Theme Of Imperialism In A Passage To India

British imperialism in China and India brought very different responses, in part because of the nature of imperialism in each place. While both regions were greatly influenced by the British, in India the country was placed under the direct rule of the Queen. In China on the other hand, the "spheres of influence" were economic, and did not entail direct British rule. During the British imperial age the culture of China continued on much the same as it had before, while in India the British tried to replace the Indian culture with their own.

As India’s modernization developed, the entire civilization of India improved remarkably. The country’s improvement of civilization is exemplified through it’s establishment of schools and law. Western education was introduced by Britain and laws were well made with courts that enforce them. (Doc 3). One should take into account the speaker of this document because Romesh Dutt is an Indian like any other, yet he praises the British for what they have done to contribute to the development of India. In addition to these establishments is Britain bringing finer ideals of humanity to India. Infanticide, the killing of female babies, was brought to a halt as well as participation in the slave trade (Doc 5). Without the interference of Britain, these inhumane actions would be prevalent throughout India and the country would suffer from a bad reputation. These

In the early portion of the twentieth century, there was an extraordinary surge of European empires claiming countries as their own. This outburst of imperialism spanned to Asia, Africa, and Latin America. At the cusp of this competitive era, approximately four-fifths of the earth were under European control. There are several accounts of resistances to European imperialism however, especially in Asia. This paper will explore the resistances made by India and China against European imperialism, compare the similarities of both campaigns, and contrast the techniques used in both accounts.

Imperialism is the domination of one country of the political, economic, or cultural life of another country. Imperialism is more often than not fueled by two major schools of thought known as nationalism and Social Darwinism. Nationalism is a feeling of pride and devotion to one’s country. This can drive a person to think that their country is the most powerful, and in essence drives that person mad with power and a hunger to conquer, which not ironically is exactly what many countries did. Social Darwinism is the very idea that a more powerful country conquer the smaller countries. “Survival of the fittest,” as the well renowned Charles Darwin used to say. Imperialism is also sometimes sparked by military motives, such as when USA set up

Imperialism is the domination of a weaker country by a stronger country. For instance Britain dominated India and China in the mid 1880s to the beginning of the 20th century. Imperialism has had both a positive and negative effects on the countries involved. Britain was imperialistic for many reasons, it could dominate because it had the technology and power to do so. They also needed land to acquire raw materials for growing markets.

The purpose of this historical inquiry is to analyze to what extent did British Imperialism have an effect on shaping modern India? The main source that will be discussed in this paper is the seventh book of the Spotlight on History Series called The British Raj, which explains the reasons behind the conflicts between the British Empire and Indian nationalism and assess the achievements of a memorable relationship.

One question I have on the topic of Britain’s reign over India is why Indians were discriminated against. On page 42, a young British girl says to Vidya at the airport, “Don’t touch me, blackie! Look where you’re going, you crow!” On page 38 Vidya’s father scoffs sarcastically, “Only white people have the brains to be officers. We are too stupid, of course.” Why did Britain hate the citizens of the country they had taken over? Was it to keep them in line, to say if they dare go against them the discrimination would get worse? If the British thought the Indians were so horrible, why did they take over their country, take their resources and take volunteers to fight on their side of the war? It made no sense that Britain would occupy their country

Imperialism has been a big factor in the world’s economy for a fairly long time now. So, it must be a good thing right? …Right? Well… yes and no. It really just depends on who you’re asking, really. If you ask someone from England, they might say yes. If you ask someone from India, however, that’s a different story. The reason for this is because the true answer is not so black and white. There are several factors that tie into this overarching discussion. What good has it done? What bad has come out of it? These are all factors to consider. In India’s case - in my opinion - it’s not such a good thing. Why? While Britain did do some good during their time controlling India, they ended up crippling the country in the long run.

I know this because although britain claimed to gift India and her people with an absence of killing, and mutual respect, the British people have proven otherwise with the Amritsar massacre, and violent threats. To elaborate, Dr. Lalvani claims that there was a “noticeable absence of killings”, but this contrasts to the fact that in 1919, General R. E. H. ordered 50 Indian soldiers to open fire upon 20,000, killing 400 and injuring 1,200. This is important because it directly contrasts Dr. Lalvani’s previous claim that India had a noticeable absence in killings, with 400 being the dead. Finally, Dr. Lalvani claimed that there was mutual respect between Indians and britons. But, on the contrary, “Britain’s own cloth manufacturers conspired to cut off the fingers of bengali weavers and break their looms” (Document 3). This is very important because threats of violence and destruction of property against Indians is absolutely not

As many people know, Imperialism has shaped the culture and customs all over the world. Imperialism is the dominance of one country over another politically, economically or socially. Western culture can be seen in all parts of the world; from Asia to Africa, to the Indies and the Americans. The downside of having the bits of western culture all over the world, is how it got there. Western influence was forced upon places in Asia, specifically India, Indonesia with a hellacious price; lives and poverty.

     Throughout American History the U.S. has sought to expand its boundaries. This need increased greatly during the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century with the start of the industrial revolution. This Expansion was a big departure from earlier attempts to expand the boundaries of the U.S. The needed for Natural resources forced the U.S to look for places that could supply them with the natural resources they needed and markets where they could sell their goods in. The need to imperialize caused the U.S. to look to foreign places to gain resources to better the nations industries.

This period was one of major change in Indian life and culture. While the East

Another writer, E.M. Forster, also gives examples of the English built England everywhere. In his book, A Passage to India, one of the main characters, Aziz is describing Mr. Fielding's (an Englishman) house as he observes while visiting for tea. Aziz describes the high ceilings and the archways commonly associated with British architecture. He continues by describing the beautiful light blue color and the openness of the room, "It was also a very beautiful room, opening into the garden through three high arches of wood." (Forster 66). But Aziz was mostly impressed with "...the carving on the pavilions. Think of the hours it took. Their little roofs are curved to imitate bamboo. So pretty..." (Forster 75). The architecture Aziz was so impressed with was typical

Although there are many other important factors, the main cause of the rise of imperialism was most certainly economic. The Age of Empire, by Eric J. Hobsbawn, provides an interpretation of New Imperialism. Hobsbawn calls imperialism “a natural by-product of the international economy” (Sherman pg 177). He is basically saying that imperialism is dependent on the rivalries of competing industries, which continually drive the international economy. Hobsbawn also dictates the need for external markets. The Industrial Revolution created many products that needed markets, thus creating a need of colonies. Hobsbawn believed that the overproduction of the Industrial Revolution and the Great Depression could be solved. He also realized that

E.M. Forster’s classic novel “A Passage to India” tells the story of a young doctor, Dr. Aziz, and his interactions with the British citizens who are residing in India during the time of the British Raj. Throughout the novel, the reader gets many different viewpoints on the people and the culture of India during this point in history. The reader sees through the eyes of the Indian people primarily through the character of Dr. Aziz, and the perceptions of the British through the characters of Mr. Fielding, Adela Quested, and Mrs. Moore. Through the different characters, and their differing viewpoints, the reader can see that Forster was creating a work that expressed a criticism that he held of the behavior of the British towards their Indian subjects.