The latter stages of this British dominance (1815-1871) is referred to as Pax Britannica, a peaceful period where there was broad co-operation between Europe’s great powers. This agreement between countries was referred to as the Concert of Europe, which was to maintain the peace settlement made at the congress of Vienna following the Franco-Prussian war. It is essentially the breakdown of this balance which gave rise to new imperialism (www.nationmaster.com).
The shift towards colonial expansion and the increased competition from countries such as Germany and United States, which typified the new imperialism, was accelerated by the events known as the long depression (1873-1896). This was a prolonged period of price deflation, business turndown and the decline of free trade among Europe’s powers (www.nationmaster.com).
The events, conflicts, attitudes and conditioning which flourished during this era finally resulted in the conditions for the Great War of 1914-1918, which can be thought of as the end of the era of new imperialism.
In order to understand and explain the events of the new imperialist era it is important to describe the change in the balance of power between Britain and Europe.
As countries such as Germany and United States began to industrialise Britain’s advantage diminished and Britain’s share of the world trade fell from a quarter in 1880 to a sixth in 1913 (Brown, 1972).
The development of steam shipping and economic transport brought United States and Japan into European markets. Competition for markets led to rapidly increasing expansion and the powerful countries had to look outside themselves for markets, raw materials and labour. The main target of this new imperialist expansion was Africa. What resulted from this drive for new territories is referred to as the ‘scramble for Africa’, where other less powerful countries such as Spain, Portugal, Belgium and Italy joined in the race to colonise the countries of Africa. Areas previously considered open to British trade and influence were taken under direct control of other countries. This process took place in other parts of the world with for instance the United States controlling Hawaii and the Philippines and Japan controlling Korea and Taiwan (www.nationmaster.com).
Europe’s power and wealth grew as the colonised countries were exploited and new markets for produced goods were protected. Military power was also consolidated with the prizes of Empire being the supply of soldiery (Kiernan, 1995).
The events which took place during this era of expansion are open to many interpretations and forms of explanations. When looked at in terms of a political and economic system, different and often conflicting theories can be used to explain its development.
Many theories and literature link imperialism to capitalism. Capitalism, that is the process where capital is invested in production, can be thought to have begun in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Kiernan, 1995).
Thus it is evident that imperialism is especially relevant to the Marxist theory, which sees new imperialism as the economic and political dominance of monopolistic finance capital in the most advanced countries and the control of the means of production in the less developed regions (www.nationmaster.com).
Marxists use new imperialism to describe and explain the spread of British and later European capital throughout the world (Brown, 1972).
Lenin is one of the key Marxist theorists who emphasised the connection between imperialism and capitalism. According to Lenin “imperialism is due to capitalism, and when capitalism is removed, by the abolition of private property over the means of production, distribution and exchange, imperialism must cease to exist” (Seton-Watson, 1961 pg 9). It has been argued however, that this a far too narrow conception of imperialism as there was domination and exploitation of one nation by another before the age of capitalism and there is dominance of countries where there is no capitalism (Seton-Watson, 1961).
Furthermore Schumpter and Langer claim that imperialism is not driven by capitalism and is supported by non-capitalist factors and psychological ingredients (Wright, 1961).
The development of new imperialism has also been explained in terms of Accumulation Theory and World Systems Theory.
The Accumulation Theory is largely conceived by Hobson and later, Lenin. This theory centres on the accumulation of surplus capital during and after the industrial revolution. Both Hobson and Lenin linked the problem of shrinking continental markets driving European capital overseas to an adequate distribution of wealth in industrial Europe. The Accumulation Theory suggested that capitalism suffered from under consumption due to the rise of monopoly capitalism and the resultant concentration of wealth in fewer hands, which gave rise to the misdistribution of purchasing power. (www.nationmaster.com).
Hobson’s theory has been criticised by many who argue that his theory fails to explain colonial expansion on the part of less developed industrialised nations with little surplus capital such as Italy (www.nationmaster.com).
Immanuel Wallerstein addresses the counter arguments to Hobson’s theory without degrading his underlying inferences.
Hobson’s theory is useful on explaining the role of over-accumulation in overseas and colonial expansionism while Wallerstein’s World Systems Theory better explains the dynamic of inter-capitalist competition (Kiernan, 1995).
Even when political and economic arguments are accepted there are many questions about the nature of imperialism, the use of force, exploitation and oppression, which need answers.
Beliefs and attitudes of the colonisers and the colonised had to be shaped to accept the process. The idea of colonial expansion as a “civilising mission” along with the idea of a natural process or “survival of the fittest” were powerful means to this end.
A divided Europe was able to recognise itself most clearly by contrast with the outside world. It saw itself as civilisation confronting Barbarianism (Kiernan, 1995).
The ideas of civilisation and religion were closely linked. Often the representatives of the colonisers were religious missionaries working amongst the people in the colonies. Often colonisers met with so little resistance that they would believe that their presence was welcome although many events such as the Indian Mutiny would show otherwise. When faced with growing unrest and resistance, colonisers were compelled to feel even more superior and resorted to racialist claims and as the nineteenth century went on the civilising mission became an article of faith (Kiernan, 1995).
Closely linked to the idea of civilising mission is the idea of the “survival of the fittest”. Darwin’s theory of evolution could be interpreted in ways which justified imperialism, this became known as Social Darwinism.
The concept of higher and lower races justified the greed and methods used to gain wealth and power. Kipling described imperialism as the “white man’s burden” (Kiernan, 1978).
The racist, supremacist and distorted attitudes and beliefs, so necessary for the development of new imperialism went hand in hand with the rise in nationalism. This coupled with white man’s accumulated pride in
From this essay it is evident that there are many ways of looking at and different theories to explain new imperialism.
This essay shows that the period 1870-1914 saw the development of a different kind of imperialism, one with ruthlessness driven by increased competition. Imperialist advances which created huge changes to the social and political systems is a relatively brief period. The same forces and attitudes are leading social and political changes today. This can be identified in the recent war on Iraq.
This essay explains new imperialism in terms of the balance of power between Britain and Europe. It is evident that Britain’s position was central. It is not unusual then, that British society, class system and culture are heavily influenced by this period.
Explaining new imperialism as a political and economic system is the area in which there is the most confusion and debate. Despite some who argue otherwise, there is much evidence to suggest that it was capitalist tendencies which led to new imperialism.
Finally the idea of imperialism as a civilising mission involves the idea of oppression and exploitation. The behaviour during the era of new imperialism was so in human that a cover story was needed. This was needed in order to convince people that what was happening was acceptable.
It is visible that new imperialism occurred as a result of previous conditions, of which the influence can be seen in present day.
References
Brown, M. B. (1972) Essays on Imperialism. Spokesman Books
Kiernan, V. G. (1995) Imperialism and its Contradictions. Routledge
Kiernan, V. G. (1978) America: The New Imperialism. Zed Press
Said, E. (1993) Culture and Imperialism. Chatto & Windus
Seton-Watson, H. The New Imperialism. The Bodley Head
Wright, M. (1961) The ‘New Imperialism’. D.C. Heath and Company