The Impact of Imperialism on the Third World

The Impact of Imperialism on the Third World

The term "imperialism" carries with it many (perhaps rightfully

attributed) negative connotations: slavery, subjugation, genocide, et

cetera. Webster's Unabridged Dictionary defines it as: "The policy… of

seeking… the extension of the control, dominion, or empire of a

nation, as by the acquirement of new, especially distant, territory or

dependencies." Now one knows what it literally is and what it may

entail, and thus, further inquiry into the subject of its "good"-ness

or "bad"-ness may entail, from the perspective of the conquered. With

what little example one might find in the 21st century of current

applied imperialism, one must look to the past, and to what has become

of former colonies to understand whether the impact of European

imperialism was for the whole part positive or negative.

There are nations that have prospered after imperial control. One must

remember that the United States of America, the last surviving world

superpower, was once a series of British colonies, worked diligently

to profit not itself but a nation across the length of an entire

ocean. In one's consideration of this topic, one must also consider

that Japan was once forced open to Western civilization, though not

actually colonized, and is now one of the richest and most

technologically advanced nations in the world. In addition, India,

another former British possession, has the technology to create their

own nuclear arsenal. China, once carved into spheres of influence, now

poses one of the largest threats to the United States. Even Canada

maintains a respectable position upon the world stage.

Th...

... middle of paper ...

...left in

shambles in the wake of European imperialism, raped of their natural

culture. None of them possess any semblance of positive industry,

social stability, or any of the other necessities needed for any

nation to prosper. Therefore, what conclusions may one draw from this?

The first is that the essay stem is unfair-by confining the subject

matter to Third World nations, it immediately eliminates maybe

positive possibilities and examples (as shown in the second paragraph)

of post-colonial nations. Secondly, it leads one to hypothesize that

perhaps many of the nations formerly part of far-flung European

empires are worse off than they would be had they been left alone-but

this, of course, is merely a theory. Imperialism certainly did not

perform miracles for the Third World, and that is the only sure

conclusion.