was designed to create an informal American empire in Europe and thereby to extend American political influence over the USSR itself. Roosevelt and Truman and their advisors already predicted the threat of Soviet Expansionism, and that they tried to restrain the Soviets from changing the international order in a way that would have been as dangerous to Western interests. Therefore Marshall Plan then led to Truman Doctrine, which not only did it influence Europe to be under control by American imperialism, but also did not support Soviet Union because the United States inserted anti-communism propaganda. American pressure and the Western decision to
But instead of diamonds, this time Britain’s were chasing after gold. The Boers sought desperately to keep the British out of their home. They soon steered them away by
Part 2 People’s History of the World "A People's History of the World" by Chris Harman Chapter 1: Iron and Empires This short chapter laid out the way in which empires expanded and in which civilization grew. The concept of the surplus laying in the hands of the ruling classes became more established. Innovation began within the people that could learn from previous achievements. It became clear that the only way civilization could expand was through the encouragement of new techniques. The conquest of certain civilizations lead to new ideas being brought in by the conquerors, and this lead to a much larger surplus, larger than ever before.
Companies fought the government and the courts for the right to become incorporated and to reap its many benefits. Capitalism has adapted in order to continue making profits. Capitalism was the primary reason for the shift from Fordism to Post-Fordism, as Post-Fordism was a more efficient model of production meaning greater profits. Capitalism requires ever expanding markets and constantly evolving methods of production, lest it cease to exist (Marx & Engels, 1848). In order to achieve this a production revolution of sorts took place in many advanced economies, countries shifted from Fordism to Post-Fordism.
They wanted to depress prices and rise the value of the pound to what it was compared to the dollar before the war. The authorities wanted Britain to yet again be the centre of the world financial market but it cost Britain highly in lost output and employment. At the start of the century the government was committed to balancing the budget by a rule based system while the monetary policy was ruled independently by the Bank of England. They were more committed to a fixed rate of exchange in which the sterling pound was able to be fully converted into gold. After the First World War there was an attempt to try to return to this form of economy but it failed leaving Britain’s economy exposed to huge levels of deflation with no effective plan to counteract in place.
While imperialism showcased European strength, it also revealed a basic dependency. Each country's prosperity hinged on its ability to maintain and expand its colonial empire. This created competition among various imperialist powers for control of foreign territory. The British felt endangered by Germany's fast economic growth. Very quickly, Germany's new, modern factories vastly out produced Britain's older ones.
As a result, the social welfare of those developed nations decreases. It is thus more difficult for workers to find a job in line with their skills and qualifications; they receive a lower income and they have less time for leisure activities. Plus, this international division of work may lead to economic disequilibrium in developing countries. To get wealthier, they focus their economic activity on the trade with developed countries instead of focusing on their own economic development. This can lead to a shortage of food in third world countries and to starvation of their population, as some of those countries are exporting the major part of their production to developed countries.