week 6 - reading 1 (overseas expansion, imperialism and empire 1815-1914 Hopkins)) Flashcards
traditional - ideology and scholarship in the study of imperialism
- focus on: causes empire-building, means of control, effects of European rule, future of imperialism
- potent mixture of scholarship and ideology/politics
scholarly opinion from the start split into 2 camps:
- those who linked C19 imperialism inevitably to dev. industrial capitalism (Marx+Lenin (semi-colonies; weren’t under official control)
- liberal-conservatives: dipl., pol., social, cult., eco. explanations of empire-building + focus on role of individuals and chance rather than determinism (+notion of informal empire) + resistance against Marxists: imperialism not exploitive, no revolution but evolution towards states etc.
(‘ex-centric’ thesis)
= peripheral causation imperialism: role of sub-imperialists/men-on-the-spot
countered Eurocentrism
made by liberal-conservative scholars imperialism
ideology and scholarship in the study of imperialism - now
changes in the world (decolonization became history)
- 1960s end of European empires -> attention to the periphery (-> less eurocentrism)
- collapse Soviet empire (socialist experiment imploded -> less credibility Marxist ideas)
!!!still: no end of ideology, no capitalist triumph
+ shifting intellectual interests
- e.g. new histoire totale: vertical perspective with e.g. history of gender, or env.
-> new ideas
- Cultural history: European images of other societies + focus on e.g. propaganda, education, sport (+is sometimes joined with social history to study e.g. ethnicity and gender)
- eco. theme empire-building less euro-centric + no longer traditional boundaries marxists and others
- political and dipl. history being recast: reconsideration creation nation states + study of decision-making to the domestic roots of politics + analysis of pressure groups (formed unofficial mind of imperialism)
- new thought to overt coercive power of the state (e.g. military history also looks at recruitment and combative ethos)
-> problem: generalizing ‘Europe’ as an entity
-> opportunity: post-imperial order leads to new questions about Europe\s historic relations with the rest of the world
expansion vs imperialism
- often used interchangeably -> loss of valuable distinction
expansion: the genus
imperialism: a species (a particular form of expansion, with inequality and subordination of a client/satellite state into a more powerful host/mother country)
*integration of empire is always incomplete: it remains a multi-ethnic conglomerate, otherwise it becomes an enlarged nation state
!!imperialism can exist without empire being created (semi-colonies / informal/invisble empire)
+ expansion and imperialism are uneven with respect to time and place
!important question = why was expansion converted into imperialism in some places and not in others (e.g. not in British relations with the USA, not in French relations with Russia) = motivation needs to be big enough + inequality needs to be sufficient to dominate/win
the European empires in 1815
= imperialism of intent, not much imperialism of result (e.g. influence didn’t reach far inwards)
= first half C19 uneven dev. in Europe : Britain more empire/influence, rest less
= wrong proposition of period of anti-imperialism: expansion of Britain’s effective presence first half C19
conflict Britain and France for mastery of the world and Europe -> Peace of Paris 1763: France deprived of its colonies -> France tried to reclaim/extend their position, but threat led to national solidarity in England (John Bull as symbol)
- France restoring empire post-war wasn’t that successful, only some territories were restored (e.g. failed to win Mexico)
- Spanish and Portuguese empires broke up (causes: Napoleonic conquest at home + demands of colonists of the periphery) -> independent republics (e.g. Brazil first became one/equal with Portugal, then independent in 1822)
- NL: suffered in C18 from wars with France (1810 annexation), held on to possessions Indonesia and few Caribbean islands (due to support Britain)
Age of revolutions -> attention + energy towards domestic affairs rather than overseas
- Britain lost Americas in 1783
- Adam Smith’s wealth of nations: condemned mercantilism
-> growing trend away from empire from C18 -> view of era of anti-imperialist free trade
! is wrong:
- countries/Britain had no anti-imperial sentiment, they simply lost some empire+ kept expanding + promoting emigration and settlement
- expansion informal empire: shape newly independent republics through trade, investment and export of British liberalism so they would become valued/dependent commercial partners
explaining Britains expansion of effective presence in first half C19
= focus on broader societal trends
multiple explanations:
- Industrial revolution: important role (overproduction, population growth, unemployment (aka sociale kwestie) -> abandoning mercantilism (experiment)), but not as important as claimed (no free trade yet, overseas trade not that important at that time + mostly based on already existing connections)
- new emphasisis on the City: dev. of finance and commercial services (rise of London as centre of world trade): imperialism to make Britain warehouse of the world rather than its workshop
- defence: Britain much attention to (naval) defence as small offshore island + strong infantry
1870: the struggle for mastery of the world
= global scale: movement of labor funded by capital to take up opportunities on land
= last great era of exploration: trade in info and images
= intense imperial rivalries, central role Britain and France (+others shared in the spoils) + focus on Africa
*Russia expanded land empire central and east Asia (taking from China), until halted by Japan
industrialization has spread across Europe (+Germany imp. in second industrial revo) -> cheaper/quicker move of info., people and goods + more destructive means of warfare (+imperialist expansion/maintenance)
- strengthened connections Europe + rest of the world: more trade, incr. specialization
- financial flows from Europe growing importance in funding dev. rest of the world (Europe started financing private ventures (mainly for railways), next to govs.)
- emigration (population growth, unemployment, pol. instability, int. opportunities + blurring initial lines of connection host and home)
*France the exception to this - by about half C19 African slave trade halted, replaced by flow of free/poor migrants
- revival missionary intentions/energy
- more info/news to non-specialist audience -> malleable representations and misrepresentations of societies + popularity ‘colonial novels’ (-> generation of armchair imperialists)
- academic disciplines stimulated by overseas expansion (e.g. zoology, history, botany, tropical medicine, orientalism)
- both expansion racism and anti-imperialist thinking
!also expansion informal empire: independence America, Middle East, China were compromised
(Orientalism)
the study of European representations of non-European societies
1870: the struggle for mastery of the world - the influence of nation-state formation
nation-state formation -> changes balance of power + internal challenges new states
this didn’t flow outside of Europe as readily as trade, capital and ideas, but still relevant to understand overseas expansion and imperialism
late C19 imperialism can be seen as:
- expression of changing balance of power Europe
- product of nationalism
*both nationalism and nation-state formation enlarged the political arena -> prospects of manipulating and responding to public opinion + imperialism important topic on political agenda
Europe and the world overseas in 1914
!European imperialism should not be one explanation, there are high contrasts in structure, scale, attitude
why was expansion converted into imperialism in some places and not in others?
- Britain 2/3 exports outside of Europe -> moe dependent on earnings from overseas investment, shipping, commercial services than other European countries -> understandable that Britain was leading expansionist power (had to protect trade flows and investment)
- C19 empire building central part of Britain history, not other European countries
- Britains success: continuing political stability + capacity to combine eco. change with social conservatism + legitimating ideology that underpinned auhtority but outlawed authoritarianism
*some argue that Britain was an early start country -> other European countries followed its examples => focus on industrialization to explain empire-building
!revisionist view = highlights significance of non-industrial forms of capitalism -> idea that after 1870 ‘late start countries’ were catching up with what Britain used to be, not what it had become (best comparison is with NL: finance and commerce important engines of overseas expansion and imperialism)
!Britain no new imperialism (as Marxist claimed): expansion was already taking place through imperialism of free trade, 1870 no expansion but defensive power
*(criticism: it was challenged in/after 70s, but that confirmed Britain’s power)
most striking continuity C19
special position of Britain as the power most committed to over-seas expansion, and having the greatest empire
what changed was circumstances,
‘new imperialism’, with changes in technology, enlargement of the political arena, spread of literacy, ideology of dominance, dev. unprecedented financial capacity and the associated growth of the tertiary sector
how can new imperialism best be understood?
NOT: Marxist notion of crisis of advanced industrial capitalism
changing circumstances:
- changes in technology
- enlargement of the political arena
- spread of literacy
- ideology of dominance
- for Britain: dev. unprecedented financial capacity and the associated growth of the tertiary sector
!!these features help to account for British ‘exceptionalism’
