Essay 5

The motivation behind the European conquest of African land was largely economical. Based on this week’s readings on European imperialism, I feel that Rodney’s explanation on the subject, which was planned and determined, is more likely the truth than the spontaneous argument that Robinson and Gallagher provide.
“Imperialism was not so popular in Europe that tax-payers, who were also voters, were ready to pay its bills” (Roberts, 26). European trade in Africa was dropping drastically by the time the 20th century arrose. During the war, it was obvious how dependent African imports Europe came to be. The nation saw conquest as a necessity for their economic survival. Whites did first plan to settle in certain areas throughout Africa, yet opposition in Africa made them change their plans.
In his essay, McKenzie asks the important question, “Why that, after several centuries of nibbling at the edges of Africa, Europeans suddenly rushed in to establish direct military and political control over almost the entire continent?” (McKenzie, p 11). As the writer continues to educate the reader that there is no answer, at least not a simple one, to this question. J.M. does, however, agree that the resources in Africa were an extremely important part of economic status during this time. “Africa was beginning to be important for the commodities it could supply directly to Europe” (McKenzie, p 13). European exploration had started, and it was a nation-wide struggle for power and possession.
Europe wished to restrict the participation that Africans could have. Germany, for example, may have believed in Africans having an education, yet the topic of citizenship and the right to vote was never brought up. Middle class blacks were eventually granted certain rights through European eyes, yet the policy still remained that civilization was the deciding issue of political rights, not race. All three essays use such terms as “Parliamentary approval”, “budgets”, “economic strategies”, and “grants in aid” throughout them.