The Scramble for Africa (1800-1900): Research the factors that led to this & explain why this rush occurred. Rank the causes from most significant to least significant based on what you think motivates a country to become involved in foreign exploration/colonization. Check out the various links below to help you with this:
As the first article explains, the slave trade had ended in the west, but in inland Africa slaves were still being traded and chiefs did not want to give up their slaves. Therefore, abolitionists were calling for the slave trading to stop completely. In order to do this, European countries would need to infiltrate the area in order to explain their laws on the land to stop it. In theory colonization for this reason would be for the better good, however other factors went into colonization. In the second article describes how industries in Europe were producing far more than what Europeans could consume. They needed more consumers to increase profits and also beat the competition, so these industries pushed for colonization so the market would grow larger. However one major factor of colonization is the demand for raw materials. Regardless if the original intent was exploration or not, Europeans explored into Africa and noticed an abundance of raw materials that are very valuable, especially things like ivory and rubber. This demand for raw materials can be connected to both the slave trade and the industry demand. In order to stop the slave trade the countries would need to use resources to reach these inland areas and possibly even need to use these resources as a sort of trade off. If you give a chief x amount of rubber or ivory in return for the agreement to stop slave trading, then you would begin to eradicate the slave trade completely. As anyone who is currently in an economics class, they would know that two of the four factors of production is land and labor. Industries need both raw materials and a labor force to produce goods, so it would make sense that industries not only want to sell their goods in colonized regions, but use the land and people to further explain their industries. Therefore, I think that the demand for raw materials is the most significant motivation for colonization, followed by expanding industry. Personally, I think that exploration and the slave trade causes are more of excuses to get into the region rather than actually trying to stop slavery or exploring foreign land. It might have started out for these reasons, but in the end greed and desire gets the best of everyone and each country just wants more and more.
ReplyDeleteI like the connection to economics! It's true that the Europeans are getting two of the four factors of labor in Africa.
DeleteI also feel that exploration and ending the slave trade were excuses. Even if they weren't in thte beginning, they surely turned out to be.
DeleteI didnt even think deeply about how the raw materials was a major factor for colonization! Great insight!
DeleteI also agree that saying they were exploring was a coverup for their true intentions. Great point!
DeleteI like how you brought in the four factors of production. It makes sense for a country to want these economic factors for no price whatsoever. It would greatly increase economic growth.
DeleteI agree with your comment that the European powers used exploration and slave trade causes as mere excuses to get into Africa, only to manipulate the natives in the end.
DeleteI like how you went into detail about how economics effected the colonization of Africa. And i liked how you fit the 4 factors of production too!
DeleteThe most obvious cause for the "scramble for Africa," would be the fight for power. Countries such as England, France, and Spain had colonies all over the world and in the early nineteenth century only thirty percent of Africa had been conquered. A prime example of this fight for power would be Belgium, King Leopold II felt the need to conquer the Congo, because his neighbors were doing the same. The next reason for the "scramble" would be capital. All countries wanted to progress and at that time the only way to progress was believed the country had to resort to exploitation of other countries. The end of the slave trade also played a major role in European countries colonizing Africa. The need for not cheap but rather free labor the Europeans had become so accustomed to was now gone. They needed to do something about it. All in all, the "scramble for Africa" was a way to exploit the natives and the continents natural resources. The selfish needs of the colonizers was however masked by their apparent "good intentions."
ReplyDeleteI agree that a major cause fort the scramble for Africa was power. It seems like it was a game to them: who has the most resources, who has the most land, who has the best stuff. It was as if they were trying to show off what they had.
DeleteI agree with your statement that the countries were in it for the power and dominance!
DeleteI agree that the colonizers "masked" their actions through apparent "good intentions"!
DeleteYes I also believe that capital and power fused during this scramble of power. I like all the factors pointed out and how you combined them together.
DeleteI like how you pointed out that since the slave trade had stopped,the Europeans now had a free labor hole which needed to be filled with a new way of obtaining free labor.
DeleteI definitely agree that the desire for power was definitely at the core of the Scramble.
DeleteIn the period after the slave trade was terminated, European countries were in a brutal contest for capital gain. Since they were no longer able to exploit Africa for slaves, they began to exploit the country for its resources (and therefore began an entirely new era of slavery under a different name). Because all of the countries wanted a section of Africa with the most valuable resources, they divided up the country without concern for the effects this division would have on the African people, who were already divided up by tribes. In their greedy rush, the Europeans created a strong animosity between many groups of Africans.
ReplyDeleteThe greatest cause for this conquest was the desire for raw materials. These raw materials could bring a large profit to European countries and therefore put them ahead of their counterparts. The second main reason was the new market in which they could provide their goods--again, to increase their profit. Therefore, the greatest factor in this conquest was greed.
I believe the least important factor in the conquest was Christianity and civilization. Had the conquerors truly been concerned with bringing religion and civilization to these countries, they would have treated the African people with far more morality. They simply exploited Africa under the guise of being martyrs.
I agree that religion was not an important factor in the colonization because the colonizers definitely did not treat the natives as they should have!
DeleteI also put and agree that religion was the least factor! I believe the conquerors were worried a ton about other things and habing a belief in a higher power was the last thing they thought about.
DeleteI like how you describe the attempted missionaries to Africa as "martyrs". I definitely hadn't thought of it in that sense.
DeleteThe European countries definitely wanted profits and resources more than anything. Europe had plenty of labour, but only limited resources. Countries like France and England could conquer huge areas many times the size of their home countries, vastly increasing resource availability, and thus, profits.
DeleteI agree with you. The Europeans had no thought of how this division would affect anyone but themselves. They took what they wanted and did not even think about how this would affect the people living in these regions. However, I do partially disagree with you on the religion thing. They did have bring religion to the countries as a top priority, as most of us learned in World History their focus was God, Gold, and Glory. I agree with you that they did not have this as top priority, but they did have it as one.We can now see because of all the religions in Africa such as Christianity and Islam.
DeleteI like how you included how the European countries diregarded the tribes and just drew territory lines where ever they pleased. This was undoubtingly one of the caused of their downfall.
DeleteInteresting commentary.. I agree with you on the demand for raw goods being the top reason. This makes me question the limit to human's greed...
DeleteI disagree with your statement that people didn't attempt to convert the Africans to Christianity. One must take into account the mindset of the missionaries themselves. To them, a mission to Africa was not an attempt to save actual people, but unfortunately more like herding cattle into a pen. Africans were not considered entirely human, and missionaries treated their souls as such.
DeleteI agree with you that religion was the least important factor in the conquest. It seemed like they wanted the land and to be able to call it "theirs" rather than religion.
DeleteI definitely agree that this scramble was least about religion. As Katy stated, the notion of "god, gold and glory" may have had equal merit in the Age of Exploration, but it was then obsolete de to the fact that the spread of religion fell second to the pursuing of standing for the home nation and "gold" in raw materials.
DeleteAs expressed in these articles, there were many reasons for The Scramble of Africa. Although I do not believe this was the main reason, the colonizers argued that they were going into Africa to help completely end the slave trade. By saying this, the colonizers were able to cover up their true intentions of obtaining raw materials and gaining profit. As the second article states, there was not a shortage of labor in Euope but there was a shortage of materials. Once in Africa, the Europeans were able to access these materials they needed to increase profit and compete with one another. Another reason for the colonization of Africa was expansion. Since a huge part of a country's power was its size, countries took on the idea of Manifest Destiny. They wanted to spread over as much of the map as they could, which is why they colonized Africa. Finally, Africa was colonized because of pure exploration. This was a time when people explored out of curiosity. Nevertheless, once all of Africa was explored, people began to take note of the economics and politics of the country, which connects to the reasons of getting raw materials and more land.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the slave trade was a sort of cover up. Even if this was an intention to start off with, this surly shifted focus. I also like the connection to Manifest Destiny. This is interesting because the Europeans did think it was their right to spread out and obtain the most resources. Great idea!
DeleteI love how you approached the possibility of them saying they were there to end the slave trade as just a cover up. I completely agree with you on that one. The colonizers did,like you said, have the true intentions of gaining profit and raw goods. Great thought process Paige!
DeleteIt was great how you related the colonization of Africa to the idea of Manifest Destiny commonly associated with the Westward expansion that occured in the United States.
DeleteI like that you point out the cover ups of the Europeans and that they tried to pass it off as ending the slave trade. They kept outsiders from knowing what was going on, like China and Germany have at some point in history. The colonizers were trying to cover up their horrific actions in Africa! I really like this point!
DeleteSince The Scramble of Africa is a process that is made up of interconnected events, the search to find a beginning or one single cause may be to some degree irrelevant, in the sense that prior and contemporary actions always have effects and thus meaningful beginnings may not always be found.In The Scramble for Africa you could pinpoint three main causes in my eyes; however, the urge for power would be considered the ultimate reason, followed by expansion and a low belief in relion. It also was politically and economically the cause of competitive empire building and a constant battle for leadership. How it is explained,events in Africa caused intervention by Europeans, which inturn produces conflict between Europeans but played out in Africa.It is largely a question of perspective as to whether the scramble for Africa is to be understood as a single process. Certainly from that time there was an increasing European interest in Africa, but this was due in part to practical reasons of its accessibility and technological progress, and the relations between Europe and Africa.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you for the whole "urge for power". I think that was the number one cause of the Scramble, to show that one country was more powerful and than the other because they owned more land in Africa.
DeleteThe Scramble for Africa is an extreme example of how several countries have had wants for excessive control and power. This rush could be attributed to countries want for foreign raw materials. However, by invading territory, these countries didn't have to pay the prices to import them from other countries. There was also the fact that many European countries wanted to "covert" Africa to a more civilized place by introducing them to Christianity. The last main reason for the rush was to establish a higher rank than other European countries - the more land, the better a country looks
ReplyDeleteI like the fact that you used the term "extreme example." We have to remember that we study the very worst things about this process. There were some people there who truly wanted to help the African people (such as some missionaries).
DeleteJust to play devil's advocate, as we see in The Poisonwood Bible, not all missionaries truly wanted to help the African people either. Many of them did just as much harm in forcing their beliefs and culture onto the Africans who rarely spoke their language instead of actually helping them.
DeleteI don't think any country wanted to convert the natives, I think it was just a side mission that could be performed while they were there in the first place. Also, Europe wasn't free of "paying the price." Each country sent in many people to help conquer these nations and many died from different causes, and shipping items back to your home country, even from a country you own, is going to cost you a little bit.
DeleteI like that you point out the conversion. We have to remember that our history is factual, but opinions are interjected into our history books. We have learned the horrors, but not the other side of the story. I'm sure some people did have good intents, and I like that you pointed that out.
DeleteI agree with the fact of countries wanting Africa to convert to their ways of thinking just to gain land. I loved the sentence, "the more land, the better a country looks." It explains exactly what the larger and stronger countries were looking to gain out of missionaries.
DeleteOne will never really know the true motives of the colonizers of Africa. Many claimed innocent intent, but actions speak louder than words. Aside from Liberia and Ethiopia, all of Africa was exploited by the Europeans. Most would argue that the main reason for this quick but massive abuse of the continent by the Europeans was to become the most powerful country in Europe. More land meant more power and influence, ideally. This greed for power required the exploitation of the plentiful natural resources the land offered and a larger market to sell finished products to. to put into other terms, one could describe this the harsh side of capitalism - using less-developed nations as a source for profit. However, there were those few, pure individuals that participated in this "rush" in order to truly being goodness to the people... at least that's what they believed. Like Nathan Price in the Poisonwood Bible, missionaries wanted to bring salvation to the people through Christianity. Others, mainly British abolitionists, desired to end the slave trade; however, Muslim leaders continued the trade inland, leaving little the Europeans could do to stop it.
ReplyDeleteI agree that some people truely wanted to go to Africa to help the native inhabitants, but I don't think these individuals had much of an impact on their home nation going to Africain the first place.
DeleteI really like the fact that you said "many claimed innocent intent" because many people who try to colonize another country or civilize them, think they are doing a good thing. People often go into the country thinking they are doing good for everyone when in reality you are hurting someone. The Europeans went to colonize Africa to gain power and get raw materials. Yes this helped European countries but it hurt Africa. There are always two sides of the story and something innocent may not really be innocent after all.
DeleteI like how you pointed out how we don't really know the thoughts of every colonizer, which shows how history is not all facts but depends on who writes the history
DeleteI love how you drew a connection between the Europeans and Nathan Price from the Poisonwood Bible. Like Nathan Price, the Europeans may have had innocent intentions as they tried to make the natives 'civil' but ended up hurting them instead.
DeleteChrissy's going all deep on me! It's true, nobody will ever know the true intentions of the colonizers, but it is true that actions speak louder than words. triangular trade will show that it was the need for slaves, trade, and goods that sparked the "Scramble for Africa."
DeleteI strongly agree with what you said that everyone claimed to have innocent motives. It is like what we talked about with the anticipation guide journals and how history may not be completely fact and it depends on who teaches history to see what side of the story you are taught.
DeleteI like that you pointed out that it was not all bad in terms of intentions with the Europeans. Some did mean to help, but I also agree with Aaron in that they did not make enough of an impact to thwart the bad intentions.
DeleteMore or less, the Scarmble for Africa was caused mainly by the greed of the European nations who went in to conquer Africa. Many of these leaders saw resources such as labor from blacks, the many minerals that could be sold, and the craved items like ivory. Another thing is that the Europeans wanted power through Africa, because they wanted to be seen in the world as the greatest nation compared to all the rest and fought to control Africa to boost their standings in the "leaderboard," while also having control over native africans who would rarely attempt to fight their dictators, and if they did they were just brushed to the side. Also I really don't think that mission work was a big enough cause to rush into Afrrica. It most likely seems that these conquests into the continent were hidden under these illusions of humanitarian work so that no other nations would stop or fight another nations control of Africa.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you stated about the use of religion as a cover up for the true, greedy intentions of the colonizers.
DeleteDuring the time of the "Scramble for Africa" much of Europe experienced rapid industrialization and as a result, those powers searched for cheap ways to supply their rapid growth and fill their coffers with profits from the sale of other resources. While the Europeans often pretended that they sought to bring civilization and religion to the African continent, however their interest lied only in power and profit. Each powerful European country felt they had to carve out a piece of Africa or suffer the consequences of falling behind their rivals with access to all of the continent's resources. As a result, Great Britain and France, and to a lesser extent Belgium, Italy, Germany, Portugal, and Spain, competed to quickly grasp the largest plots of African soil. The incentive for this power grab became quite obvious as many western European countries, already relatively less powerful, fell further and further behind The British and French Empires without the vast resources and profits provided by Africa. There is no doubt that the upper classes of Europe benefited greatly through the abuse of the African people and the appropriation of their resources.
ReplyDeleteSome in Europe did genuinely feel that the African "heathens" needed to convert for the sake of their mortal souls. While this was one reason for the colonization of Africa, the Large European powers simply took advantage of this as an excuse to continue the subjugation of Native peoples. Missionaries often displayed more interest in forcing the African people into their way of thinking than in truly helping them. The attempt to "bring civilization" only brought discord, slavery, and discord.
I agree with your statement of the Europeans only "interest lied only in power and profit."
DeleteThe Scramble for Africa was a "winner takes it all" fight. It was a fight to prove which European country was the strongest that was paid for by the lives of millions of natives. I believe the main reason for colonization was the demand for precious raw materials that could not be found at home. We saw in the "Ghost of King Leopold" movie how the Congo was rich with supplies such as coffee, ivory, rubber, diamonds and tin that was seen as valuable items back at home. It would have greatly helped their economies by providing resources for free by forcing the natives into harsh labor for no pay. I believe that another major cause of the Scramble was the fight to prove their European country was the strongest. If Belgium started exploiting the Congo and becomming more and more powerful, other European nations are going to want to compete to show that they are as powerful as well. I think the belief that the Europeans wanted to come and bring "Christianity" and "Civilization" to Africa is the least important cause of the Scarmble. Why do the Europeans care at all about these natives? I believe that was a coverup to enter the continent without seeming ruthless and greedy.
ReplyDeleteI agree; sadly, Congo was stuck in the middle of a let's-see-who-has-the-most-power-and-flaunt-it competition between European countries. It shows humanity that power leads to ultimate destruction. Poor Congo had to pay the price. However, I do think the exploitation of Africa was inevitable due to its young age...
DeleteI agree that they used the excuse of "civilizing the natives" as a cover-up because, as you see in Heart of Darkness, you see the natives reverting to an animalistic nature, like when the man is crawling on all fours and lapping up the water from the river. The Europeans created the opposite affect. Good job :)
DeleteThe rush to colonize Africa by the Europeans occurred for a number of reasons. During that time the more land a country had meant that that country had more power. Therefore, European countries fled to claim parts of Africa in order to gain more power for their country. Additionally by gaining new land in Africa, the European nations would also gain any benefits the land had to offer such as the raw materials and resources there and the control of the people living there. The new resources they acquired allowed them to trade more and increase their revenue. While the people who they gained power over were subject to their rule and the imposing influence of European religion and culture. The scramble to Africa was all about each European country trying to become more powerful than the others.
ReplyDeleteThe Scramble for Africa is an important moment in history. It is the time where Europeans were greedy and had no regard for the livelihood of the people in the country. Instead, they focused in on getting profit and raw goods. They were focused on exploiting the land. While history has said that they were merely there to end the slave trade, true thinkers know that this is just a cover-up for their greed. They decided to divide the land of Africa up for themselves and it seems that not one person in the group had any thought process of how it would affect the people living in the region; instead, they divided the land for their needs. This division caused many conflicts between the different tribes in Africa. This meeting of the Europeans caused more conflict than good, perhaps if they would have thought of the Africans instead of the resources, or even consulted the people of Africa; Africa would have not of had such a violent past from fighting tribes.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you're saying. Had the Europeans considered the people of Africa first, before themselves, the outcome would have been very different.
DeleteI agree with you in that the meeting of the Europeans and the Africans caused more harm than good because according to Conrad, Africa is the "heart of darkness" due to the pain inflicted on the Africans by the Europeans!
DeleteAfter the unification of Germany and Italy, the European continent had no more room for expansion, so the European powers ultimately turned to their ties with less prominent countries like Africa, scavenging and secreting the land for contributors to their dominance and power. When the European countries explored Africa, they found satisfaction in the control and power they had over forcing the natives to extract their land for any profitable natural resource, and they took large measures to do so, killing many lives of the natives. By exploiting the African continent, the Europeans were able to put an end to their economic depression and regulate the circulation of commerce and marketing through mineral exploitation, agricultural production, or labor distribution. Thus, the drive for more power and resources was the ultimate, major cause for this rush. The Europeans claimed to incorporate converting the natives to Christianity to civilize them. However, Christianity was merely advocated to create a supportive environment for the Europeans' expansion of commerce and "civilize" the natives to minimize the likelihood of dissent throughout the colonies. Religion was, in my point of view, the last thing on the Europeans' list that motivated their involvement in foreign countries.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you on both the power and religious factors concerning the African people! Good back up facts!!
DeleteEuropean countries wanted to gain raw materials and capital, and that was the number one reason for their colonization. The Industrial Revolution had just occurred in Europe and they needed resources and slavery to help make the industrialism possible. Africa was rich in resources such as rubber, gold, and ivory, so the European countries decided they were an asset to them. Getting ahead economically was the main reason that the Europeans used their influence in Africa. In addition to the need for resources, the Europeans also gained new markets by colonizing Africa. Another important factor in this colonization was control because the European countries wanted to exert their control over other countries and expand their territory. They wanted to gain prestige over other countries. I do not believe that civilizing the Africans was an important factor in the decision to colonize Africa because they ultimately hurt the Africans and made them more slave-like. They did not care about the goodwill of the Africans, but cared more about the benefits that it would give them.
ReplyDeleteI agree, the gaining of power in Africa did not civilize Africa. It mostly made them distrust other people because now they don't know who is good and who is bad. All the Europeans did was look out for themselves and tried to make their lives better even if it did mean hurting the Africans.
DeleteThe Scramble for Africa occurred for several reasons that were continuously built around this time until finally the insane race, capture, and power over Africa was enforced. The rush occured due to mainly economic resources and desire of power. The most significant factor causing this period of time would in my opinion be competition. Leopold first started Congo exploration through learning about Henry Stanley and the advancement of all his neighbors. A country involves itself with foreign exploration and colonization through the "need" of being the first to discover a land, gain its resources, and ultimately claim the region. During a time of fast-paced industrialization, who wouldn't want to be the first to advance their country? The least significant factor that led to the rush seems to be Christianity, specifically. The Europeans had envaded African states stating their desire to civilize and conform them for their own good and well-being. Obviously, that was not solely the case. The Europeans overtook the Africans so rather than Christianity, which I'm sure they somewhat realized was out of the picture then, it was a desire to rule over a vulnerable set of people, ultimately going back to the idea of power.
ReplyDeleteI like the question you put in because it really did make me think about why countries wanted to industrialize so badly!
DeleteThe biggest reason for the Scramble for Africa was high demand of economic resources. As the age of industry skyrocketed, people were in desperate need of more raw materials to fully flourish. Even though the slave trade had ended, whites still thought of blacks as inferior beings. Also, the European countries being a superpower gave them a pretentious outlook on themselves, justifying exploitation of Africa. The Europeans did not think twice about their actions; they saw everything as rightfully theirs by mere declaration. There is really no other significant reason other than selfish desires (i.e. profit) for the Scramble of Africa. For example, even the missionaries that came to Africa were forceful, completely disregarding that these Africans had culture/religion too before the Europeans set foot here. Moreover, people claiming to colonize and make Africa "civil," really only came to Africa as power-hungry monsters. They cause more harm and hysteria, which is ironic.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. I like how you pointed out that Europeans didn't really give any thought to how their actions might affect others, and that they only thought of how THEY would benefit. Good job :)
DeleteI like how you took a step further to describe the Europeans as being selfish rather than just listing the causes for the colonization. I also like how you pointed out that Europeans were being ironic by harming the natives rather than making them 'civil', which they claimed was their intention.
DeleteI like how you brought up the idea of people "helping" another country when it actually hurts a country which, like we discussed in class, may be seen as helping by one country but hurting to another.
DeleteThis Scramble for Africa boiled down to countries wanting to be the biggest and the best. It was a quest for power that ended up becoming a competition among the European countries. The main reason for this race was to gain raw materials. As the industrial revolution came about, Europeans realized that they were not well-equipped with any useful raw materials. Because of this, Europeans had to trade overseas to get these raw materials. Industrialists pushed for Europeans to just take over these African lands to guarantee cheap resources. Once one country did this, the other countries followed in order to not be left behind economically. In Heart of Darkness, Marlow's traveling partner's response as to why he was here was,"To make money, of course (Conrad 29)." Conrad's saying that money and greed drive men to do certain things that they wouldn't normally do. Another main reason for the Scramble for Africa was the political tension between Britain, France, and Germany. They were caught in a quest for dominance over Europe,which led to the competition to have more land than the other countries. Since Europe is only a small region, they set their sights on Africa and started taking the land for themselves. Some people think that people took over African land to civilize the natives, but I think it was mainly to assert their political and economic power. Like in Poisonwood Bible, Nathan claims to want to civilize the African natives, but, as shown with Methuselah and ripping him out of the cage with his big hands, the reader can infer that he mainly just wants to conquer something. In the words of Marlow,"they grabbed what they could get for the sake of what was to be got (Conrad 16)."
ReplyDeleteI like the references to Heart of Darkness and Poisonwood Bible! That's exactly the attitude that so many of the conquerers had; they were greedy and craved power. They were willing to do whatever they had to in order to profit.
DeleteI agree with Emily. The reference to the Heart of Darkness brings to mind the persona of King Leopold who turned the people of The Congo into slaves, to gain more power.
DeleteThis rush occurred mainly because the colonizers sought financial gain through Africa’s exploitation. There is no driving force which compares to the allure of making a quick buck. Africa served as a trick-or-treat basket for the colonizers. Everyone wanted to stick their hand in wherever they could in order to grab some goodies; in this case, the treats were minerals, resources, and free labor. The most significant incentive to colonize a foreign country was the potential to make money. Everyone wants more money. In addition, people wanted to have access to Africa’s resources which were not available in their home countries’. Following this, in colonizing a foreign land for their native country, the colonizers would receive fame and glory. Finally, there was the spreading of religion. The idea of mercenaries trying to spread their religion in order to “help” or “modernize” the Africans, is in essence a giant scam. These mercenaries didn’t care about saving sinners. Their only goal was to selfishly make money and obtain fame. Through declaring that they were attempting to spread Christianity, the mercenaries were able to weasel money out of The Church and gullible believers in order to fund their self-righteous journeys.
ReplyDeleteI really liked your analogy of the trick-or-treat basket in the beginning. It helped express how random and oblivious the Europeans were to the Africans when the started the race for dominance.
DeleteBefore the 1800s, Africa was not entirely dominated by the Europeans. However, in a matter of a few years, everything changed for the natives. The Scramble for Africa was a period of suffering and pain for the natives while it was the richest and the most productive one for the Europeans. During this period of time, Europeans colonized the African continent. I think that the most significant cause for the colonization was the Europeans' hunger for more land because more land means more power. Moreover, another factor that made Africa stand out to the the Europeans was the rich resources Africa had. In the video we watched in class, it was apparent that Africa was rich with resources such as diamonds, ivory, rubber, and more. Such resources attracted the Europeans because they were well aware that such resources would give them more power.
ReplyDeletei like how you bring in a reference to the video that we watched in class today. It shows the many resources that the Europeans could use
DeleteI agree with both you and John. Africa was considered to be an extremely sought after place because it contained such precious resources that Europe could make a lucrative profit off of.
DeleteI believe that rampant nationalism was the primary cause of the rush for Africa. The monarchs, scientists, explorers, and businessmen of the time all took immense pride in their home country, and they believed that the furthering of their country was the greatest goal in life. The brinksmanship that has been attributed to the the great Wars of the 20th Century was festering on the European continent long before the 1900's ever began. The next most powerful factor in the rush for colonization was the Industrial Revolution. As innovation pushed production quotas higher, businesses demanded larger and larger quantities of raw materials. In an effort to offer the best conditions to businesses, countries colonized as much territory as they could in order to offer the largest amounts of raw materials. In addition, controlling valuable resources and land provided European countries leverage against each other in the business world. Last, outright racism on the part of the Europeans can also be blamed. Common thinking at the time put Africans unfortunately on the same level as chimpanzees or gorillas. Europeans who felt they were being philanthropic did not consider the notion of black equality, but rather the idea that blacks were wild animals that had to be trained.
ReplyDeleteThe Scramble for Africa was mainly because of the selfish countries of Europe trying to assert their control by taking as much territory as possible. With this power they wanted to make sure they had the most profitable countries possible. By this I mean the countries with the most resources and laborious forces. They wanted to make the most profit from Africa, and never once considered the people of Africa's feelings. Once one country in Europe began to make a profit from Africa, the other European countries felt the to join in to prevent one country from becoming more dominant than another.
ReplyDeleteDo you think the fight for dominance ever had a winner or was it a pointless fight just out of greed? Honestly did they think there was going to be a clear winner or did they just want MORE.
DeleteYea I totally agree with you that most of these explorations and exploitations took place out of selfishness and greed for power and money.
DeleteI absolutely agree with you. The main reason behind the Scramble for Africa was largely economic and had little to do with spreading Christianity and civilizing the natives, as the Europeans claimed. Countries were mainly concerned with exploiting their African colonies as much as they could to extract raw materials and enrich themselves.
DeleteI agree, with Africa's large well-being it is a HUGE continent. Like in the book, it being a 'blank map' it was uncharted until the Europeans came in. They found out that Africa had many beneficial resources and tried squeezing Africa dry of anything it had.
DeleteThere were multiple factors that led to the “Scramble for Africa”. The nineteenth century was a time of exploration for Europe, and Africa was the place to explore. Africa was transformed from an uncharted, mysterious land, to a land rich in resources that everyone craved a piece of. With the end of the slave trade, Europe sought some other type of trade with Africa. Europe was in the middle of an Industrial Revolution; therefore, raw materials were in high demand, and Africa was full of them. The continent was exploited for its cash crops such as coffee, rubber, and sugar. The Industrial Revolution not only sparked the need for the conquest of Africa, but it also provided the conquerers with the material they needed to take over. Steamboats allowed for easy navigation through the Congo, and an advance in weaponry gave the Europeans a huge advantage over the Congolese people.
ReplyDeleteThe most significant cause of the “scramble for Africa” was the need for raw materials. Raw materials from Africa would aid the thriving Industrial Revolution, and Africa also served as a market for Europe to trade to. This activity would bring profit, which is what people wanted. The most significant cause was the greed of the Europeans. The least significant cause would be Christianity. It was clear that the conquerers were more concerned with bringing themselves benefits rather than civilizing the natives.
Personally, I believe the need for workers were more importanat than the goods because the majority of the countries could grow, mine, or trade for the goods a whole lot easier than they could find strong men.
DeleteI agree with chris's comment. Had Africa had no workers, only resources, Eurpoeans would have been less eager to exploit the resources because they would have had to ship down workers. If Africa had had just workers, the colonizers could have taken advantage of the free labor (and they did, *cough cough* slave trade *cough*).
DeleteThe Scramble of Africa had many factors that led to the event. One main reason of the event was for power. The Europeans wanted control of everything because it gave them power and made them seem like "top dog" to all the other countries around them. Also with this wanting of power, raw materials was on high demand. By colonizing the African countries, European countries would be able to get raw materials for free since they could basically just take the materials from the land. This would help European countries give them a boost in economics and help their country flourish. With the wanting of raw materials, it made the Africans slaves because they were basically free labor. However, it killed many Africans and left them with nothing but distrust towards white people. Africans can no longer trust anyone that comes into their country because they don't know who is going to help them or whio is going to hurt them because both groups of people say what they are going to do will be helpful. All in all, many factors led up to the Scramble of Africa.
ReplyDeleteI agree that much of the reason European colonies participated in the Scramble for Africa was because they wanted prestige. This relates to the King Leopold documentary we watched in class that talked about how some of his first reasons for going into Africa revolved around competing with his neighbors and rivals- Great Britain and Germany.
DeleteThe Scramble for Africa, or the creation of the spheres of influence, is an event that can be attributed to so many factors: the end of the slave trade, mercantilism, capitalism, power thirst... etc Nevertheless, some of these attributes stand out more than others as being the main push behind. In my opinion, the main reason would be the hunger for a market economy. America as a nation thrives because of the vast market economy we have established worldwide. This hunger is seen in the English conquest of native in the Americas. Being able to spread their goods, will bring in more money, ultimately more power. The second reason would be power. During this times of exploration, what really demonstrated the wealth of a nation, was the number of colonies it had in its possession. These European nations eagerly scrambled for Africa to get a taste of that power. The third and almost false reason, is to bring about civilization to this lost people. King Leopold claimed he was bringing civilization to a dark place, but ended up turning the natives into slaves and working them to a point of death.
ReplyDeleteI like how you compare the need for market economy and how you bring in the example of America. It shows that the countries that are stronger get the benefits.
DeleteThe Scramble for Africa (1800-1900) was caused by a variety of reasons. First off, the world was in dire need for workers. Since the west coast of Africa was abolishing slavery, slave traders had to move inland to find their workers. This caused a major part of the exploration in Africa. The next most important cause would be the need for raw goods. Once the country had the workers, it needed something to make the workers work on. They explored Africa for a variety of raw materials. Rubber was one of their biggest finds, for it was the key insulator they needed for all electrical appliances. Subsequently, after this product was made, where would the country sell it? Africa of course! Explorers looked through Africa to find new villages to sell their newly created clothes and inventions to so that they could turn a profit! This continued on until they found a new need. In our world, land is money. So through the help of medical advances, the “white man” no longer had to fear malaria or yellow fever and could chart more land and lay claim to it before other countries. These territories would help evacuate their mainland surplus population, provide raw goods for their factories, and place their military in a strategic position for defense or attack. – Chris Wagner
ReplyDeleteThe Scramble of Africa was such a tragic event for the African people. Many may say there is one reason why this happened or started, but personally I do not think there is one main reason. I believe the Scramble of Africa is a perfect example of the dust bunny effect. It all started with something small and irrelevant to Africa such as economic, social, and military revolution in Europe. This thus caused the Europeans to explore, capitalize, make military advances, get political, and do and/or want many other things. This all caused them to get nosey all up in Africa and cause the famous Scramble of Africa. With that said if it was just one of the said inquiries above there wouldn’t have been a problem, but since each entity kept clumping together it created a huge problem known as the Scramble of Africa. This is how I believe the Scramble of Africa came about and became a problem.
ReplyDeleteIt is my firm belief that the European intrusion into the affairs and cultures of the African continent were based not on some misguided sense of salvation or the spreading of relative "civilization," but the simple need for the economic expansion of said Europeans. While the spread of Christianity and religion in general was a factor in this "Scramble for Africa," it certainly was not the driving force. Nations do not require religion to exist, nor do they need to "enlighten" others with their beliefs on civilization; it is true that these things can contribute to a nation's growth, (as well as the growth of that nation's empire) money has been and always will be the factor that spurs nations into action. For example, as stated in one of those fancy links, the British slave trade had ended - as stated in Wikipedia - in 1807. As the angry German AP Econ teacher would be quick to tell you, after a nation ends an extremely lucrative economic practice, that nation needs to find a suitable alternative as quickly as possible. Naturally, the exploitation of the resources of the African continent as well as its people - not, then, considered overly "wrong" - was seen as a great way for Europeans to supplement their incomes. The "Scramble for Africa" was simply the result of the increased desire for monetary gain by many European countries. I fell asleep ten minutes ago. Goodnight.
ReplyDeleteI like how you point out that the Europeans didn't think it was wrong because it felt like the natural thing to do in order to increase profit. In fact, it is not the act of colonization that we now criticize but the result. We cannon fault a country for wanting to expand its wealth and power, but we can fault it for abusing the poeple and place it colonizes. (I also like how you mention a certain economics teacher :P )
DeleteIn the time period after the slave trade, European countries looked for a new way to expand their wealth and power. Again, they turned to Africa. The original motivation was exploration. With the development of new technologies such as the steam engine and new medicines that fought off African diseases, Europeans such as Henry Stanley could move into the heart of the uncolonized continent. Once there the continent was explored, politics surpassed exploration as a motivation. African Colonies meant power and influence. Countries that had colonies were more respected and generally more powerful than countries that did not. Thus, every major European power wanted its piece. As European nations started to take over the land, they discovered the vast quantity of resources. With this discovery, Capitalism became the most significant motivational factor for African Colonization. And African Colony provided its mother country with raw materials, a market for industrial goods, and a large labor force. These factors guaranteed profit of the colonizers as long as the native population was held under control. This control was made possible by the development of new military advances and restrictions on the sale of new weaponry to Africans. Only slightly less significant than capitalism was the attempted spread of Christianity to the new colonies. Like in Spanish owned Central America many years before, missionaries set out to civilize the natives and introduce them to Christianity. These Missionaries provided incentive for the expansion of commerce by urging the necessity of bringing civilization to the jungle.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your interpretation of the motives behind the "Scramble for Africa." Your bit about Capitalism goes along nicely with what I said about the economic motives.
DeleteI also suspect that you weren't as sleep deprived as myself when you wrote your response. That's always a plus too.
Besides the fact that I agree with Patrick about being sleep deprived, I do agree that originally the Europeans just wanted to explore and discover but that turned into a scavenger hunt for power.
DeleteI like how you added the new found technologies such as the steam boat and guns as mechanisms for the increased colonization and also found it interesting that you saw religion as a vehicle for increased commerce.
DeleteAre you sure that Christianity itself was a legitimate reason the Europeans were trying to go into Africa? It seemed to me like they just skewed the religion to fit their needs, and I personally thought that Europeans were simply using Christianity as a cover for their more pressing capitalistic needs.
DeleteThe most prevalent reason for the Scramble for Africa was the increase in demand for economic resources and profit. Leaders of various countries would do anything to get their hands on profit for them even if it meant terrorizing and taking over a territory for its resources. Also, another reason for the Scramble for Africa was for religious reasons because Christian missionaries wanted to spread their religion (just like in Poisonwood Bible!). Countries would send out missionaries, otherwise known as conquerors to spread the religion but at the same time to seek out resources. The least significant factor seemed to be the want to explore because not many explorers went into Africa willingly. They would go for money but unlike Marlow who really does want to exlpore, many others would not want to be like him.
ReplyDeleteI find ironic that the conquerors had the audacity to call their colonization "evangelism" when the root of Christianity is God's love, not brute force, status, and possessions. Luckily, because you mentioned Poisonwood Bible, the father is a dynamic character who might possibly see the actual light of Christianity rather than what he sees in the beginning of the novel, focusing on the nakedness instead of sharing the Gospel.
DeleteYour connection to Poisonwood Bible was very insightful. The ruthless spreading of one's own religion also demonstrates some of the corruption and tight control thriving in Europe at the time.
DeleteThe Europeans had many reasons to come to Africa. The most important reason for the "scramble for africa" was the resources. The Europeans would do anything so their country could make more money and introduce new resources or more resources to people. The main reason I believe for the exploration of Africa was to gain more land and have more places to find resources. I think that the least important factor was religion. It didnt seem like their main purpose was to spread the religion.
ReplyDeleteYou even see the hunger for land in WW1. No one is content. Africa was a land owned by its own people, but the Europeans saw it as "blank space" to color in with their own name. Luckily, the extent of slavery and oppression did not occur with the Native Americans in that time of 15th century exploration.
DeleteYou pretty much summed up what I also thought were the most and least significant factors for the scramble. I like how you pointed out in your last sentence that religion wasn't really the main purpose. I thought that religion was something for them to use to support the colonization of Africa and some even for, like you said, self gain.
DeleteIf religion was important to them, they would AT LEAST think about the people of Africa and how the European's brutal actions can negatively affect them.
DeleteThe factors that led to the scramble were not necessarily in Africa in the beginning. Muslim traders did not want to give up the use of slaves or the profit that came from the trades. In the beginning of exploration and missionary trips, the people that were sent out only cared about find the city of Timbuktu and what the Niger river’s course was. However, after a century passed they were more interested in finding and recording market goods and resources to give to the philanthropists. The rush occurred because Europe still wanted more which in turn turned their interests into making a monopoly. I would rank the causes as least important being Europe wanting to record the goods and resources for the philanthropists to the most significant being Europe wanting a monopoly with the colonies in Africa.
ReplyDeleteI see the Europeans in the Scramble for Africa in a constant of discontent. It's still a problem we have now in first world countries. People are in a state of competition, wanting to be the richest, to the point that they can exploit other people to get what they want. Africa provided raw materials and a way to brag about having more land (probably rising their economic status). I've read that the colonist wanted to own African lands to evangelize Christianity, but the heart of Christianity is love. Most of the conquerors were plagued by selfishness and discontent that enslaved the Africans. All the hatred toward the Africans flooded over from the termination of African Slave trade. The conquerors were those who couldn't give up the idea of enslavement. Military innovations weren't as important unless it was to "control" the workers and instill fear.
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting that you said the heart of Christianity was love and I can see what you mean by that. Indeed, the conquerors were selfish and I feel that evangelizing was sort of an excuse or an insidious opening for some of them to get into Africa with "good intentions" when really they had more self-centered desires of getting benefits from the land, resources, and labor/slavery rather than actually helping the Africans.
DeleteWith the end of slavery, The Europeans needed workers and resources for those workers to use. This was all for the benefit of power-hungry Europe, while the people of Africa were used and not able to benefit off of the work that they had to do. The scramble was caused by the need for the numerous resources that Africa could provide, while not having to use their own people for these jobs. Medicine was also plentiful due to the many plants that can be found in Africa. Though religion could have been one of the reasons why the Europeans started to look into Africa, it certainly was not one of the main reasons. There was no reason to spread their beliefs onto the people when all that they wanted was to exploit the country. Also the fight for the many territories made the different European countries power-hungry, so there was dispute over which land was theirs. This was significant because countries would randomly start to take up land without thinking about what it would do to the people.
ReplyDeleteI agree, I don't think religion was a key factor in the start of the scramble. in fact, I think religion was least important. Their greed and selfish intent for Africa's resources is one of the main causes. They wanted to profit and with this knowledge of abundant resources burgeoning throughout Africa, they would do so by any means necessary...even if that meant torturing others.
DeleteI feel that the major reasons for the Scramble for Africa will differ between sources because of each country and leader who fought for the continent and their territories want to be perceived in a positive light. I think the first major cause of the Scramble for Africa was that European countries and rulers wanted to colonize and make as much profit as possible with no regard for the Africans and their specific tribes. I think Henry Stanley also played a large role because he was the first explorer to venture to Africa and begin exploitation. I think that ending the slave trade followed, but the effort was not always carried through because there was a need for the Africans to be used as slaves and exploited so that the Europeans could make a profit. Lastly, I think that religion played the smallest role because even if people were attempting to bring their religion to Africa, it was usually forced (like in Poisonwood Bible) and the natives did not accept it. Also, many conquerors who were claiming to "spread religion" were not practicing what the taught and exploited the Africans, thus making religion a smaller aspect of the Scramble for Africa.
ReplyDeleteI like how you included the idea of forced culture changes in the form of religion that the natives just did not accept.
DeleteThe Scramble for Africa was instigated by reasons including the end of the slave trade and the European thirst for exploration. However, in spite of the fact that several colonizers justified their journeys as philanthropic with solely the objective of bringing civilization and Christianity to the "savages," the main factor for European interest in Africa was economic. As can be seen in the links, European countries demanded raw materials and needed markets to sell finished products to, needs that could be met with the establishmnent of colonies. King Leopold, for example, extracted tons of raw materials from his colony in Zaire- materials such as ivory, rubber, gold, and tin- with the objective of enriching Belgium to the status of its counterparts, Great Britain and Germany. The lowest ranked reason for the Scramble is ironically the one the countries championed the most: missionary work. While some Africans were introduced to Christianity as a result of colonization, this was of least importance to the European leaders that divided up the "blank continent," as Conrad puts it, creating territories for themselves with no regard to the natives upon whose land they were trespassing.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with the point you made about their justification of motives. The European nations made a notable effort in trying to cover up the fact that the colonization was totally driven by the desire for profit.
DeleteAt first curiosity was what sparked the "scramble for Africa", but other factors rapidly became new interests for Europeans on mostly for selfish reasons. The most significant factor was merely for economic and self gain/benefit. As people started to take notice of Africa, people thought of its value more and thus the race began for the gain and ownership of land, resources, and etc. Africa was bountiful of valuable resources such as rubber and ivory that led many greedy people to come up for grabs and profit from it. There were also other factors that did have a part in leading the scramble; civilization and conformity was some of the reasons that some people used to support the colonizing and exploring of Africa. Some people thought that the people of Africa was "uncivilized" and therefore needed religion (Christianity) and industrial progress to become "civilized". Though it seemed that the Europeans were trying to help the Africans, most of the time that was not the case. They turned a blind eye to the culture and the Africans' way of living by only having the narrow-mindedness of seeing through their own perspective of what "civilization" meant and forcing their own definition on the Africans.
ReplyDeleteI agree, people would do anything to get money/be rich. They think about themselves only, not the poor people who are working their butts off trying to stay alive.
DeleteI also agree with Michelle in that even though the European countries were curious about what was in Africa, they still wanted the economic gains from the countries they exploited.
DeleteThis comment is similar to my own. Because of Europe's greed for money, power, and resources, they needed to exploit Africa for their personal economic gain.
DeleteThe scramble for Africa, occurring from 1880 to 1900, was instigated through a wide varitey of purposes. The most striking reason for this period of rapid colonization was capitalism. The Europeans working to colonize these regions were selfish and greedy and were only interested in Africa for the resources it had to offer, not the people and culture thriving in it. Exploration was another strong force driving this period. People's curiousity about the uncharted would was growing quickly and several groups were sent out of Europe and into Africa to learn more about it and gain cultural knowledge about the continent as a whole. The spread of Christianity was also a defining force in this race for colonization.
ReplyDeleteI agree, capitalism was a major reason. The raw material in Africa did cause Europeans to colonize the continent. And I believe that the spread of Christianity had little to do with the Scramble of Africa.
DeleteI agree the European countries were greedy for Africa's resources which led to a race. I never gave much thought to Christianity being a driving force for the colonization. I always believed it was an afterthought to the capitalism.
DeleteThe Europeans definitely were greedy and selfish; they only wanted to benefit themselves, ignoring the consequences of forcing natives to be workers and depleting natives' resources.: death.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that there were multiple driving forces behind the motivation of European nations' scramble for Africa. Henry Morton Stanley's exploration of Africa was a major contributing factor in that it made the continent of Africa accessible, thus turning colonization into a conventional and realistic plan. The ending of slave trade led something to be desired in that it destroyed a once highly profitable market. European nations soon started desperately looking for alternatives in raking in profits. This is why they turned to Africa. However, the root cause of the scramble lies in the spirit of competition itself. The fact that a few European nations began laying claims in Africa started other nations to follow so as to not be left behind or not miss a profitable opportunity. Much like the space race in the 60's and 70's, the scramble for Africa is a result of nations' fears of being left out of an extremely valuable market.
ReplyDeleteWow, I would have never been able to draw the comparison between the Scramble for Africa and the space race. I agree that the motives behind both are the same: "the spirit of competition," as you call it.
DeleteYes, extremely interesting analogy! Do you think this economic fear of falling behind other nations could have possibly contributed to World War I?
DeleteDue to Africa's rich abundance of raw materials, it was highly sought out and fought over with the Europeans. Africa used to be an uncharted territory which no one wanted to go to. Europeans had their own colonies and dared not to touch Africa. The moment they found out at the maximized profits they could receive from their raw materials, countries flocked to Africa to get the best of the best. Harsh labor and queer punishments occurred. Countries strived to be better and richer than anyone else. They wanted the absolute power. Industrialism plays a huge role. Not only are the Europeans getting benefits from Africa, they are also rapidly evolving via technology wise. They took advantage of everything the Africans had and even made them work. No slave trade my butt. Africans died from exhaustion and torture. Tribes were pitted against each other as Europeans claimed random pieces of land, combining various tribes together without much thought.
ReplyDeleteI agree, if Africa's resources were unknown to other countries, then I don't think the Europeans would have been so fond of the resources to the extent that they would want to exploit.
DeleteHi Kelsey! So what you're arguing is that the abundance of resources in Africa or Europe's insatiable desire for such resources is the most influential cause of the Africa Scramble? I agree, somewhat. The Berlin Conference is what caused such a huge mess of Africa's borders that has caused wars even today, and it was all because Europe spent a few days carving up the land based off who wanted what monopoly.
DeleteI agree that countries only care about themselves and how powerful they are in the world. They are full of greed that they are blinded in how negatively they affect Africans. They don't even care who's land this is initially, and only care about how they can employ theses resources to obtain more power and advance.
DeleteI think The Scramble for Africa began with the fact that Africa was supplied with many resources.The Europeans weren't concerned about the people, but rather the materials that the land provided. So this was the main key factor as to why they even began exploitation and "civilizing". The second factor that I think led to the Scramble for Africa was greed (financial increase and wealth). Once the Europeans found out about the many resources that Africa contained, they immediately begun thinking about their own personal benefits and self profit that they could gain from Africa (i.e. King Leopold). And lastly, I think that Henry Stanley's exploitation of Africa is a key factor that led to the scramble. His influence and great power that he held over the African people was the lead-way needed to boost the esteem and absolute confidence of King Leopold to send his representatives over in pursuit of profit.
ReplyDeleteYour argument concerning Stanley made me rethink my position. You're absolutely right -- if Stanley failed, I don't think Leopold would have attempted to colonize Congo.
DeleteThe reason why the Scramble of Africa happened includes the end of the slave trade and the desire of the Europeans to explore and conquer. However, many different European rulers tried to justify their journeys as humanitarian like King Leopold, and explained their goal is to bring civilization and the religion of Christianity to the people of Africa even though the reason for European interest in Africa was to raise and support their own economy. As shown by the links,the European countries wanted raw materials in order to sell the many demanded luxury products. These demands could be met with the settlement of colonies in Africa. For example, King Leopold overworked many natives from his colony in the Congo in order to receive materials such as ivory and rubber so that he could make Belgium rise up to the status of other European countries like Great Britain. The lowest ranked reason would probably be the one that conquerors would use the most as an excuse to explore: missionary work. While some Africans did convert to Christianity, the Europeans didn't really care about the religion of the natives so long as they worked
ReplyDeleteI agree! The end of the slave trade was a big factor that caused the scramble for Africa. Raw materials were exploited and sent to Europe to be manufactured. And the lowest ranked would be mission work. That just developed as a result of colonization.
DeleteWhile several factors contributed to the Scramble for Africa, nothing accounts for it as much as capitalism does. The need for a market for European goods (preferably a monopolized one), coupled with the desire for cheap raw materials for Europe's burgeoning industry drove Europeans to scramble for colonies in Africa.
ReplyDeleteAnother factor that caused the Scramble for Africa was the prevalence of the sense of cultural superiority (which, ironically, only proved that such Europeans were profoundly culturally ignorant) in European societies at the time. Although African slavery was more humane than its brutal European counterpart, Europeans felt the need to "save" those fantastic slaves and spread its "superior" religion of Christianity. Such societal attitudes enabled and justified European colonization by presenting exploitation as "attempts to civilize Africans." Neither abolitionism or Christianity itself is wholly responsible for colonialism. Nevertheless, I believe that the overzealous abolitionists who, in their cultural ignorance, focused more on saving slaves in distant lands and the institutionalized churches that remained silent should be held accountable.
As horrific as his crimes were, Henry Morton Stanley was probably the least important factor in the Scramble for Africa. Had he not gone into Congo, another explorer would have, especially considering the explosion of European exploration due to medical advances.
*"Neither abolitionism nor Christianity"
DeleteGood arguments. I agree that Stanley is of little importance under the given situations. After all, if it hadn't been him, it would've just been a differently name printed in our textbooks. Other explorers may not have caused as many issues, but Europe would hear of their findings and shift their justifications to fit the new mold.
DeleteThe Scramble for Africa can mostly be attributed to shrinking continental markets and also a decrease in overall balances of trade. As countries like Great Britain underwent increased industrialization during this period, they were also faced with somewhat decreased balances of trade as they were shortchanged of the raw materials once available, so Africa served as a medium for obtaining such materials. Additionally, the European countries saw Africa as a power play and means to gain additional profits as the more colonies you had the bigger your place as a world power. Lastly, the scramble of Africa can be attributed to a false sense of moral obligation as it was their "duty" to help the Africans be saved and bring them to the light of Christianity. So, as the list implies greed and the prospects of profit are the primary motives in almost every colonizing effort.
ReplyDeleteCompetition, greed, and status stimulate countries to obtain all of the resources they possibly can in order to advance and industrialize more than any other country. To the countries, advancement and industrialization is a competition – a game. To win, a country must conquer the most land, increase in wealth, technology, etc; however, occasionally, they cheat, manipulate, or deceive in order to do so. Europe’s journey to Africa for resources was based on greed and the desire to be number one in the country, which they were. Even with the industrial revolution, labor, and military, Europe had it all but was never satisfied. Religion was the least important factor in motivating the Europeans for colonization. I believe that they solely took advantage of “Christianity” to get what they want. They twisted the words from the Bible in order to make Africa a market of slaves. If Africa was an important factor, then there would have been a compromise that would make both Africa and Europeans happy.
ReplyDeleteThe Scramble for Africa were caused for several reasons, although the most important reason was the demand of raw materials. The industrial revolution had began and European countries needed resources: human, capital, and natural. The most important factor was the need for raw material, and Africa could supply this. There was mineral exploitation, large agricultural production, and small scale agricultural production.The second important factor was the end to the slave trade. Europe had to find a way to exploit Africa once more, now economically.The third reason is politics. As Europe's super powers were growing also was the need for smaller nations to stake claim to power in Europe. Countries, such as Belgium, did this by colonizing Africa. They gained power and respect in Europe for colonization. These powers rushed into Africa to take part in this scramble and paid no regard to the people living there. They drew up borders that split tribes apart, and hurt the civilizations that lived there. The fourth reason was the advancements. Europeans were scared to go to Africa because of malaria and yellow fever. but once a way to immunize yourself came, explorers came running.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that demand for raw materials and politics played the largest factors in the cololnizing of Africa. I liked your connection to the end of the slave trade. You made a good point in saying Europe needed a way to control Africa since the slave trade was no longer an option.
DeleteThe main reason for the quest and Scramble for Africa was the demand of raw materials. As the Slave Trade came to an end and the Industrial Revolution began, countries believed the best way to becoming the most powerful would be to control the world's resources. To them, colonizing Africa was an economic investment. Likewise, the need for world power and domination comes from a political aspect. European countries needed to retain their power, as much of the rest of the world was just forming. More Land equals more money and resources which in turn equals more power. What I believe to be the least significant factor in the colonization of Africa was curiousity to travel uncharted land. Although this curiousity did exist in many explorers that European countries would send to Africa, the leaders of the colonizing countries were more interested in what the African countries had to offer rather than simply discovering new lands.
ReplyDeleteMultiple factors, some more urgent and damaging than others, attributed to the consumption of Africa through European colonization and conquering. The most harmful was Europe's resource deficiency, which only became a problem once the Industrial Revolution started to skyrocket the demand for resources to make products and weapons. Due to this, European countries ravaged the poorer, more resource-rich Africa to feed the hungry monster of Industrialization. After they consumed Africa to swindle it's natural bounty, the need for markets is the most damaging cause. Because of all the resources the colonies were bringing in, Europe's production grew exponentially; just as they had few resources, European countries began to run out of consumers. Just like the forced consumption of Britain and colonial America, Europeans shoved their surplus onto their colonies, forcing the starved and weak people to consume when their people couldn't. The least effective would be weaponry, as the Europeans would have made more effective arms without the colonization of Africa, and the only effect it had was giving the Europeans a marginally better chance in combat against armed African tribes.
ReplyDeleteAs the second article and many others have stated, the Scramble for Africa was first and foremost about getting ahead. Following the Industrial Revolution, many countries had demand far exceeding their supply of these new goods. Machines could work faster, people had more money to spend, but there was simply not enough raw material. As seen in the King Leopold documentary, he turned to rubber in Africa in order to fuel those back home. It was the economic incentive above all else. Following this need, the want to overpower those that they saw less than human was interjected. As seen in the novel, many did not regard the Africans as people and therefore saw nothing over taking over the foreign lands in the name of their ruler. Nevertheless, the least important of these intentions of the Europeans was that of conversion to Christianity. While extremely important to some with potentially good intentions to simply aid those in need, the lack of understanding of the culture of the natives only led to further discord and distrust of the white man. In addition, many simply used the notion of religion and philanthropy to enter into Africa without trouble as seen through King Leopold. Those with true intentions got lost in the shroud of subterfuge.
ReplyDeleteThe absolute most important reason for the European colonization of Africa was for raw materials- much for the same reason Europeans drove out the Native Americans to fuel the economically favorable conditions that mercantilism brought them. The Second Industrial Revolution had just started at this point in time, so a growing need for minerals, metals, an increased food production (sugar, tea, coffee), and other resources fueled a parallel need to Africa. The second most important reason for colonization was the European belief that their culture was superior to the African tribes', and it would be more beneficial to bring progress and civilization to them. This mindset is seen in the works of people like Rudyard Kipling in his ever-well-written poetry about the "White Man's Burden." Furthermore, because the Europeans had no regard to the native African cultures, they drew up quite terrible border lines which split up tribes and lumped enemy tribes in the same country. These borders have not been changed by a lot, which is why there are still so many political issues in Africa today (e.g., the Rwandan genocide). Interestingly enough, the same thing was happening in America with the concept of Manifest Destiny and heading west to expand the country (read: driving out the Native Americans). The European reaction to the end of the legal slave trade also manifested through colonization; while the Europeans were still technically not engaging in a widespread international slave trade, obviously they found an excellent cover through the guise of colonization. This way, they could still have "labor workers" (which they "saved" from the evils of domestic slavery enforced by Africans) who function just like slaves but without the stigma of the name. Finally, Christianity was the least important reason for the Scramble. Yes, many missionaries cam over to Africa misleadingly believing that they needed to completely change the natives to save their poor souls, and yes, the Price father is a nasty piece of work. But one must keep in mind that the religion was taken out of context and was used only as a cover for capitalistic reasons.
ReplyDeleteMany factors played into the "Scramble of Africa," however, the main reason among the three sources is the resources that Africa had. The Europeans (England, France, Spain, and Belgium) needed to find a way to find resources because they did not have much (Europe was poor in resources); Therefore, they had to exploit Africa for its resources for their own growing countries, disregarding all the natives they would injure and kill. This gain in resources would allow their economies to exponentially boom. On the other hand, the least significant factor for the "Scramble for Africa" is the desire to explore and uncover Africa. Many Europeans fall under this factor like Stanley: King Leopold funded him for an exploration and a science experiment, but, instead, he worked for the king to attempt to gain all the raw materials in Africa by means of trade, brute force, or documents the African tribes could not read.
ReplyDeleteI think the most significant reason for the scramble for Africa started because of the raw minerals they had such as ivory, gold, rubber, etc. This led to explorers to travel to Africa for the minerals. Which in effect caused Stanley to be hired by King Leopold II to obtain treaties with the local chiefs to create his (King Leopold II) own colony. I think the least significant event that caused the scramble for Africa was to civilize and bring Christianity into the outside world because the motive wasn't to civilize the African natives but more to enslave them.
ReplyDeleteA gambling guide - DrmCD
ReplyDeleteA 김제 출장마사지 gambling guide. We can help 남양주 출장마사지 you find the 양산 출장샵 games with the best prices and the best bonuses. 거제 출장샵 All gambling sites provide a comprehensive list of all Rating: 3.8 · 6 대구광역 출장안마 reviews