Dirks argues we should look past colonial justifications of ‘higher’ principles such as Liberty, Democracy or a 'civilising' impulse and recognise them as excuses for 'domination and exploitation'. However, the confident and aggrandising attitude is crucial to understanding why the British presumed that their white settler colonies would desire a closer union, and why others were excluded. J. S. Mill’s, who studied the empire as a scholar and as an official of the East India Company thought that "different types of possessions [are] to be governed in different ways depending on the stages of civilisation they had reached’ and because of this civilising aim any failure was blamed on the 'precolonial past'. As Sullivan has noted, like James …show more content…
Mill’s also promoted of Britain as 'the power which of all in existence best understands liberty' and that empire was in the interest of humanity. Britain’s positive force he argued meant it had responsibility to promote “free institutions among the dark-skinned races of the world.” As Betts has argued, they also linked Britain to classical allusions to Rome and Athens as symbols of “order and civilisation in a barbaric world”. It was argued that "we should teach classics [because]... There is no nations burdened with Empire that has so much to learn from Imperial Rome as we do..." The idea of the self-sacrificing, noble British race was also seen in Kipling’s 1899 poem The White Man’s Burden". As Bell has argued, British imperialists imagined themselves as a civilising force of order like Rome, rehabilitating thugs to ‘sturdy yeomen’, and settler colonies were envisioned as the 'organic' spread of a superior people, bringing enlightenment with them. This self convincing attitude went up to government as a white-paper read, “the central purpose of British colonial policy is…to guide the colonial territories to responsible …show more content…
However, the difficulties of a creating an agreed constitutional formula exposed that a coherent ideology was out of grasp. Political structures and Britain’s role within them were of particular concern as for Froude 'one free people cannot govern another free people'. An anonymous article in 1873 argued for 'a really Imperial Parliament in place of the 'English, Welsh and Scotch, and Irish one that wrongly goes by that name’. There was particular concern over Britain’s future role; whether it would be first amongst equals, maintain her status, or be equal with perhaps power centred not in Westminster, but in a federal head. Dilke argued that the issue of central government as 'the choice of capital will, here as in Canada, be a matter of peculiar difficulty'. Also, ambiguous vocabulary with ‘federations’, ‘confederations’, and ‘commonwealths’ whilst in one way was a strength in attracting many to the cause, meant disagreement was inevitable. Bell compares Seeley with anti-Imperialist and opponent Goldwin Smith to show that they shared a broad consensus about the world and Britain's place within it, as Smith, nicknamed “Little Englander” advocated unity, but contrasting Seeley, believed it would come from residue loyalty to England. Furthermore, Dilke, who had already raised concern over
The British East India Company took over India because of all the resources that they had. when the company made the Indians join a military they rebelled and started firing back at the British and then the company “called” the British government and they came with big guns to take control and regain India for themselves. British imperialism has a negative impact on the politics of india because of the British courts and the government wasn't far toward the indians. British imperialism had a negative impact on the economy of India because the British did not help the environment and they made railroads to take away from the land. British imperialism had a positive impact on the economy of India because the British eliminated highway robberies,
“Englishmen.. have given the people of India the greatest human blessing - peace.” (Dutt). Merely coming to India in the 1600s to trade, the British East India Company established trading outposts. After ridding of French influence in India during the Seven Years’ War and having Indians mutiny against British rule, Britain gained full control of India. India has been under the imperialist control of the British until their independence in 1947. British imperialism caused some negative effects on India through poverty and persecution, but retained more of a positive impact due to its massive improvements in the modernization of India and the overall improvement of Indian civilization.
Archibald Philip Primrose, Lord Rosebery, wrote, in his letter to the London Times, that colonies are essential to the nations survival. “Health of mind and body exalt a nation in the competition of the universe” (Document 8). These political leaders believed that colonization was necessary to keep the nation’s global influence.
British imperialism had a negative impact on the politics and economics of india because the British were running the country for their own good and not for the good of the indians. In contrast the British had customs that ultimately ended up benefiting the Indians.
British imperialism had a negative impact on the politics of India because of the establishment of the framework for India that leads to their downfall and the Indian Army which they used to control their own kind. According to Dr.Lalvani, the British established the framework for India’s justice system, civil services, loyal army, and the efficient loyal police. (Paragraph #6). While this is true, the framework didn’t include the Indians, because “Of 960 civil offices, 900 are occupied by English men and 60 by natives”(Doc. #2). British laws often benefited the British and were designed to limit the freedom of speech of the Indians, for example, the Rowlatt Act in 1919. (Gandhi). This evidence shows that the British, when creating the framework for the new and improved India wanted to benefit from it while trying to lower the Indian’s and limit the
British imperialism lasted for hundreds of years and has had staggering effects in India that we can still see today. Britain initially became interested in India in the 1600’s; the government set up trading posts around the country because it was interested in the raw materials and resources available. At first Britain used indirect rule through Sepoys -- Indian soldiers -- but after the Sepoy Rebellion Britain had to step in to rule directly. Although British imperialism had positive effects such as eradicating immoral customs and paving the way for modern India, it also had numerous negative effects, such as by creating laws to better control Indians which left their government negatively impacted, taking from India with no concern for the
Imagine a country coming into yours and ruining your environment. Killing your people. Taking your land- your power. Pushing you and the ones you love into starvation and poverty. In reality, this is what imperialism was for India when the British had gained control over them.
The British originally came in as a decent sized company in East India, but when the sepoys attacked that company, England sent their whole army and navy to get the sepoys under control, but while doing that they also took over all of India. Although economically and socially the Indians did benefit in some ways, the British established a massive infrastructure by controlling India and having a huge political, economic, and social impact on India that helped them more than it helped the Indians.
Since the beginning of time various groups across the globe have fought for their freedom, and territory. Some groups failed and found little fortune while others prospered giving way to powerful nations capable of seizing land from the less fortunate for their own benefit. This is what modern day historians refer to as imperialism. Throughout history these powerful nations have used imperialism to their advantage. In simple terms imperialism is a powerful tool used by powerful nations in order to spread their influence into other smaller less powerful nations, whether it be through religion, pop-culture, technology, or military force. Which eventually results in total domination over the area in which the powerful nation has spread its
Europeans contained the belief that their customs and religious values were the sole method in living. Missionaries from throughout Europe desired to journey to foreign lands in order to teach the civilized and Christian ways of living to the natives. Often missionaries were in competition for converts, and thus supplied imperialism with other drives (Patterson, par. 10). The Social Darwinist ideas were prevalent in this time. The Europeans believed in the survival of the fittest, and it was generally accepted that the Anglo-Saxons were the superior race. In the 1890’s Rudyard Kipling published “Whiteman’s Burden”. This poem defines the white man as responsible for civilizing the “others”. It is supportive of the imperialism of other countries
Rudyard Kipling’s attitude towards the British Empire was significantly negative. The novella essentially expressed Kipling’s feelings towards British Imperialism and his overall frustration with the British Empire. However, there are several positive qualities of the Empire pointed out by Kipling several times throughout his novella. Despite his mixed feelings, he is ultimately dissatisfied with the British Empire, claiming that it is “the White Man’s Burden”. Kipling was a steadfast imperialist, living in a time of British domination and oppression. He shared similar outlooks with the natives, that the majority of them were oppressed by the government and the wealthy. The upper class was greedy and wanted working men to do all of the work for them so that they could reap the profits. Kipling conveys his attitude towards British Imperialism through parallelism and figurative language.
However, some westerners actually genuinely thought that they should help and westernize the inferior countries of the world. The British went into Africa, thinking that it was their duty to spread their advances of medicine, law, western civilization, and the Christian religion. This was proved to be embraced in the "anthem of imperialism," called the White Man's Burden by Rudyard Kipling. He expressed in the poem that the duty of the "white man" was to teach and help the people who they cast the inferior rank to. However, it is hard to believe that this was Britain's most important goal in their imperialism.
Before the Europeans began the New Imperialism in Africa, very little was known about the inner parts of the continent. However, after some explorers delved deeper into the heart of Africa, the Europeans soon realized how economically important this area was, and how much they could profit from it. At the time, Britain had only small occupations of land in Africa, but after they realized that they could make money from the rich resources from the inner regions of Africa, they wanted to invade the African countries and take over. This led to the scramble and ultimately, the partition of Africa. During the Age of Imperialism, from 1870-1914, Britain was a major country, which proved to be true
At the close of the 19th century Rudyard Kipling preserved the prevailing attitude of Britain’s intellectual elite in a poem - “The White Man’s Burden”. In his work Kipling confirms the hubris of a generation of Britons who were entirely convinced that they were culturally, rationally, and morally superior to the “new-caught…Half-devil and half-child” natives of the British colonies. This belief in the superiority of western values manifested in the flight of thousands of philanthropically minded Victorians across the British Empire. These emigrants consisted of a section of society driven to do their duty and fulfil the “national
Imperialism has been noted to be practice of foreign rule in a context of hierarchy and subordination, which can eventually lead to the formation of an empire. Imperialism refers directly to the enhancement of power and military superiority.