Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Africa on the eve of colonialism
Africa on the eve of colonialism
Africa on the eve of colonialism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Africa on the eve of colonialism
From the end of the nineteenth century until the attainment of independence in the early 1960s, the countries of East Africa were under the colonial administration of European empires. After decades of foreign rule which saw unparalleled transformations within society, the post-colonial states that emerged have been blighted by ethnic conflict. It has been argued that the beliefs of British, Belgian and German administrators led them to completely reorganise the societies they governed based on a fictitious ‘tribal’ model, and in the process they invented ethnicity. There is a great deal of debate on this matter, though, and its continued relevance to contemporary politics only makes it more vigorous.
Before we go on to analyse to what extent it may have been invented under colonial rule, we need to first of all establish just what exactly is meant by the term ‘ethnicity’. It is a complicated as well as a contentious question, interpreted in a variety of different ways that can depend on political beliefs, social status, place of birth and personal history. Clearly, if we are to talk about ‘ethnicity’ without descending into an exhausting debate on linguistics and semantics, it is necessary to take for granted a certain degree of generalisation. We can say that all human beings, broadly, do belong objectively to some form of ‘ethnicity’; that is, a social group whose members they are linked with through a shared culture, religion, territory, language, or genealogy. What varies greatly is the awareness of this connection, and the importance an individual places upon it.
The term ‘tribe’ would further complicate the debate, and serve no other purpose than to draw discussion away from the process of invention; the main focus of...
... middle of paper ...
...nd every aspect of life from marriage to choice of profession was influenced by the ethnic group you belonged to. Transience, multiplicity, and change were the key words, though. One can say that what the colonial governments actually invented, and what has often left such a painfully devastating legacy, was not ethnicity itself, but the codification of ethnic groups in national laws, the exclusivity of groupings, and the bringing to the fore of a person’s ‘tribe’ at the expense of all other means of identification. You no longer merely took comfort from being part of a Tutsi community, you were a Tutsi from the day you were born until the day you died, and the course of your life would be decided for you based on this label. Rather than inventing it, colonialism destroyed ethnicity’s one defining characteristic in the East African context: its ability to transform.
Europe, in the late 1800’s, was starting for a land grab in the African continent. Around 1878, most of Africa was unexplored, but by 1914, most of Africa, with the lucky exception of Liberia and Ethiopia, was carved up between European powers. There were countless motivations that spurred the European powers to carve Africa, like economical, political, and socio–cultural, and there were countless attitudes towards this expansion into Africa, some of approval and some of condemnation.
As defined by Cornell and Hartmann ethnicity is “a collectivity within a larger society having real or putative common ancestry,
Before reading this paper, my definition of ethnicity included ideas of appearance, language, and religion. The authors argue however, that “ethnicity is socially contructed”. Therefore, ethnicity is a product of human action and speech over time meaning that they do not remain constant. My definition can be regarded as ‘everyday primordialism’ and the second a constructivist view. Fearon and Laitin argue that social scientists should be concerned with using ordinary language definitions of terms that can be popularly used. They finally come up with a definition of ethnic groups as “groups larger than a family for which membership is reckoned primarily by descent, is conceptually autonomous and has a conventionally recognized ‘natural history’ as a group.” Although I agree with their premise, I think there are some issues with their description of conceptual autonomy as a defining factor for ethnicity. While F&L agree that “it is an empirical fact that ethnic groups ‘understand themselves’ through contrasts with other ethnic groups,” they don’t recognize that there are no ethnic groups in history that have not defined themselves in opposition to another group. Also they argue that casts and classes are not conceptually autonomous, which is not
In today’s society, it is acknowledgeable to assert that the concepts of race and ethnicity have changed enormously across different countries, cultures, eras, and customs. Even more, they have become less connected and tied with ancestral and familial ties but rather more concerned with superficial physical characteristics. Moreover, a great deal can be discussed the relationship between ethnicity and race. Both race and ethnicity are useful and counterproductive in their ways. To begin, the concept of race is, and its ideas are vital to society because it allows those contemporary nationalist movements which include, racist actions; to become more familiar to members of society. Secondly, it has helped to shape and redefine the meaning of
As we know, the majority of our past has challenges and the discontent, fighting to win independence from the Europeans. With the various readings we have discussed in the past couple of weeks about fighting for independence due to colonization. Also the troublesome view of race, human identity, and frustration. We will discuss a very important reading and viewing that is believed to best represent the main challenges that Africans’ went through during their difficult journey to independence, and identify conflicts. Blackass by Ignoi Barrett, will give us two very different examples but, very similar concepts on the role of independence and the war that colonization has been carried on in this new world in a political sense.
It saw the rise of the powerful kingdom of Kongo, with half almost half a million subjects (Storey, 2015). Even though it was an area of extraordinary cultural diversity and dozens of languages, all of them were Bantu in origin, which served as a common binding factor for people in that area (Rediker, 2007). In the case of a dynamic kingdom like Kongo, it is more or less assumed that state formation went hand in hand with the interest of its people at the centre of its concerns. But as the tentacles of the slave trade grew, many communities stratified internally, and kumu, “big men”, emerged to facilitate the commerce; which lead to West-Central Africa providing 38 percent of the century’s slaves (Rediker, 2007). This caused insecurity within those communities, as individuals began to turn on others close to them, including neighbours, friends, and even family (Nunn & Wantchekon, 2011). Stemming from this insecurity comes the question of whether or not the slave trade led to the establishment of a “culture of mistrust” (Nunn & Wantchekon, 2011). Fage’s earlier argument can be used to explain Wilson’s (1856) claim, where he states
While Collins does a succinct job of examining the economic and political factors that heightened colonization, he fails to hone in on the mental warfare that was an essential tool in creating African division and ultimately European conquest. Not only was the systematic dehumanization tactics crippling for the African society, but also, the system of racial hierarchy created the division essential for European success. The spillover effects of colonialism imparted detrimental affects on the African psyche, ultimately causing many, like Shanu, to, “become victims to the white man’s greed.”
There was a lot of driving forces when it came to imperialism in Africa there was a lot of driving forces when it comes to imperialism in Africa such as national pride and money.All of these driving forces had the biggest impact on imperialism in Africa for example technological advancement caused the europeans to find a vaccine for Malaria and that allowed them to venture further into Africa.
...r a decade before this became a reality.19Furthermore, during the late 1920s, the East African Indian National Congress, a key Indian political group in Kenya, consistently made demands for the abolition of colonial laws that disadvantaged and oppressed Africans.20 For example, they spoke out against the ban that prohibited Africans from growing cash crops such as coffee, which at the time greatly hindered Kenyan’s ability to succeed in agriculture, as well as the extortionate levels of poll and hut tax.21 The fact that many politicised Indians cared for Kenyans and were working in the interests of them, contrary to the popular belief that they were the corrupt exploiters of Africans, sheds further light on how the fractious race relations of Kenya’s history were largely created out of exaggerated stories that did not accurately represent the true actions of Asians.
In Africa there have been many wars and problems with poverty as well as famine that lead to war. One specific war was the civil war in Congo also known as The Great War of Africa. The war in Congo lasted from August 1998 to July 2003 and left thousands of people dead or injured. The war started because of issues in the DRC which stands for the Democratic Republic of Congo. The war was a long and terrifying war that ended when the transitional government of Democratic Republic of Congo took power. Africas unfriendliness has continued with the Lords Resistance Army Insurgencies and The Kivu as well as Ituri conflicts. The civil war in congo has made a huge impact on the people of africa and how they live today.
The process of decolonization in Africa during the 1950’s through the 1970’s was a very smart yet risky idea. For some places independence was easily gained yet in other areas it was a battle. During the time periods where colonization existed, Africa was peaceful and kept things in order. People had control over their specific locations and there were no questions to be asked. Once it was decided to remove these rights, things got out of hand rather quickly. Violence was a main occurrence during the decolonization timeframe because rules, rights, leaderships, etc. got altered and drastically changed. Sometimes nonviolence was used but it usually wasn’t as effective. A major example of using nonviolence actions to gain independence is when Gandhi protested in India. African leaders have tried very hard to lessen the influence of Western powers and the broader international community but they’ve never been completely successful because they continuously needed support in state building, economic development, and public health initiatives.
European dominance completely changed the political, economic, and social structure of African societies. “European powers viewed Africans as “primitive people” so they assigned themselves a duty to civilize or teach them, the Africans the ‘proper civilization’ of which they meant colonization, imposition of European civilization and exploitation of Africans (World History 158). The European imperialist process gave rise to a profound crisis in indigenous cultures; convinced that their culture was the most advanced, they felt obliged to give it to know and seek means to make others adopt it, thus spreading their political systems, customs, religion and philosophical concepts. Moreover, before the influence of countries, like England and France in African territories, the form of life there was completely different in many aspects. The political systems of most of the African populace, apparently was a tribal organization that represented a smaller group of the lineage that has been disengaged from its ancient origin, seeking their independence and new territory. Authority was based on affiliation, which is within the family, the village, the region or the nation, and the chief of the tribe met executive, ritual and judicial functions, according to the pattern of government in each constituent unit of kinship. The political organization depended on factors of kinship, emotional, legal, and rituals. However, with the arrival of Europeans and their political system, these systems were permanently displaced. These people would change the course of Africa with their new doctrine. The political change occurring on the continent of Africa is reflected in Things Fall Apart when the white missionaries westernize the Umuofian government by
An overwhelming majority of African nations has reclaimed their independence from their European mother countries. This did not stop the Europeans from leaving a permanent mark on the continent however. European colonialism has shaped modern-day Africa, a considerable amount for the worse, but also some for the better. Including these positive and negative effects, colonialism has also touched much of Africa’s history and culture especially in recent years.
Originally, drawn from genetics to characterise an end product created out of the mixture of two species (Stross, 1999; Baaz and Palmberg, 2001), in colonial discourse, the term hybridity has often a derogatory connotation because it is imbued in nineteenth-century eugenicist and scientific-racist thought (Young, 1995). Pieterse argues that hybridity is often held as inauthentic because it problematises boundaries (2001: 220). However the problematic associations with this term did not prevent academics celebrating it as the conceptual apparatus for eradicating essentialist notions of culture.
According to Shirley & Levy (2013), “The term ethnicity is a cultural heritage shared by people with a common ancestral origin, language, traditions and often religion” (p.3). In other words, the person that I am today has been shaped by my past; I have become an heir of a culture, language, religion and tradition that makes up who I am and from what ethnic group I belong. As a result, my shared cultural background determines the type of foods, family relations, patterns of communication, values and beliefs that I hold. Furthermore, I was told that my descendants shared their rich heritage from the African and Indian descent. At first, this information made me believe that I had to be in Africa or India to be a partaker of their culture. However, growing up in Grenada gave me the opportunity of