The motives of empire?
Concerns for international reputation and migration shaped the politics behind colonialism in Europe, North America and Japan, as the mass media grew in significance and as empires relied not only upon overseas collaboration, but also domestic support.
Machinations within European states could drive imperialism abroad, from political motives in the European national capitals entirely independent of events in Africa and Asia. Economic turmoil in the late nineteenth century bolstered arguments inside Italy and Germany for securing the possible economic advantage from far-flung African colonies. Foreign policy successes might also compensate for political failures at home—or not, as Charles X of France discovered when he was deposed shortly after his conquest of Algiers in 1830. In 1890, King Carlos I of Portugal invested his royal prestige but failed in his attempt to unite Angola and Mozambique on opposite sides of the African continent. Portugal’s proposed inland empire was blocked by Britain, aiming to construct its own Cape-to-Cairo territory, and Carlos’ diplomatic humiliation helped undermine his kingdom and pave the way for republican rule. On the other side of the colonial encounter, political dynamics in the Ottoman Empire and Ethiopian Empire shaped the success of organised resistance and the outcome of colonial wars. Historians have endlessly debated whether an overall sense or meaning of colonialism existed across all its local manifestations.Settler colonialism, or demographic imperialism, illuminates a thorny debate in international historiography: were European colonialisms dictated by domestic or foreign politics? Leopold von Ranke and his historicist followers in the nineteenth century studied foreign policy (Aufienpolitik) as history’s determining factor. In their view, Germany’s political decisions, including imperialism in Africa, were driven by competition with European neighbours.
Eckart Kehr, Hans-Ulrich Wehler and others in the twentieth century argued for the opposite interpretation. Wehler characterised German imperialism as ‘social imperialism’, based upon the ‘primacy of domestic politics’ (Innenpolitik).35 In this interpretation, Germany’s naval arms race against Britain and its seizure of African territories were intended to distract attention from economic problems, and to support certain interest groups at home: international competition was driven by internal factors.A colonial focus on German, Japanese and Italian expatriates, however, helps resolve the apparent dichotomy: colonialism transcends the historiographical debate between foreign and domestic priorities when tied to population movements and emigration. The existence of each nation was predicated upon population, both in the Romantic conception of the early nineteenth century and the Social Darwinist ideology of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Mass migration at once expanded the limits of the nation, relieved over-population and over-supply in labour at home, created new dynamics in national culture, established economic opportunities abroad and opened new possibilities for international influence. In Italy’s case, by focussing colonial policies on the numbers of people settled, whether in the ‘free colonies’ of expatriate communities in the Americas, the ‘demographic colonies’ in Italian Africa or the ‘internal colonisation’ of land reclamation projects in Sardinia, the Italian state cut across international boundaries. By concentrating on extra-legal attributes of citizenship, such as language, patriotic celebrations, social support networks, communications with the mother-country and even tastes in food and music, the Italian government hoped to ensure that its emigrants, or ‘colonists’, remained loyal Italians both abroad and when they returned home. Italy’s achievement in linking migrant communities together brings a new perspective to rapid changes in the transatlantic world, European colonial systems and the rise of a global community. Italy would return nonetheless to the bloody conquest of Africa with the rise of the Italian Nationalist Party. The Italo-Turkish War over Libya, 1911—1912, was followed by Italy’s bloody conquest of Libya itself, lasting into 1931. Italy’s conquest of Ethiopia in 19351936, under Mussolini, included attacks on civilians and widespread use of poison gas. Both campaigns used indiscriminate violence to clear away local populations for future Italian settlement. Japan’s invasion of Manchuria in 1931 similarly opened up mass Japanese settlements in mainland Asia. The recruitment of settlers in Asia and Africa relied upon the hollow prestige, false profits and supposed virility of European, American and Japanese imperialism.
More on the topic The motives of empire?:
- Anonymous Speech and the Privacy of Speakers
- Historical Overview (Part One)
- 30 Prohibition on Collecting Tax by the Patriarch
- RELIANCE ON TECHNOLOGY AND DATA
- Constituent elements and underpinnings
- Conclusion
- INTRODUCTION
- Conclusion
- Conclusion
- CONCLUSION AND REFLECTIONS