Sources History Question the Effects of War on Britain

393 Words2 Pages
‘Do you agree with the view that the British public’s enthusiasm for the Empire increased during the Second Boer War (1899-1902)?’ Source 4 agrees with the view that the British public’s enthusiasm for the Empire increased during the Second Boer War. It suggests that the country was overjoyed at the news of a military development, but at the end implies that it was only possible for people to form this opinion through the influence of press. Source 6 supports the content of this Source to some extent, agreeing with the view that people supported imperialistic propaganda. This Source suggests that people believed that they had to support imperialism (because of propaganda), not because they wanted to, using music halls as evidence. 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
Open Document