Industry & Domination, Strayer 20

15/2/2015

Here you go for those four people who have figured out my assertion that this helps, and for the six of you who actually think I know what I'm doing and read on the weekend. I'll check in occasionally today.

17 Comments

Bingham

15/2/2015 02:25:43

MQ4 for free: Was colonial rule a transforming, even a revolutionary, experience, or did it serve to freeze or preserve existing social and economic patterns? What evidence can you find to support both sides of this argument?

Colonial rule varied from place to place, and so evidence for both of these scenarios can be found.

For evidence of colonial rule being a transforming, even a revolutionary, experience, students might point to the experience of African women, some of whom found greater autonomy over their day-to-day lives than before because of changed living patterns that removed men to the cities, and some of whom found new economic autonomy as they took advantage of opportunities in trade.

WHAPers could also point to the new opportunities offered to some farmers of cash crops, like those in Burma or Ghana, who were able to tap into the colonial trade networks for their own benefit.

Large-scale conversion of some populations to Christianity was also a transformative experience for those who converted. (Remember Voltaire’s comment on Christianity.)

Finally, you might point to the minority who secured Western educations, which transformed both their lives and often their vision of their own society.

For evidence of the freezing or preserving of existing social and economic patterns, a solid WHAPer could point to the detrimental aspects of the colonial economy, which meant that no colonial society underwent industrialization in anything like the manner of Japan.

This effectively meant that the economies of colonized countries remained based in agriculture and the production of raw materials and cash crops. (Primary economic activities – Geography, remember?)

It also stunted the growth of the middle class in those countries. (An that makes for unstable societies, e.g. the French Rev., America today?)

Moreover, the tendency of colonial states to rule through local elites had the effect of maintaining the social status quo.

Allie Elkhadem

15/2/2015 04:42:20

When Strayer is describing what triggered the Indian Rebellion, he says it was the "introduction into the colony's military forces of a new cartridge smeared with animal fat from cows and pigs." I looked up what a cartridge was but I'm still confused as to what it means. Could someone please explain this to me?

Bingham

15/2/2015 07:14:10

It's not the cartridge so much as the animal fat part. Hindus are vegetarian, according to their religion - you know, reincarnation and all that? And it's not so much that the British had included the fat, but the total arrogance and disrespect it showed toward their subject people. And like all revolutions and revolts, there is a spark, a final straw in a series of events leading up to hostilities. This was the "final straw" leading to the Indian Mutiny.

Allie Elkhadem

15/2/2015 07:35:17

Thank you!

Isabella Jarosz

15/2/2015 07:00:40

Hello, forum-goers. I was majorly struggling with MQ4 (How did the power of colonial states transform the economic lives of colonial subjects?)- was anyone able to form a response to it? If so, can you please share it? Thank you!

Bingham

15/2/2015 07:18:33

I'll be your Huckleberry.
Some groups found ways of working within and profiting from the colonial system, including some farmers who produced cash crops for export, as was the case of rice cultivation for export in Burma and the raising of cacao in Ghana. (See my Big Pic answer above.)

Others learned to find a place within the system, like those African women who became small-scale traders. (Recurring theme alert! New opportunities for women, for a while…)

Wage labor on plantations and in mines became a far more common way to sustain oneself – for better or worse, mostly worse.

Isabella Jarosz

15/2/2015 12:37:24

Thanks!

Allie Elkhadem

15/2/2015 07:42:44

Here's my answer to Margin Question 7 (How were the lives of African women altered by colonial encounters?). Please tell me if I'm missing something

- Greatly increased the subsistence workload of women & in some regions assumed total responsibility for domestic food production
- Left to manage domestic economy alone with men leaving for cities
- Took over traditionally male tasks (breaking land for planting, milking)
- Sought closer relations with their birth families than their husband's families
- Established self-help groups
-Implemented new farming techniques & crops in some regions
- Colonial economies often gave women new opportunities for economic autonomy with trading
- Impoverished women often became the heads of their families
-Some left home and went to mission schools to find new freedom away from men

Isabella Jarosz

15/2/2015 12:40:35

Hi Allie! I would also add that men actively sought to control the sexuality and mobility of women, but I think you could just add that to your last point. Also, make sure to mention their economic autonomy (I just think that phrasing seems important, you could just add it to your second point), and the fact that working hours and workload increased. Not to mention their divide from men in work, which had not been the case before.

Allie Elkhadem

15/2/2015 08:01:05

I'm struggling with margin question 8 (did colonial rule bring "progress" in its wake). For this question should you identify the three points Strayer makes and then state that it is hard to classify if progress actually occurred? Or are you supposed to defend both sides of the argument?

Bingham

15/2/2015 09:18:57

This is the kind of question that really gets at the heart of what we do in history. You've seen them before, usually frames as big picture questions. The idea here is not to make judgements, but to ensure the historical record is accurate - reflecting all sides of an issue or event. This is why I've spent so much class time discussing the problem of Eurocentrism, social history, and the absence of women in the historic record.

This question is debatable, especially since definitions of “progress” vary widely, but however one views the impact of colonial rule, it is clear that several important developments took place during the period. The stuff you mentioned, the further integration of Asian and African economies into the global network; and the bringing of clearly positive modernizing processes such as administrative and bureaucratic structures, communication and transportation infrastructure, schools, and modest provisions for health care.

On the other hand, with the sole exception of Japan, colonialism in any form failed to produce industrialized economies, ones that would have lifted Asian and African economies to European levels of quality of life. This coupled with the huge masses of people suffering under colonial rule and industrial processes, tends to counter the modernization argument

I hope that helps..

Isabella Jarosz

15/2/2015 12:37:03

Gee whiz, this chapter is dense.
Anyways, here is my answer to Margin Question 1 (In what different ways did the colonial takeover of Asia and Africa occur?)
PLEASE NOTE that the reason I am putting this up on the forum is because I am extremely unsure about my answer and am positive I missed a lot, so I'm looking for help if you can give it. I'll put some of the ones I'm more confident on up as well.
So here's my answer:
-Whereas before Spanish and Portuguese were the major colonizing powers, they were uninvolved compared to the likes of Germany, Italy, Belgium, the US, and Japan in the second wave of colonization.
-While first wave colonization had devastating demographic consequences that reduced populations (Native Americans), demographic depletion was nowhere near this drastic in the second wave.
-Second-wave colonization was influenced by ideals of the Industrial Revolution -> colonial conquests were shaped by military capacity/economic power
-Second-wave more willing to undertake the expense/risk of conquest and outright colonial rule
-Second-wave used more weapons
???

Bingham

15/2/2015 13:30:46

Yeah, this one goes deep, which is going to burn those Monday night readers, mark my words.

This seems like one of those cross chapter questions, but I think you can just address the unique features of the late 19th/early 20th century versions of colonialism. So you need to mention that 1. colonial takeovers occurred as a result of military power, or its threat, 2. in India, it was the Brit East India company doing the dirty work, not the British government, 3. the British in India and the Dutch in Indonesia were able to penetrate (pardon the phrase James) mainly due to local political instability, 4. in Africa colonialism happened in the context of European rivalries (scramble for Africa) with later and slower attempts to consolidate colonial holdings.

Hope that clarifies things.

Isabella Jarosz

15/2/2015 12:43:02

MQ3- What was distinctive about European colonial empires of the 19th century?
1) prominent of race in distinguishing rulers/ruled, using "scientific racism"
2) deep, active penetration (shhhh.) into societies, using new means of communication/transportation, centralized tax-collecting bureaucracies, and imposing changes in landholding patterns
3) penchant for counting/classifying subject peoples which they used to manage the complex societies they governed
4) contradicted core values such as democracy, independence, and modernization that they implemented at home to an unusual degree in their colonies
Let me know if I missed anything.

Bingham

15/2/2015 13:37:19

Yeah, you have it, and remember this, because this is the more recent and unforgivable iteration of European (and increasingly US and Japanese) hypocrisy it resonates still in the events we see on the news today. Although, now that I think about it, the Japanese weren't really espousing Christian and Enlightenment ideals, so maybe they are the least hypocritical of the industrial colonialists. Still bastards though.

Cameron C. link

15/2/2015 14:51:06

MQ5-Change-What kind of wage labors were available in the colonies? Why might people take part in it? How did doing so change their lives?
Reasons to take part in it
-In Africa (more than Asia), people moved to farms or plantations and later mines, because they lost their land.
-In Asia, plantations were established and financed from Europe to grow (sugarcane, tea, and tobacco, etc…) Mines (which were initially owned by the Chinese) were claimed by the Europeans were a source of income previously.
Type of wage labors
-Some kinds of wage labors were European owned plantations, mines, construction projects, and working at homes.
How it changed their lives
-In Africa people were forced off their land, because a law in 1913 made 88% of the land belong to Europeans, so native Africans were employed by the new landowners or were placed into “native reserves”. Later, when cities began to grow in population, people began to share the cost of living, making the cities become quickly overcrowded. The mix of overpopulation and high living cost in major cities caused normal family life to be nearly impossible for the majority of people living in these cities.
-Caused many impoverished workers from Asia to migrate to European farms, plantations or mines.
-In both Africa and Asia people were forced to live in inhumane and overcrowded living conditions.

Bingham

18/2/2015 06:42:48

BPQ4: Why were Asian and African societies incorporated into European colonial empires later than those of the Americas? How would you compare their colonial experiences?

Europeans incorporated Asian and African societies into their empires later than those of the Americas for a number of reasons, including their lack of a disease advantage over indigenous populations and, in the case of tropical regions the distinct disease disadvantage of Europeans compared to indigenous populations.

Also a factor was the Europeans’ reliance on military advantages gained from the Industrial Revolution.

• And there was internal competition between European states that drove the accumulation of colonial territories in the nineteenth century despite the inherent risks and expenses involved in ruling directly.
• In comparing colonial experiences, the colonial period in Asia and Africa had nothing like the devastating demographic consequences for indigenous peoples in the Americas.

Slavery on plantations was a critical feature of the colonial experience in the Americas but not in Asia and Africa.

Spain and Portugal played a much smaller role in the creation of European colonial empires in Asia and Africa as compared to the Americas.

While European colonizers did have an impact on some regions of Africa, they had a greater impact on the Americas.

Industry & Domination, Strayer 20

Leave a Reply.

Bingham

Archives

Categories