European Imperialism Dbq Essay

Late nineteenth-century imperialism to early and mid twentieth-century imperialism varied greatly from the previous form that was prominent in Europe. Imperialism is defined as “the extension of a nation’s power over other lands” (Spielvogel and McTighe 226). Prior to the 1880’s, European imperialism had mainly consisted of setting up trading posts or colonies and minor missionary activity, most notably in Africa and Asia. Past this point, however, Europe began a swift rush for more and more territory, and the reasons as to why varied from country to country. One such motive was economic, which was relatively common. This led to the taking of land and resources, especially in Africa, which was largely ravaged by the European conquerors, and

this ultimately led to African oppression (Spielvogel and McTighe 226). Although European imperialism had many detrimental consequences, such as the loss of landownership and natural resources, the most devastating impact was the oppression of the African people. One of the first impacts of the imperialism of Africa was the taking of resources by Europe.
As a continent yet to be industrialized, Africa’s main markets consisted of the trading of natural resources. When European imperialists came to the continent, many stole these resources, which included things such as rubber, oil, tin, peanuts, timber, hides, and palm oil (Spielvogel and McTighe 226). On December 16th, 1961, the members of the Umkhonto we Sizwe, or the military wing of the African National Congress, wrote a manifesto entitled “We are at War!”, which was written during a time of nationalism and revolutionary ideas. It included the following:
They have taken for themselves the best there is in our rich country and have left us the worst. They have the fruits and the riches. We have the backbreaking toil and the poverty. We burrow into the belly of the earth to dig out fold, diamonds, coal, and uranium. The white oppressors ad foreign investors grab all of this wealth. It is used for their enrichment... (Document 10).
As seen in the above quote, the use of Africa as a source of raw materials severely impacted its people. Much of the population was not well reimbursed for their efforts in mining, farming, and generally gathering resources, and the imperialists in charge made large amounts of money by sending the products back to Europe for use in factories or otherwise. This left the African people without a way to make much money, because they were not yet industrialized and had to rely on products like crops and other natural resources for monetary gain (Spielvogel and McTighe 236). This loss of natural resources and the loss of control over their markets led to more devastating impacts on the Africans, like the loss of land ownership.
Before “new imperialism”, Europe (on the whole) remained uninterested in most of the land continents like Africa had to offer, but after this form of imperialism began to take hold, many countries scrambled for territories. This stealing of African land, however, was severely harmful to its people. Europeans first began by taking the natural resources the continent had to offer, and then took African land without the consent of the natives. In 1884, the Berlin Conference, which consisted of seven of Europe’s largest powers, convened to decide which countries would take claim in which parts of Africa. It should be noted that although this meeting took place in order to divide Africa into different sections, no African delegates were present, nor was their consent given for such an event to take place. Set up by King Leopold II of Belgium, the Berlin Conference of 1884 confirmed Britain and Germany’s claims to parts of Eastern Africa, as well as Portugal’s claim to Mozambique. Because no African delegates were present, when the artificial boundary lines of African countries and colonies were drawn, entire villages and pre-established places were split in half, with no regards to what was previously in place. This devastated the African people, as it divided them and forced them to be ruled by European countries without any say (Spielvogel and McTighe 233-234). In addition, the 1830s European settlers in the Boer Republics, located in Southern Africa, took the land from the indigenous Zulu and placed many of them in reservations, and later defeated them in war (with the help of the British army) (Spielvogel and McTighe 232). All of these instances show the negative impacts European imperialists had on the African people when they used the land for their own benefit. A popular African proverb states,
When the whites came to our country, we had the land and they had the Bible, now we have the Bible and they have the land.
In this proverb, it is clear that the Bible may not have been wanted originally, but it was given to them in “compensation” for the land that the Europeans (“whites”) took, which also negatively impacted the continent. Taking African land, however, was one of many causes of the oppression the African people would face during the period of European imperialism.
The oppression of the African people started with the beginning of imperialism, but became more apparent as time wore on. In the early twentieth century, the ideals of many imperialist countries, especially the French, were to incorporate the African people located in their colonies into their European country by giving them the opportunity to run for office, for example. However, by doing this, these countries cast aside many of the native African traditions, and mainly offered only low-paying bureaucratic jobs to the people of Africa or insignificant jobs in government. Often, the Africans were payed lower salaries than their European counterparts. Additionally, as more and more European settlers traveled to imperialized Africa, new schools, clubs, and even churches were set up to appease the newcomers, who were very condescending to the natives (Spielvogel and McTighe 235-236). In 1962 (a time of support for freedom), a West African nationalist named Sekou Toure explored the idea of the condescension the Europeans had towards the natives, saying,
Colonialism’s greatest misdeed was to have tried to strip us of our responsibility in conducting our own affairs and convince us that our civilization was nothing less than savagery, thus giving us complexes which led to our being branded as irresponsible and lacking in self-confidence... (Document 6).
This oppression led to a loss of rights for many African people.

To make way for European settlers, many had to give up their farmland. They were paid less, and looked down upon by their rulers. In fact, Europeans often only referred to Africans by their first name as a sign of disrespect. In An Anthology of West African Verse, by David Diop (written in 1507), he describes a situation where a “white man” (European imperialist) kills his father and hurts his family, and then treats the man like a servant, as though just because he is African, he is a lesser person (Document 5). In addition, British colonies in Africa were often led through indirect rule, which was “a colonial government in which local rulers were allowed to maintain their positions of authority and status” (Spielvogel and McTighe 229). This, however, led to the specific oppression of the lower classes, especially the Western culture-educated generation in the early 1900s, because only the wealthy and elite remained in power. This lowered the amount of opportunities for the younger African nationalists, and created the basis for class warfare. There were many causes of oppression, but this consequence of European imperialism had many negative impacts for the African

people.
Though the most important negative impact of European imperialism on Africa was the oppression of the people, other consequences include the loss of land ownership and natural resources. Imperialists were intrigued by African countries because of the raw materials and markets they had. However, by taking these away from the natives, the Europeans put them in a difficult position for survival. Then, when they divided the continent at the Berlin Conference, because they did not invite any African delegates, they split long-standing villages and areas, disuniting the people. Finally, the European imperialists oppressed the people of Africa by forcing them to become a part of their countries while also not providing equal opportunities (Spielvogel and McTighe 236). Some supporters of the European imperialism of Africa, such as O. P. Austin (who was notably not African), have said that imperialism provided many benefits to the people, such as food supplies, roads, canals, and schools (Document 1). Other supporters, like Parker T. Moore (who was also not of African descent), may tout the fact that imperialists tried to “civilize” the African people by showing them democracy and converting them to Christianity (Document 4). However, both of these arguments are invalid because to begin with, the imperialists did not improve the general way of life for the Africans. Many natives were starved to death working on the plantations, and luxuries such as schools often favored the upper classes and the elite. In addition, the Europeans often showed the African people things like democracy, but never implemented these concepts fairly (Spielvogel and McTighe 236). Furthermore, many Africans felt belittled by being called “heathens”, nor did they want to be forced to convert to Christianity. With all of the negative impacts European imperialism has brought, one is left to ponder, where would Africa be today if it had not happened at all?