Throughout all of history, there has never been a single benevolent empire. Yes, some empires may have shown qualities of benevolence, but the keyword here is sustainability. It is impossible to sustain a benevolent empire because the indigenous population cannot be protected nor preserved, its economic needs cannot be supported, and self-government leads to rebellion.
Very briefly, a benevolent empire is an empire such that both the ruling nation and native people are never considered oppressed by the ruling government, its policies, and social structure.
First of all, the majority of the population within a new empire consists of indigenous people, and there is no way to “benevolently assimilate” them without weakening the empire itself. Some may argue that the indigenous population can simply be treated as the equals of citizens, but there
…show more content…
is no doubt that this will form a social hierarchy over time as demonstrated by the Spanish and Portuguese empires. To try to avoid social conflict, the Chinese observed a non-assimilation policy with the surrounding Uighurs and Buddhists. Although effectively avoiding the creation of a social hierarchy, this ultimately backfired for them because the foreign populations were able to maintain an independent, self-determining identity to contest Chinese rule and force the government to take repercussive action that is still displayed today with Tibetan Buddhists. Speaking of Buddhists, we must delve into the issue of religious perspectives. Compare the Spanish colonization of the Philippines to Mughal rule in India. The Spanish forced conversions upon the Filipinos, which, while good for expanding for the empire, was the product of unnecessary violence. In contrast, the Mughals did well with religious tolerance in the Indian subcontinent for a short time.
Unfortunately, having too many religions co-existing in the same region created religious tension. This fragility showed itself when Aurangzeb rose up and supported Islamic supremacy, causing all the other pre-existing religious groups to clash and bring the empire down—a problem that could only have been avoided if the Mughals adopted the Spanish conversion mindset.
Evidently, cultural integration cannot be achieved without upsetting indigenous culture or negatively impacting the mother country. If this cannot succeed within an empire, then neither can self-government.
The main problem with self-government is that it allows for quick formation of the desire for independence by the conquered people within the empire. In an almost comical example, the Mongols allowed the Russians to govern themselves as a tributary state as long as Mongol officials were elected. The Russians were able to strengthen themselves to overthrow Mongol rule from 1450 to 1480 by siphoning money from the very tribute they collected for the
Mongols. Likewise, indirectly governing a specific conquered territory by sending officials over would only delay the inevitable uprising of its people through salutary neglect, as seen with Britain. Therefore, an empire that allows its conquered people to govern themselves is an empire that is ensuring its own rebellion because of a lack of oversight and too much trust from the mother country. Rebellion necessitates military action and loss of benevolence. As a final point, one cannot forget the main fueling factor behind any empire’s actions: money. If money equals power, then no empire can last without a steady source of money. There is no way for an empire to sustain income benevolently. The main reason why an empire cannot benevolently sustain itself is because of the conflict nature of indentured servitude and forced labor. Yes, indentured servitude is the more benevolent option for income, but it quickly becomes unpopular and unavailable as work becomes more intense and unattractive in cash-crop agriculture. Events such as Bacon’s Rebellion would happen again under the unpleasant working environments of cash-crop farms. Forced labor or slavery ensures wealth as long as the empire is willing to be responsible for a massive decline in a certain country’s population. Slavery in the Americas was the cause of a steep decline in the South American Indian and general African populations. This is clearly not benevolent nor ethical in any situation. The other factor in an empire’s wealth is trade. Since cash-crop farming cannot be benevolently sustained, the only way to ensure profit for the mother country is to impose navigation acts on all colonies. If colonists were allowed to trade freely, they would trade with other wealthy and profitable nations. This would only lead to the necessity for tariffs, which would cause a chain reaction of discontent among colonists. As we have seen, all attempts at benevolence eventually come full circle and fail to remain maintainable elements of an empire. There has been an ongoing theme that there is no way to truly satisfy the needs of the people without sacrificing the power of the ruling nation. There never was, never is, and never will be a benevolent empire in existence.
Akbar was considered the best of the Mughal rulers partly because of his tolerance of all religions. Akbar did his best to unify the Hindus and Muslims by giving both religions positions in the government. Traditionally, only Muslims would could be rulers zamindars while most of the population was Hindu. Akbar also married women of both religions, as an attempt to unify Hindus and Muslims. Akbar himself was interested in religions, inviting different people to discuss other religions with him. Akbar's greatest impact in trying to unite the Hindus and Muslims was creating the Divine Faith religion, but most people did not convert. When Akbar died, the following rulers did not support the same religious tolerance policy that he had. Aurangzeb tried to rid the empire of all Hindu. This caused revolts from both Hindus and Muslims, which created a period of instability allowing Europeans to come and take
The failure of defensive development in Egypt, the Ottoman Empire, and Persia had a large and long-lasting effect on the Muslim world. The original goal of the reforms was to end European intervention, revive the weakening empires, and to be on equal standing with Europe. Yet, all three empires over-utilized the wealth and knowledge of Europe, leading to their ultimate demise. The empires wished to impose reforms in the military, economics, education, and law which the region had not experienced previously. This resulted in backlash, violence, and division within the empires eventually leading to bankruptcy, ironically, to those which they wished to separate themselves.
The Ottomans and Spanish built flourishing empires based on different philosophies from 1450 to 1800. The Ottoman and Spanish were two powerful empires during that time. During the building of the two empires, the Spanish and the Ottoman both developed similarities in their social, political, and economic structures. The Ottoman took control of Europe, while the Spanish saw it as easy to monitor new lands. The different tactics employed made the both empires flourish. For instance, the Spanish were not tolerant of religion. They conquered other areas with the aim of converting Christians to Islam, if they refused, they would be killed. On the other hand, the Ottoman leaders incorporated leaders of diverse culture
In the past, lives were controlled by European imperialism the practice of a country extending its political power, over conquered territories. The country and the lands it controls were called an empire. The empire enforced its rule on people of different cultures, ethnic backgrounds, and different political systems. The empire had one supreme ruler; sadly, the conquered territories lack effective representation in the empire’s government. Therefore, the conquered countries natural raw natural resources were exploited and their economic growth suppressed. This was evident in Africa, South Asia, Latin America, and North America countries.
Imperialist portrayed imperialism as a positive effect as they believed their empire would expand and prosper. As stated by Joseph Chamberlain in document 1, he states that colonist provided a way for expansion and control. He also states “...new markets shall be created, and the old
Imperialism is when a mother nation takes over another nation and become its colony for political, social, and economical reasons. Imperialism is a progressive force for both the oppressors (mother country) and the oppressed (colony), majorly occurring during the late 19th and early 20th century. It had more negative effects than positive effects due to its domination to other nations.
In history, when two cultures meet, both are changed forever, especially in the case of conquest. Conquest is defined as the act of acquiring another state by force of arms. While conquests are numerous throughout world history, when a society takes over another, it is common for the resultant culture to be very different from the dominant culture’s way of life.
As early as the era of cavemen if not earlier we’ve been encroaching on others’ land and attempting to prevent the encroachment of our own. It is animal nature to acquire and protect land and food and this drive serves as the main motivation for imperialist expansion. With more land and more access to food, a particular culture can have that much more of an opportunity to expand and thrive. Once a different land is conquered, sometimes the coexistence of the indigenous people and the conquerors does not seem likely or possible which leads to even deeper cultural rifts, which, depending on how much power or diplomatic influence can end in genocide for the culture with less
The first way the Ibo culture of Nigeria is civilized is through the government. The government takes care of issues in a fair way. After both sides were done speaking at the Egwugwu Ceremony, the Evil Forest said, “Our duty is not to blame this man or praise that, but to settle the dispute” (Chapter 10 pg.93) The Evil Spirits main goal was not trying to blame the person who did wrong, but to solve the problem in a fair manner to get it over with. Another example of how the Ibo culture is civilized through government is it is organized with rules. The government leaders made white men go back to their own land so they wouldn’t change the Ibo culture. As it says in the article Political Colonization, “They said the land had changed and that they were dying. And they demand that all white men go back to their own country so that the land might return to the way it was before the british came.” The government made that rule because it would help the Ibo culture stay alive and not transfer over to another culture. The last way the Ibo culture is civilized through government is
Most of the civilizations throughout history have been taken over or replaced by other civilizations due to disunity and chaos. Although an empire might seem prosperous, the decline and fall of empires are sometimes inevitable. Even though an empire might seem invincible, there are many factors that could lead to the sudden decline or fall of an empire. Over many centuries, historians have composed many reasons, such as weak militaries, economic burdens, dynastic successions, and external enemies, which have been known to contribute to the rise and fall of many once successful empires.
Lives of indigenous people were changed immensely during European Imperialism as hundreds of nations were exploited during the time period between 1830 and 1930. “By the early 20th century, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Spain, and Portugal together held sway over almost 84 percent of the earth’s surface.” Colonies developed in these foreign societies benefited the European empire economically in many forms. Henceforth, imperialism was primarily an economic rationale for the empire, which supplied the home country with essential raw materials, a cheap labour force, and a new market for goods in an era of increasing global trade. The economic advantages of imperialism eventually moved to a belief in white
The belief of a nation running their own state is a right for most of us. However, this is only a new conviction. The right for one to sovereign their own nation has come due with hard work. Illicit imperialism has stricken humanity for numerous years. Due to the aspiration of power certain nations today do not self-govern their own state. But why would there be a desire for this power? Some of the main items include natural resources, increased assets, and military expansion. Ideally this is great if this is voluntary external rule, but when it’s no longer voluntary this is when the boundary has been crossed. This is why every nation should have control over their own state if they desire.
The glorious British Empire, at its height the most powerful régime in the world. Just a small island off the western coast of Europe, Britain grew to the span across the entire globe, effectively creating am Empire where the sun never set. Colonization, industrialization and a sense of nationalistic destiny drove the once expansive Empire. We still see effects of British imperialism today, which our global economy, as well as national tensions that germinated as a result of decolonization. Moreover, industrial revolution and push for independence manifested as a result of British influence. The same features that defined the British Empire, nationalism and commerce, lead to its demise.
The British Empire ultimately had beneficial effects for its people; they did so through military, and economic aspects. Many advancements and benefits of these aspects led to a stronger empire and better lifestyle of its people. The main reason these advancements occurred was because the British Empire, and the most of the other European countries, were much more technologically advanced. While they enjoyed many years of advancements and developments, they still underwent periods of upheaval and detriment. Overall, the British Empire furthered the livelihood of its people and the world that followed it.
This identifies the basic criteria of imperialism. This definition lets us know that imperialism involves a direct relationship between both the natives and the occupier, which as a result, causes pure economic struggles later. Most of the earlier empires of the world used this imperial technique with intentions to later occupy it for capital means in the future. Imperialism is closely related to the idea of colonialism, which will also assist in understanding why it was