Expansion of Africa and Asia by Europeans - Essay Example

?Final Exam The purpose of this paper is to provide an insight into the following two main issues relating to European colonization. The format that this paper will utilize is to first address on the question and then provides some insight into the issue. The first issue that this paper will address is ‘How and why were Europeans able to dominate and colonize African and Asian lands and peoples with so little effort?’ There are a number of strong schools of thought into this issue however it is my belief that there is no one single cause for this European expansion, rather there would have been several significant factors working together. It can be that there are two categories of contributing factors for Europeans to expand into Africa and Asia which are the means by which to expand (logistics, weapons etc.) and the desire to expand (For resources, political interests etc.). From the ‘means to expand’ side or expansionism it was argued by Jared Diamond (1997) that some of the major factors that helped Europeans dominate other nations was simply Guns, Germs and Steel. At the time of colonial expansion European technological expertise had given them a significant advantage in firepower. An example of this would be at the Battle of Rorke's Drift during the Anglo Zulu war in which A few hundred British soldiers were able to repel an attacking force of several thousand Zulu Warriors largely because the British had an advantage in firepower (Heavy caliber rifles). It could also be argued that because of prolonged fighting amongst neighboring European powers had given them a sort of ‘Veterans’ advantage, insofar as many colonial armies had actively been engaged in combat for many years and the commanding officers had several hundred years of battle texts to draw examples from. A second contributing factor according to Jared Diamond would be the advantage of germs. Although it is the case that several tropical diseases exist in these continents Europeans had been living in dense, overcrowded, over-polluted populations for many generations that they had developed a better tolerance to serious diseases such as smallpox. When European colonists came into contact with indigenous populations in many places, local populations were often nearly wiped out because of the introduction of infectious disease. A final factor that gave Europeans an advantage in the colonization of new lands was an advantage in infrastructure and supply chains. Because Europeans had better supply chains they were better equipped for long standoffs with indigenous populations, by having preserved food, better access to ammunition, easier access to luxuries which in turn helps morale. It was even argued by Diamond (1997) agricultural techniques that produced more food per acre for the colonial powers (Through the use of draft animals, irrigation systems, and domesticated crops) allowed the nations to provide food for larger armies than the armies they hoped to defeat. With all of this in mind it could also be argued that the Europeans had desires of expansionism in order to gain an advantage over their European contemporaries or to further their own wealth. Some of the most important colonies were often established because of access to natural resources (Such as the Belgian colony in the Congo being exploited for its rubber, or the Dutch East Indies being exploited for its spices). These sorts of economic factors would play a huge role in motivating European nations to expand outward. The second main issue that this paper will address is what the legacy of imperialism in our contemporary world is?’ It could be argued that there are really only three perspectives that could be left by imperialism in the contemporary world which is that the legacy is positive, negative or somewhere in-between. From a positive perspective of positive influence according to the Whittington writing for the BBC (2005) it was argued that one lasting legacy was strong infrastructure. Because European powers were looking to export significant resources such as gold, timber, rubber, sugar etc significant investment was made into road, rail, and sea infrastructure. Moreover, major infrastructure projects such as large mines that were established under colonial rule pay strong dividends after the end of colonial interests. A second positive perspective would be the use of language. In the case of India, there is a great deal of regional languages that makes internal communication difficult, as such English has become one of the major languages of cross regional communication in India. Finally it could be argued that major institutions such as a strong political systems, and the rule of law which was introduced through Colonial expansion would have had a positive impact on those nations which choose to maintain these institutions after the departure of the colonial powers. Even with this information in hand it could also be argued that there is a strongly negative legacy to colonial imperialism. According to the BBC (2005) it is the case that King Leopold the II of Belgium would have been guilty of crimes against humanity by today’s standards. Local people were viciously exploited, through enslavement, mutilation and cultural genocide in the aim of generating wealth through the exploitation of resources. It was further argued that the number of Congolese that died was between nine and thirty million. By the simple nature that many colonies fiercely resisted colonial influences from the very beginning right through to departure of colonial nations would be a very strong indicator that their presence is unwelcome. Moreover, in many cases the true impact is not measurable, because the impact was less tangible; an example of this would be a linguicide (Language death) or cultural genocide (The destruction of cultural institutions) In the end it is more likely that the lasting legacy of colonization is in-between positive and negative. Nobody would argue that it is positive the indigenous Congolese were subjected to gruesome torture at the hands of the Belgians, moreover many people would argue that it is positive that many colonies gained lasting institutions such as democracy (In the case of India, the nation is now the world’s largest democracy). It could also be argued that many of the lasting positive benefits were really only established by colonial powers to benefit themselves and not the indigenous populations (Such as the building of a road to extract resources that would be brought back to the European power). As such there is no simple explanation to this issue as it is the case that it can be viewed by many different agents on a range of different issues. As a final point I believe it could be argued that superior firepower, better access to infrastructure, better tolerance to diseases, and a desire to expand ones cultural & economic influences is still no excuse for committing atrocities against other people. References BBC (2005) King Leopold II and the Belgian Congo (online) Available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A4429064 Accessed on May 4th 2011. Diamond, J. (1997) Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. W. W. Norton & Company. Whittington, J. BBC (2005) Colonial Legacy Still Weighs on Africa. Sir Nicholas Stern talking to James Whittington, BBC World Service business reporter (online) Available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4626437.stm Accessed on May 4th 2011. Read More