Eric Williams' economic reductionist argument presented in his 1944 Capitalism and Slavery supported the theory that the move toward African enslaved labour in the Americas was entirely a matter of economic expedience that helped catapult Western Europe to the forefront of a new global capitalist economy. [2] In White Over Black published in 1968, Winthrop Jordan argued that the social forces in Europe that gave rise to African slavery in the Caribbean centred around issues of Christian, White and nationalistic European identities. [3] Whether a matter of economics, identity or a combination
During the time of the European scramble for Africa, European countries fought to control the natural resources and colonize Africa. In response to the imperialism of Europeans African actions and reactions involve, diplomatic methods nonviolent and violent resistant. Documents 1, 2, 3 reveal evidence of how some African countries that was oppose to the imperialism of the Europeans deal with it by using diplomatic methods. The Royal Niger company document gives an example of how the British were willing to develop a diplomatic relationship with the chiefs of the African countries. It shows how the Royal Niger Company agrees on paying for the land and to respect native laws (doc 1).
Strategic factors played a changing role in Britain’s relationship with its African empire throughout the expansion period 1870-1902, the consolidation period 1902-1955 and the de-colonisation period 1955-1981. In some of these periods Strategy was right at the foreground of Britain’s rule in Africa and other times it was pushed to the back by other major factors. These include economic considerations, International relations, changing attitudes and nationalism. Many historians such as Martin Pugh saw that ‘the most obvious motive for British expansion was strategic’. Britain’s strategic motives in Africa centred on thwarting the growth of rival European powers as well as securing its interests in Africa.
To what extent were economic motives the most important reason for Britain obtaining influence and possessions in Africa from 1868 – 1902? There are many factors involved which allowed Britain to obtain influence and possessions in Africa during the scramble. The main factors are Strategic, The individuals in the field, humanitarian issues and properly the most important factor; economics. Economics could be described as the main reason for British interests in Africa to begin with but also remaining an important factor throughout this period. The British involvement in Africa was down to economic reasons; this is clear throughout the time period as most events which take place in Africa can be linked back to economy.
The decision of using Africans as slaves and the issues of trade on an international spectrum are extremely important when looking at the subject of slavery. The Middle Passage is an important link in the Slave Trade that marked the beginning of a new a new and often horrendous life for many African people. It reveals the story of the savage treatment of the so-called “savages” that were captured from Africa. The Middle Passage is the term used to describe the trip across the Atlantic made by captive Africans. The definition of “Middle Passage” has changed over time.
Greed and arrogance throughout history is certainly not a new idea, even as we pick up a current paper, these traits are still witnessed today. They are the drive train behind the desire for power and wealth, and the combination is a heady mix for impending war. In the late 1800’s Europe was on the fast track for the desire to rule and control and Africa was its target. Not only was Africa an untapped reservoir of resources such as; gold, diamonds, oil, copper, tin, ground nuts, ivory and ebony, they were a storehouse for another big commodity, slaves. What began as desire to protect the trade route to India grew to be a desire to control the land and peoples that lived there, and an unstable Egyptian government was just the loose board Britain
Underdevelopment There was several immediately obvious aspect of that underdevelopment that we need to elaborate. Colonialism has its own logical concept on the Europeans and Americans. It was not true that the idea to colonize Africa was the issue to make profits. But their target was human capital associated with slavery. Africans were skilled, knowledgeable and creative individual who manage themselves without outside help.
Nkrumah was in doubt about true independence and because of that, he wrote on neocolonialism. Neocolonialism is a condition where a country may be politically independent and still be economically dependent on other states. He also was involved in Pan-Africanism, and felt that Africa needed more development and African needed political unification of its countries. Nkrumah had an idea of an African Federation and it did not succeed. There was then the OAU Organization of African Unity.
According to Wood (1990) he states that “slavery was an essential part of the earliest multinational systems of credit and trade which arose in the 15th and 16th centuries” (p.96). The African slave trade also stimulated European shipping, manufacturing, and gun making. Slavery played an essential role in the growth of commercial capitalism in the colonies; slavery was the essential to creating wealth. Slaves where very important because it meant that plantations could plant large amounts of crops and own workers without having to pay them. “Slavery was important to the southeast regain, because of slaves, most of the southeast made money off cash crops which helped them but more slaves, and also more land”
Many foreign powers wished to take Ethiopia for themselves due to its economic nature and its long standing history. This was mostly due to the factor that "European powers engaged in the Scramble for the partition of Africa"[2]. Ethiopia was a state like no other within Africa that was able to maintain themselves this was due to the fact that they had a feudal system that was considered to be similar to that of Russia. Furthermore Ethiopia had significantly moved themselves into a powerful position with the European powers making it difficult for numerous situations to occur. Menelik II had successfully managed to manipulate European powers against each other as well as gaining numerous arms and modern weapons against one another.