Changes in the periphery, Stayer 23

23/3/2015

Bingham

23/3/2015 07:13:43

To what extent did the experience of the former colonies and developing countries in the twentieth century parallel that of the earlier “new nations” in the Americas in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries?

All sought to define their states following periods of dominance by European powers.
They claimed international status equivalent to that of their former rulers.
They often secured freedom through revolutionary struggle.
They sought to develop their economies, which were heavily influenced by their past, and continued interactions with the industrial nations of the West.

Bingham

23/3/2015 07:37:10

From the viewpoint of the early twenty-first century, to what extent had the goals of nationalist or independence movements been achieved?

These nations had achieved independence from foreign rule and gained some kind of national consciousness.
The newly independent states rejected racism and racial explanations for human behavior.
Post-colonial nations reasserted traditional cultures—religious traditions such as Hinduism and Islam, and asserted that faith is compatible with modernity. In Africa, newly independent nations embraced African cultural styles in dance, music, social norms, family style, and religious outlook.
As the new nations developed, there was everywhere a decline in infant mortality and a rising life expectancy and literacy rates.
There was substantial industrialization in some post-colonial nations, such as South Korea, Taiwan, China, and India.
The former colonies were able to provide a somewhat unified voice on certain issues such as global warming and the World Trade Organization (WTO).

On the other hand, there is also evidence for goals that were not realized:
A number of states failed including Somalia, Sierra Leone, Liberia, and the Congo
A number of post-colonial nations experienced serious internal conflict, civil war, or genocide.
Post-colonial societies witnessed the break-up of larger and more inclusive political units, such as the dissolution of colonial India or French West Africa and the failure of Pan-African, Pan-Arab, and Pan-Islamic states.
Some newly independent states became proxies in the conflicts of the Cold War (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Cuba).
Many post-colonial nations continued to be dependent upon Western corporations or governments and failed to achieve genuine economic stability, autonomy, or even much in some cases much economic development at all.

Charlie

23/3/2015 12:33:55

Hey forum-goers! Heres some stuff:

______________________
MQ1: What was distinctive about the end of Europe's African and Asian empires compared to other cases of imperial disintegration?

I figured it was slightly cleared to word this question: Contrast the fall of Europe's Asian and African empires with other empires in the past?

-Never previously was imperial disintegration associated with a widespread nationalist ideal.

-In the past, earlier imperial disintegration was not accompanied by an arrival of new nation states claiming equal status to their former mother empire.

-Not only did these new nations assert their political independence but also the validity of their cultures that had been suppressed under imperial rule.

-New disintegration brought about the "novel idea" of "national self determination" stating people were naturally divided into independent states of their own which further discredited the idea of imperialism.
________________-
MQ2: What international circumstances and social changes contributed to the end of colonial empires?

-The world wars had weakened Europe putting their moral superiority into question.

-The two new superpowers, the US and the USSR, both openly opposed the older European colonial empires.

-The UN provided an international battleground for anticolonial sentiments to be expressed.

-A new generation of young educated people aware of Europe's gaps between their morals and practices no longer viewed colonial rule as the way to go and advocated for independence.

-A wide selection of ordinary people such as vets, people with education but no jobs, a small class or urban workers becoming aware of their exploitation (connection to the arousal of class consciousness preceding communism), small scale traders, people who lost land or suffered from forced labour, and impoverished newcomers to cities all had motivations for advocating independence.

-The actions of individuals or agencies such as Nelson Mandella or the INC played a role in ending European colonial rule.

-On the Europeans side, it was becoming possible to remian profitable without direct governmental rule over colonies in which case a gradual weaning of rule or "decolonization" occurred. (This reminded me heavily of how slavery was abolished not because it was moral, but because it was no longer profitable.)

Bethany V

28/3/2015 10:11:01

"Compare and contrast colonial India and colonial South Africa". This isn't a MQ or BPQ, but Strayer makes this comparison throughout the section: The Case of South Africa, Ending Apartheid.

Differences

-Black South Africans struggled against an internal opponent rather than against a distant colonial authority, as in India.

-The presence of a sizable, white settler community in South Africa delayed South African independence until 1994, almost 50 years after Indian independence was obtained. India had no such settler community.

-Unlike a predominantly agrarian India, South Africa by the early 1900s had developed a mature industrial economy

-Though there was some racism in colonial India, nothing developed to the scale of South African apartheid.

-South Africa faced mounting international demands to end apartheid. South Africa was isolated from a Western world in which white rulers claimed membership. This had no parallel in India.

-Though in India divisions with nationalist movements were over religion, while in South Africa they were over race, ethnicity, and ideology.

-The violence accompanying the transition to South African rule was nothing compared to the massive killing of Hindus and Muslims that accompanied the partition of India.

-Unlike India, South Africa acquired its political freedom as an intact and unified state.

Similarities

-As in India, various forms of opposition (resistance to conquest, rural rebellions, urban strikes, and independent churches) arose to oppose the evident injustices of South African life.

-In both India and South Africa an elite-led political party provided an organizational umbrella for many resistance efforts in the 1900s.

-Both the ANC and INC were led by educated, professional, and middle-class men who sought not to overthrow the existing order, but to be accepted as "civilized men" within their societies.

-Both the ANC and the INC used nonviolent action to protest colonial rule, though only initially in South Africa.

-As in India, the South African nationalist movement that won freedom was divided and conflicted.

Bingham

28/3/2015 23:24:48

That's the kind of "out of the box" thinking we need right now. Excellent work Beth any.

Spencer

30/3/2015 14:27:35

I found this document. It has basically EVERYTHING you need to know AND MORE. Thanks, Bingham!! http://www.binghamsplace.com/uploads/4/8/0/5/4805013/bingham_notes_strayer_23.pdf

Steven

2/2/2020 20:09:54

Spencer, 5 years later, you will never know how much this one comment has improved my day. Thank you sir, thank you.

Changes in the periphery, Stayer 23

Leave a Reply.

Bingham

Archives

Categories