Chapter 22 Module 6


2. What was distinctive about the end of Europe’s African and Asian empires compared to other cases of imperial disintegration?
The end of Europe’s African and Asian empires due to the mobilization of the masses around a nationalist ideology (1088). “America threw off British, French, Spanish, or Portuguese rule during the late eighteenth century and early nineteenth centuries (1088). The African and Asian empire’s struggles were different, not only about political independence but also the way their cultures had been deluged and besmirch during the colonel era. “HumanKind was naturally divided into distinct peoples of nations each of which deserved an independent state of its own (1089). “African and Asian movements were shared with these other ends of empire stories the ideal of national-self determination” (1089). Human beings were naturally divided as into-nations which brought which was proclaimed by the winning side of both world wars. Empires that had no territories came under attack from highly nationalist governments. During the second half of the twentieth century, due to the pressure from nationalist movements, Europe’s Asian and African empires dissolved into dozens of newly formed independent states.  The ideal of national self-determination was profoundly at odds with the possession of colonies that were denied any opportunity to express their own national character. The enormously powerful force of nationalism, having earlier driven the process of European empire-building, now played a major role in its disintegration. (1090).

3. What international circumstances and social changes contributed to the end of colonial empires?

The world wars had weakened Europe while discrediting any sense of European moral superiority. “Both the United States and the Soviet Union, the new global superpowers, generally opposed the older European colonial empires, even as they created empire-like international relationships of their own” (1091).  The United Nations provided a platform to conduct anti-colonial agitation, which contributed to the global illegitimacy of the empire, making a huge transformation of social values encouraging African and Asians to seek political Independence. “At the same time, social and economic circumstances within the colonies themselves generated the human raw material for anti-colonial movements” (1091). In the early twentieth century in Asia and the mid-twentieth century in Africa, the later generation of western-educated elites, especially young men had risen throughout the colonial world.  Young men were becoming more familiar with European Culture, becoming deeply aware of the culture and the rituals, no longer practicing what their fathers have learned before, seeking there own independence. More people were following that route, women and men alike. As the twentieth century continued on colonial rulers started planning a new political relationship with African and Asian people. Europeans imagined retaining profitable economic interests in Asia and Africa trying not to make expenses and problems of formal colonial governments.

4. What obstacles confronted the leaders of movements for independence?
“Leaders had to organize political parties, recruit members, plot strategy, develop an ideology, and to negotiate both with one another and with the colonial power to secure the transition to independence” (1092).  Being a leader who created movements was not easy at all. Many countries were against movements. Leaders started to appear from different parts of the world. “ Leaders, drawn everywhere from the ranks of the educated few and almost always male, organized political parties, recruited members, plotted strategy, developed an ideology, and negotiated with one another and with the colonial state” (1092). Movements like these drew on memories, localized forms of resistance, nationalist leaders did not seek to restore the past (1092). A common task of nationalist leadership was to recruit more followers.  Millions of Men and Women joined Gandhi’s Movement to stop violence in India. The relationship between the Nationalist leaders and the followers were tensed. “Beneath the common goal of independence, they struggled with one another over questions of leadership, power, strategy, ideology, and the distribution of material benefits, even as they fought and negotiated with their colonial rulers” (1092). Even though people knew that the main goal was to gain Independence they struggled with leadership, power, strategy, and ideology. “ Beneath the common goal of independence, they struggled with one another over questions of leadership, power, strategy, ideology, and the distribution of material benefits, even as they fought and negotiated with their colonial rulers” (1092)





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Chapter 23 Module 8

Chapter 14

Introduction to Part 5 & Chapter 16