Although imperialism has not been being given the attention it deserves by the media and academicians, it has remained to be one of the most powerful forces on the earth for the last five centuries. Struggle for economic power and political satisfaction has been the force behind the spirit of imperialism. Superpowers have conquered even continents in the face of the earth. The rise of Britain, France, Italy, Portugal and many other countries can be attributed to the economic advantage they got from their colonies through imperialism. Terms like commonwealth, territories, dominions, and provinces have been used indirectly referring to imperial colonies of the superpowers and other colonizing powers. This paper looks at imperialism as it is, discussing the theories of imperialism, as well as the evolution of the theories of imperialism.

Imperialism is the process by which the labor, markets, raw materials and the land of a people are expropriated by a politically dominant nation or country for economic gain. Enrichment rather than any help to the conquered nation is the main interest of the superpower that is colonizing a nation.

Imperialism started as a form of western civilization in the continent of Europe. Ireland was the first country to be colonized as a part of what came to be known as the British Empire. The Germans also, for example started practicing imperialism with the invasion of the Nazi where they exploited the people and even plundered resources. Hobson (35) argues that imperialism was so painful to the colonized, that they had of struggle and fight so hard in order to recover their al9ienated land. Hobson introduces the concept of nationalism, internationalism and colonialism as they relate to imperialism. The superpowers had colonies in almost all the parts of the world. For example, Britain had colonies in America, Asia, and Africa and in Europe itself. It was an international power. Its policies were and implemented in the whole world. Germany was not left behind. It had colonies in the whole world too.Italy and France followed suit.

Hobson (35) asserts that the term nationalism was used disgustingly to refer the freedom of the oppressed states. The states considered themselves colonized. He gives examples of the PanSlavist movement in Russia and the case of Italy as areas where nationalism was enlarging day by day and was operating like a centralizing force.

The peak of imperialism can be traced back to the 19^th century, during the time in which the scramble for Africa, Asia and Latin America happened. North America, Japanese and European imperial powers directed their interests in these continents with a lot of force. These new lands were seen as areas of new opportunities. They were considered new markets for manufactured goods, as well as sources for raw materials and slaves for industries. Towards the beginning of the twentieth century, these superpowers had already established their chain of exportation with the colonies. They could export machinery and other goods in form of loans, technology and investments. Hobson notes that the superpowers developed rapidly due the advantage of acquiring raw materials from the colonies (25). For example, in 1870, the United States, Germany and Belgium experienced advancement with great rapidity. The interest of the superpowers was growing day to day, because there was continual production of manufactured goods in their mother countries. Considering they had surplus, they considered the colonies the best places for marketing the goods and, therefore; the ignition to colonize was re-awakened.

The superpowers were competing against each other for colonies. According to Hobson (25), the Great Britain came up with a slogan of protectionism f its colonies in order to safeguard them from the other colonizing partners. Colonies were thus made protectorates of Great Britain through annexation. The superpowers went ahead to adopt imperialism even as a political policy. The zeal to look for new places for investments and new markets for manufactured goods was the force behind the motivation. Hobson observes that, by adopting imperialism, these nations would have gotten a way of dealing with their superfluous capital (26).the industrial revolution which had taken place in these developed nations long before, was the foundation behind their surplus capital. There were more and more manufacturers, more new advancements and thus, people had to use their government to secure a market for them. For protection in the new markets, the manufacturers had to depend on their governments.The taproot of imperialism was formed by an imbalance situation in the imperial powers where they found themselves having more goods than can be consumed by their populations. Every part of these nations seemed to have excessive powers of production. There was excessive capital for investment. There was limited space for investment. Presenting new markets and opportunities for investments was the best gift the government of the day could have offered to these manufacturers.

The passion to spread western civilization and convert peoples worldwide to hold into this ideology far outweighed economic considerations in the interest of governments, in their intervention to the process of civilization (Mill 1). Also, the sociological view of removing people from the most populated towns and distributing them was at the hearts of governments. The towns in the imperial powers were overpopulated. At the same time, the developing continents like Africa didn’t even have towns apart from some historical towns like Cairo. It was, therefore, logical to distribute the populations. The people in these developing countries would not just marry this idea. They would resist it by all means. So, imperialism had to be used. Protectionist policies also had to be applied. The governments, thus, justified themselves as dealing with the interests of the human race in the world. In other words, the government considered that they were relieving one labor market, in order to supply another.Another perspective of looking at imperialism was that, the new countries, or the countries of the developing continents, had a very high demand in everything (Mill 2). They needed skilled labor. They needed technology. Goods and services were scares in these countries. On the other hand, supply was in abundance in the imperial countries. Balancing this scenario seemed logical. Colonization seemed the only way out. Since the developing countries were not just going to accept to be colonized,imperialism was the best approach. The imperial nations thus had already calculated their plan even as they moved in to colonize.

Mill observes that emigration was another factor that encouraged governments to venture into new lands. Missionaries had already toured the new lands and could provide information to the government about the situation in the new lands. According to Mill (2), even though emigrants had a little impact since they were few, they added to the targets of numbers by the governments. Some of the emigrants had skilled labor that government needed and so, the government relied on them to establish colonies. Mill further argues that the contribution of the emigrants went a long way in convincing the locals that colonization was advantageous to them (3). This is because they had already established contacts with the locals and even mustered the local language. Due to this fact, some of the emigrants were used by the governments as their officials in the colonies. The served the interests of the governments while at the same time they enjoyed a cordial relationships with the locals.

Land is the most important natural resource. Land was at the center of imperialism. The colonies or the imperial powers were faced with the question of raising money for the colony. Mill (3)asserts that one a mister Wakefield proposed the policy of putting all unoccupied land into in to a price. Getting the land from the locals was not going to be easy. Resistances were to be witnessed. Imperialism was the only way out for the colonizers. The governments of the imperial powers were ready to counter the resistances, rather than lose the expected labor, land, markets and investment opportunities. These governments, therefore, had to set policies that would enable them acquire land with ease. Emigrants were sponsored and given stipends. The aim here was to establish a system of a self-sustaining colony, and apart from this, a colony that will be feeding the mother country.

Furtherance of their system of education was a strategy that the colonial powers were using in order to promote their interests (Macaulay 3). The colonial powers were competing to spread their ideologies to the third world countries. The more colonies a super power had, the more powerful it was. An example is India where the natives enrolled in the education system of the British with a view to saving their country from imperialism at some time. Macaulay argues that the colonial powers worried that they could not directly calculate the benefits that they could get from educating the natives, but that education was advantageous in future dealings with the natives. Although the colonial powers introduced education to the natives, there was a lot of discrimination in the way this education was provided. Africans, for example, in the African continent, were the last to be considered for positions in the schools. Schools were established along racial lines where Africans were the lowest.

The economic revolution that took place in most of the European countries at almost the same period greatly affected the agenda of imperialism. Lugard (70) observes that when the consumers of goods and services became their economic rivals, they had no option but to look for new markets. Hostile tariffs and high rates of dependency, also, had discouraged the manufacturers from marketing their goods in the developed countries. The option of spending little of their capital to establish new markets was explored. The investors themselves were ready to cooperate with the governments in order to propel the agenda. The imperialists were, through such notions, made to believe that with time, the colonies will realize huge returns, and thus, benefit the mother country. Investors thus were attracted in large numbers, to invest in the newly found markets (Lugard 70).

The imperialists used tricks and played with the psychology of the locals in order to conquer the colonies. Lugard (71) reiterates that medical works was seen as a better way of convincing the locals that colonialism was for their advantage. In relation to Africa, healing of the soul was highly regarded by the locals. The colonialists used this as an opportunity to penetrate their land. In the African context, the medical missionary was very welcome because people wanted to see the magic in the ‘white people’.Industrial mission was another form of conquest that the imperialists used to penetrate the colonies. They believed that it was possible to teach the natives some bits of industrial advancements. They categorized the natives into groups as per the economic activities of the tribe that was being colonized. In agriculture, for example, the natives could be taught the use of manure and the application of simple science in crop production an animal farming.

The theories of evolution of imperialism have owed their existence from the inequalities that are in the world. Marxist theories, for example, explain the inequalities in excess wealth creation in one part of the world while the other part has little if any. Marxist used this to explain World War I. He argues that the concentration of wealth in one part of the world usually leads to under consumption. Liberal strategies cannot be applied to solve the situation because of capitalist interests. He argued that the world would be divided up, as a result of rich countries fighting for re-division. Winslow (23)argues that economic imperialism has been used by historians since the time immemorial to propagate the agenda of imperialists.

The theory looks at the possibility of capitalist countries developing agricultural industry to feed the hungry peoples of the other half of the world. By so doing, according to the theory, there wouldn’t exist surplus production in any nation. The proponents of capitalism were opposed to this theory and they used to discredit it. They argued that if they could do this, then capitalism would cease to be capitalism. They argued that with capitalists, surplus capital should be realized and that using the surplus to feed the citizens of a particular country would make the capitalists lose their property. They thus favored a form of imperialism that will see them export products into their mother country. By this, they argue, their identity as capitalists will be preserved.John Hobson, who was not a Marxist in the beginning, considers the Marxist theories later in the post-Marxist times to develop his theory. His theory is looked at in four distinct elements, though they have been introduced for different reasons. He argues that under consumption is brought about by excessive savings. He reiterated that investment must be sought for investing surplus. This is because if savings continue to increase, without investments, and the levels of consumption remain low, there is no way a nation can evade a surplus (Brew 74).

Later in the post-Marxism period, Hobson considered excessive saving as having been a result of inequalities in income distribution and he also identified monopoly as a cause of the inequality. He explained that inequality can occur when some people have a lot and they save a lot, while others have little though they want to spend more. He explained monopoly as a secondary factor. The case of USA is cited as a country where monopoly matters a lot in determining inequality. This was contributed by increase in prices that is brought about by monopolies.

Hobson shows concern with the politics surrounding imperialism especially in relation to the expansion of the Great Britain in the years of 1870. This is the time when the territories of Britain had increased by a big number in the continents of Asia and Africa. His concern though, was the tendency for continuous over saving even with the colonies. He was concerned that the capitalists continued amassing increasing wealth at the expense of the native of the native. This, he argues would perpetuate the problem of inequality in the world.To conclude, surplus production and excessive saving are the most triggering factors that aroused the spirit of imperialism. There existed an inequality in the world because of the surplus in one part and little capital in the other. In a bid to search for new markets for manufactured goods and services, labor, raw materials and investment opportunities,colonization through imperialism was effected. Today, imperialism exists in different forms.

Works Cited

Brew, Anthony. Marxist theories of imperialism. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1980. Print.

Hobson, John, A. Imperialism. London: Allen and Unwin, 1948. Print.

Lugard, D. The rise of our East African Empire. Edinburg, 1893. Print.

Macaulay, Thomas, B. Speech in parliament on the government of India, Bill number 10, July 1833. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957. Print.

Mill, Stuart, J. Principles of microeconomics. Journal of Laurence Laughlin, 540-560.

Winslow, M. Marxian, liberal and sociological theories of imperialism. The Journal of political economy, 39 (6), 1931, 713-738, Print.

CLICK BUTTON TO ORDER NOW