Wooooooow. Talk about power hungry. As if the takeover of the Americas wasn’t enough in the 16th and 17th century, a second wave of European conquests occurred between 1750s and 1900s. Though the later race involved different competitors and different countries of interests, the theme of power and colonial rule still parallel.
The text hardly speaks of the Asian countries of colonial empiricism, but instead that the Europeans sought more of the African countries. Map 20.2’s caption states that by the early 1900s, all the different parts of Africa were conquered by different European countries: France, Britain, Germany, Italy, among others.
On page 594, under Under European Rule, it says, “In many places, incorporation into European colonial empires was a traumatic experience. Especially for small-scale societies, the loss of life, homes, cattle, crops, and land could be devastating.” Could be? In what ways would it not be devastating? How can losing your home and land be a good thing? The most disturbing part of this chapter is the image on page 600. The young boys have lost their hands, not as a direct effect of forced labor, but as a crude punishment for not obtaining an abundance of materials that the Europeans ordered. They have no footwear; the boy on the left doesn’t even have a shirt on. It seems like the body of the boy on the left has developed improperly, which could have been an effect of the forced labor he was put through.
It is hard to believe, but some good did result from these colonial encounters. One of these benefits was education. More opportunities of literacy were available via missionary and government schools. And these opportunities gave access to actual jobs, like government bureaucracies and business firms, versus the horridness forced labor. Having the abilities to read and write gave people higher social statuses compared to those that were not literate.
The textbook implies that the natives became literate in the European languages, French, or English. Why hadn’t the Westerners also encouraged literacy of native African languages? Also, what if the reverse occurred in terms of colonial rule: What if it had been the Africans and Asians who colonized the European countries? Would Europeans be speaking Asian and/or African languages? Now that would be interesting. English is spoken almost everywhere, like a universal language. It may not be the primary language for every country, but when translations are given in foreign countries, an English one is most likely to be given. I don’t think you can expect a Japanese translation in an African country (unless of course, there is a Japanese tourist attraction). With that said, imagine if the “universal language” was Swahili? Or Vietnamese? Or Arabic?
No comments:
Post a Comment