Assess The Benefits Of Imperialism

Throughout the late 19th century Germany was becoming an increasingly formidable industrial power, prompting Britain to become uneasy about her long established superiority over economic markets. Britain’s discomfort was exemplified by the rhetoric of Prime Minister Chamberlain holding empire as a means of clinging to economic prosperity, as well as justifications of the supposed superiority of the British race. This discourse concerning threats to the existence of the reign of the British people reflect the fact that the British were not simply concerned with maintaining the profits associated with colonial holdings, but were deeply fearful of the death of British economic hegemony in overseas markets that it had enjoyed for centuries. Feeling threatened by expansionist German cries of “today Germany, tomorrow the whole world,” Britain felt that her global economic superiority was being challenged: a violent push back was eagerly advocated by the British people, factoring into the declaration of war on Germany. Hence for European powers imperialism represented not just a status symbol of the power of their nation, but a way of life and insurance of economic dominance that was to be defended at any

Nonetheless, clinging free trade policy induced the fall of national competitiveness in the global market and allowed multipolarity which eventually caused the Great War in 1914. Through free trade, Britain tended to emphasise service and financial sector rather than manufacturing (Cain and Hopkins, 1987: 1). In other words, Britain’s free trade, especially in the late nineteenth century was based on the balance of payment and free trade was an instrument to discover new opportunities for foreign investments; this financial dimension was suggestive of mercantilism (Cain and Hopkins, 1986: 517; Hopkins, 1988: 7; WTO, 2007: 35). Also, while the British Empire adhered to free trade policy, other nations namely Germany and the US took protectionist

History had proven the inability for Empires to sustain themselves solely through expansion and the exploitations of conquest. The British were no different, as they strained their resources leaving them vulnerable and decaying on many fronts. Imperialism turned its page, but left behind the profiteering

Although, the did British believed that they could stay economically afloat by maintaining its ongoing relationships with the United States and trade with the Common Wealth. This was not going to happen though, trade with the Common wealth was actually in decline. Also the EFTA, the European Fair Trade Association which Britain had set up with other countries such as Denmark and Norway, as a defence to the Six’s economic bloc, was of little help. As it didn’t promote British Trade, as Britain was the largest market among the EFTA.

* Examines the British Empire from an economic perspective, controversially concluding that the British Empire was, on balance, a good thing

Overall Focus: That the British empire played an integral part in Britain’s war effort, which saw members of her commonwealth, as well as colonies, contribute not just war materials and supplies, but millions of soldiers to help protect Britain itself. But, this aid had a steep cost, as it meant that Britain was no longer the power it once was, and in turn paved the way for the empire’s collapse following the war.

One notices that tracing the exact roots of British imperialism is a daunting task given the varied developments scattered over almost two centuries. Sir Lucas helps resolve matters when he says-

Industrialization generated the level of wealth necessary for territorial conquest. European countries considered expansion an important goal because natural resources were not as plentiful as the fertile lands abroad. Leaders were unsatisfied with traditional methods of trade. Protective taxes curtailed profits and it was soon realized that resources could be further exploited with complete ownership of territories. In The Rise of Our East African Empire, Captain F.D. Lugard insisted that Britain must be held "accountable

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

There is an unsettled discussion on the pertinence of imperialism to all classes in England. While some consider it just a concern of the nobility others link it to the manifestation of newborn nationalism and patriotism in all classes beginning from the mid-19th century. John Mackenzie in Propaganda and Empire and Imperialism and Pop Culture introduces the concept of “generalized imperial vision” as a counterview to the discussion. He sees classes as formations that are predetermined.

The root of all acquisition of territory lay within European power dynamics , and the first British Empire successfully took advantage of these internal conflicts, gaining knowledge, power, and a characteristic confidence. The

Without the British Empire’s dependence on slavery in the Americas, the Industrial Revolution as it is known today along with the capitalist system would not exist. Historians Carter and Warren and Marks both argue that the triangular trade network between Britain, the Americas, and Africa was responsible for supplying the resources necessary, along with creating a demand for manufactured goods, that allowed Britain to break free from the “biological old regime.” Burbank and Cooper also argue that due to Britain’s unique ability to connect its imperial colonies and their output to mainland Britain without forcing Britain to devote its land or labor force to resource production, capitalism was able to take hold in the industrial world. Therefore, without the slave-holding colonies of the British Empire acting as a catalyst, it would not have been possible for mainland Britain to industrialize in the method it did. This system of slavery created the supply and demand needed to fuel the Industrial Revolution, through trade and exports. Additionally, it allowed the labor force of mainland Britain to devote their labor towards manufacturing rather than resource production, creating the capitalist system of the Industrial Revolution. Finally, it provided a way for Britain to break free from the limits of the “biological old regime” and the need to allocate land for resource production or food, rather, it allowed Britain to focus on industrial innovation.

During the early beginnings of the twentieth centuries, powers of the European countries and also the United States helped shape the future of the world. The effects of that time period still have relevance in our world today. Europe was initially the first technological and military authority with the United States soon to follow. One of the main influences in this dominance was the expansion of those countries by utilizing imperialism. Imperialism is defined as “the policy of extending a nation’s authority be territorial acquisition or by establishing economic and political hegemony over other nations” (Kagan 755). To put it more simply imperialism is really overtaking another country and using its geographic location and resources to its own advantage.

As we examine the impacts of colonialism on Western Imperialism and the legacy it has created in respect to LDCs (Less Developed Countries) and NICs (Newly Industrializing Countries), we must first evaluate colonialism and imperialism to understand the implications it has had historically on the legacy of Western Imperialism. This allows us the inept ability to better understand the political, social and economic impacts. Imperialism is then defined as the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies. Imperialism was propagated by European powers from the sixteenth to the twenty-first century. Colonialism is defined as the control or governing influence of a nation over a dependent country, territory, or people. Imperialism has often led to colonialism, through the physical occupation of foreign territories; people had previously tried to establish their own institutions but were unsuccessful. The state of imperialism seemed to be stronger and had the ability to overpower those institutions, which in turn resulted in those states then

The British Empire was an empire on which the sun never set. Lasting for over three hundred years, Britain became the global hegemonic power of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. From the wilds of Australia, to the fertile lands of Africa, the British Empire ruled over a quarter of the world’s population. Spurred on by new economic, strategic, and “humanitarian” reasons, Britain embarked on an aggressive expansionist policy, quickly gaining spheres of influence in India, China, Africa and the Middle East. With the empire ever expanding, visual and material culture became increasingly relied upon to help consolidate the empire. Overall, whether an advertisement for Pears soap, the funeral of Dr. Livingstone, or a commemorative biscuit tin, visual and material culture was at the forefront of British imperialism.