What Was the Impact of the Colonialism on the Third World - Case Study Example

What was the impact of the colonialism on the third world? What changes occurred, if any, after decolonisation? Introduction Colonialism is a term that applies to establishment, development, acquisition, maintenance and expansion of colonies in one territory by people from a different one. Colonialism has been widespread across the world at different periods of time and considered to have begun in 15th century. This century is synonymous with Spanish and Portuguese exploration of Americas and the Age of Discovery, the Middle East, coasts of Africa, East Asia and India. France, England, and Holland established overseas territorial bases by the 16th and 17th century, and they were often doing so in a competitive manner with each other. Some historians believe that colonialism existed long before history has recorded it and that colonialism has had both negative and positive effects and consequences on the territories that were colonised. Colonialism has largely impacted the developing world, which included Africa, Middle East, Latin America and Asia. The impact was on economic, political, technological, social, spiritual, demographical and physical parameters on the colonised territories. Colonialism essentially meant imposition of people from one territory on people on another territory. Powerful states like Britain and some European countries owned most of the third world colonies by 20th century. Third world generally refers to nations that are not aligned democratically or industrially with the First World western countries. Most talked about colonialism is the European colonialism in India and Africa. Impact on the third world The impact of colonialism is generally weighed at individual and collective level. On the individual level it implies dissemination and increments in skills, self-discipline, creativity and material well-being (Rodney, 1972). European colonial powers were adept at accomplishing this since they knew how to exploit human and natural resources of the areas that they colonised. In Africa, for example, there was a clear lack of progress in domains that needed specific techniques for sustenance of the advanced materialistic culture; Europeans identified this lacuna and cash in on the same (Brett, 1973). Arnold (1996) has argued that colonialism, by and large, left some positive impacts on territories that were under its influence. For example, he adds, British created a flawless irrigation system in India, which is still the lifeline for farmers in the country. That around 44,000 miles of distributaries and canals irrigated around quarter of crop area in India by 1890s was by no means a small feat to accomplish; something that India could not have done on its own if Britons were not around. Colonialism has also been attributed to economic development of the third world countries by providing infrastructure that might not otherwise been possible to build so rapidly. There are, however, some counterpoints on this statement by different socio-political analysts who argue that such infrastructure was not created by colonial powers for the benefit of the colonised territories but in order to enable them to exploit manpower of the colonies and natural resources of the nations. In terms of resources, colonialism is supposed have impacted a lot ecologically; particularly in the areas of land and forests, extraction and mining, and introduction of human and animal disease by settlers in these colonies. History is replete with examples showcasing negative examples that colonisers have left by way of deforestation, cash cropping, and landscape changes through mining. Political impacts, on the other hand, have been repressive and coercive state rule, creation of artificial national boundaries, dismantling of local institutions, and displacement of the native inhabitants and populations. Bryant (1998) has argued that all impacts that colonialism has brought upon a territory or its population are actually intertwined with each other. He attempts to establish connection between environment and politics. For example in India, British had a deeper interest in mining and huge forest cover. They were interested in its precious and semi-precious stones strewn in Pirpanjal range of northern Himalayas and other semi-precious ores in southern plains. It was interested in timber to fuel its own industrial revolution back home. In order to execute these interests building railroads was the first requisite; one reason why 32,000 miles of rail tracks were build by them by 1910 (Arnold and Guha, 1995). Since clearing of forests for railroads was essential, the British found it easier way of going into deeper areas for timber exploitation. Lands left treeless were converted into agricultural land, which was cultivated to generate revenue. Over a period of time biodiversity was lost, salination problems began, and soil erosion became a problem to handle (Gadgil and Guha, 1992). Most of the impact that colonisation left stemmed from one or another type of vested interest colonisers had from a particular colony. French, for example, deforested Madagascar from 1896; the intention of which was to replace traditional rice cultivation with coffee cultivation, which resulted in coffee being cultivated as a cash crop. Around the same time French interests changed as French producers of rice, who were making profits from the trade, suddenly felt shortage of rice. This was a situation that French colonisers in Madagascar felt could be handled by growing rice gain and it, ironically, imposed "rational forest resource management" policy in 1909. The situation was frustrating and in the melee, which last around 30 years until 1925, the Madagascar landscape was 70 percent fragmented by either clear-cutting or burning forests (Ward, 2002). The result was horrendous; the local people in Madagascar were not only badly displaced and control over resources lost, it had to import food for its survival. Fertile land had ceased to be so on account of persistent monoculture. Europe saw lucrative propositions in South African diamonds, the harsh extraction and mining of which was left to South Africans disrupting and displacing them from families in the process, while processes like cutting, polishing and refining were given to white minority there. In order to plunder diamond reserves in an unchecked, reckless manner, land were appropriated which left indelible marks of displacement on large number of South Africans (Frick, 2002). Not only in South Africa, but elsewhere too colonialism deprived colonies of their own agricultural, mineral and other natural resources. The access was almost cut off (Chandra, 1992). Trading and market practices got manipulated since physical infrastructure was created by colonisers for their own use and advantage. Locals would not be permitted a free movement of their goods for sale, or exploration of new markets. Since colonialism dispersed people, this led the communal identity get blurred. Since colonial rule would forcibly displace and relocate people to wherever it wanted, locals lost sense of community. This created sense of inferiority in them while colonisers gained confidence with each act. Colonialism, it has been observed, leaves indelible marks on the colonised country, the aftermath of which continues for long. Social analysts have argued that the political crisis Africa saw in the recent past and a lot of bloodshed that happened is a product of the colonial rule. This is because tentacles of colonialism had so deeply ingrained itself into the country that it had weakened its educational and legal system, except a few African who were trained and educated to assist colonisers in economic and administrative work (Obadina, 2000). Otherwise African were asked to just listen to orders and take commands and not question. This could be taken as a backdrop of why Africa still lags behind in literacy and its independence is still not grappling to gain foothold. The worst impact of colonialism on the Third World has been that it nurtured underdevelopment and created an atmosphere of dependency, Since the Third World countries were a developing lot, colonisers drew means for self progress by harnessing local’s struggle for growth. This happened in every colony. In India British colony was estimated to have mined GBP 100 million worth of natural resources, while around 185 tons of gold and 22,000 tons of silver were transported to Spain from South Africa until 1810 from circa 1600. Africa and India are said to have suffered most on account of colonialism. Impact of decolonisation Decoloisation led to plethora of changes in the world, particularly on the political front. Just as colonisation had positive and negative impacts on the colonised territories, decolonisation is also attributed to both. First and foremost impact of decolonisation was reclamation of self-determination that included values, ideas, identities and host of other reformative changes. Political analysts view decolonisation as a stepping stone towards wider recognition of human rights in the colonised Third World countries and its impact thereby on rest of the global politics. Asia and Africa, again, are presented as two important examples in this direction. Decolonisation led to growing and changing role of world institutions. Duara (2004) has defined decolonization as “the process whereby colonial powers transferred institutional and legal control over their territories and dependencies to indigenously based, formally sovereign, nation-states … decolonization represented not only the transference of legal sovereignty, but a movement for moral justice and political solidarity against imperialism.”. The chronology of decolonisation is historically accepted to have begun in 1945 with the signing of The Charter of the United Nations, which led to a tide of nationalism in Asia and Africa, supported by normative ideas of self-determination and equal rights to all people. Such acts bolstered the spirits of nationalist leaders in these two continents (Lauren, 1988) and support that followed started eroding imperialism and created an inevitable value for independence. However, one flip side of decolonisation that is discussed is whether decolonised states have actually become independent in every respect after being decolonised. There are varying degrees of arguments both in favour and against this. One premise that is strongly held so far is that further dependence on the colonisers even after decoilonisation does not take roots from lack of capability but actually is a consequence of the state references. Kraser (1985) has aptly remarked that great powers dominated sovereign equality before 20th century, but in the current scenario great power primacy is dominated by sovereign equality. Classically, decolonisation has not provided freedom in its entirety to colonised territories from imperialist forces. This is because, some way or the other, and even after decolonisation these territories have to interact with imperialist influences for several issues; political, economic, and demographic. Lack of governmental institutions after several years of colonisation is said to be one reason determining this dependence, and so do experience and skills required in running a nation. Decolonisation has also turned into a traumatic experience for some independent states as till it happened the only external relationship they had was with the colonisers. This has transformed into an uneasy isolation for these nations (Clapham, 1996). Conclusion Colonisation has impacted the Third World in both positive and negative ways. While the development and infrastructure that the colonization resulted in the Third World countries cannot be undermined, the political, environmental and cultural cost on which such a development took place cannot be ignored as well. Colonisers, apparently, had a sharp intent to colonise places rich in natural resources and easy to exploit, which happened in abundance in Asia and Africa. Overall the impacts of colonisation were detrimental and the world today is still reaping the negative repercussions of the same. Decolonisation, similarly, however attractive it does seem, has still left a lingering level of dependence for nations that have been decolonised. References Arnold, D. (1996). The Problem of Nature; Environment, Culture and European Expansion, New Perspectives on the Past. Blackwell Publishers Limited, p. 178 Arnold, D. and Guha, R. (1995). Nature, Culture and Imperialism: Essays on the Environmental history of South Asia. Delhi: Oxford University Press Bryant, R.L. (1997). Beyond the Impasse: The Power of Political Ecology in Third World Environmental Research. Area 29, 1-15 Brett, E.A. (1973). Colonialism and Underdevelopment in East Africa; The Politics of Economic Change 1919-1939. Heinemann Educational Books Limited. Preface, p. 291 Chandra, R. (1992). Industrialization and Development in the Third World, Routledge. Clapham, C. (1996). The foreign policies of post-colonialism. In C. Clapham, Africa in the International System: The Politics of State Survival (pp. 77-105). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Duara, P. (2004). Introduction: The decolonization of Asia and Africa in the twentieth century. In P. Duara, Decolonization: Perspectives from now and then (pp. 1-18). London: Routledge. Frick, C. (2002). Direct Foreign Investment and the Environment: African Mining Sector. OECD Global Forum on International Investment, Conference on Foreign Direct Investment and the Environment, Lessons from the Mining Sector, 7-8 February, p.15 Gadgil, M and Guha, R. (1992) This Fissured Land: An Ecological History of India. London: Routledge Krasner, S. D. (1985). Structural Conflict: The Third World Against Global Liberalism. Berkeley: University of California Press. Lauren, P. G. (1988). The end of empire. In Boulder, Power and Prejudice (p. 211). Westview. Obadina, T. (2000). The myth of neo-colonialism, African Economic Analysis. Rodney, W. (1972) How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Bogle-L'Ouverture Publications, Tanzania Publishing House, p. 9,18,21,162,224 Ward, B.C. (2002). Land Use, Environment, and Social Change in Madagascar, June 5, p. 9-12 Read More