Colonialism in Africa

Name
Tutor
Course
Date
Colonialism in Africa
Fifteen years before the closure of the nineteenth century, European imperialist governments in their quest to expand their territories for various reasons aggressively scrambled and invaded the African continent. Initially, gullible African societies, most of which were decentralized, welcomed the foreigners, but after realizing the stakes some mounted resistance (Johnston, 43). As expected, the more sophisticated imperialist governments prevailed in most of the colonies and subdued the natives. The effects of the foreign presence were monumental, and it would take more than half a century for these colonies to free themselves from the oppressive rule and become independent governments.
Until the late 1800’s, European traders had been occasional visitors at the coastal regions of most of the African continent. Several factors motivated earlier visitors. First, some were missionaries, spreading Christianity and these were the first groups to make inroads into the interior of the continent. Some traders having discovered lucrative trade avenues in the east and would make a stop-over on the African coast on their way there. Others like Sir Henry M. Stanley and John Speke were purely explorers. Colonization, however, was more organized and motivated by completely different reasons. There was an aspiration for European empires to assert themselves and achieve self-aggrandizement. This competition spilled over to the need to acquire territories and colonies.

Politically, one reason was that the superpowers of the time wanted to outdo each other in the acquisition of colonies. France wanted a place to prove itself after an utter defeat at Prussian war. To each country, national prestige was an important fueling factor, the effects of which would culminate in global wars. Is it a wonder that some of these colonies provided manpower for the First World War in 1914? Secondly, with the explosion of industrialization towards the close of the 19th century, social problems arose. Crime, unemployment, and homelessness were some of them. European industries in Africa provided the perfect employment opportunities for surplus European labor, and the African colonies provided resettlement places for white paupers. The missionaries after encountering hostile natives requested for protection from their governments, and so in a way, Christianity preceded colonization (Delavignette, 86). In addition, there was a need to ‘civilize and uplift’ the culturally backward African people (Nunn, 172). This was based on pure ethnocentrism and a superiority complex.
Economically, the booming industrial period required raw materials as well as a market for finished products. Many historians agree it is the economic factors that fueled the imperial expansion into the African continent. The unexplored land provided many raw materials like rubber, cotton, and minerals for booming industries. Inasmuch as the African labor was cheap, and even with the abolition of slavery, Africans served as a good source of manpower and toiled on plantations and domestic chores (Anderson, 98). Although economic reasons have been the major cited reasons for European aggression, some historians have faulted this argument, since some colonizers did incur more costs in the invasion than the benefit accrued from such conquests. For example, the Italians and Germans were not as successful enough to maintain a protracted presence in their colonies.
After noticing an increasing interest in the continent of Africa by European nations, the chancellor of Germany convened a summit that would set principles for dividing the continent into colonies (Gall, 19). Encroachment of European powers in Africa had started long before the Berlin Conference of 1884, but it is after this summit that colonization became both legitimate and formal (Gall, 30). The European powers boasted of advanced military prowess and weapons compared to the machetes and spears as well as other archaic weaponry the Africans used. Their armies had the experience of fighting in many wars. With this kind of military background and technological advantage, the Africans stood no chance. Newer steamships meant it was easier to deploy more troops from Europe. Also, medicinal advancement had acquired solutions for some of the challenging diseases found in the African jungles that the whites were susceptible to. The spreading Christianity was both good and bad in that it brought enlightenment in the form of education to the children of the natives and the gospel but also did nothing about the oppressive rule. Some of the new Christian converts began rebelling against their traditional authorities hence making it easier for the colonizers beside the fact that most African chiefdoms were decentralized and easy to conquer (Delavignette, 85). There were many factors that made it easier for Europeans to succeed, including the fact that some African leaders unknowingly signed off their territories, but the invasion encountered utter resistance in some regions. In fact, Ethiopia was never colonized because the emperor successfully fought and defeated the Italian army.
Much of warfare was by guerilla since most African chiefdoms lacked a constant professional army (Englebert, 22) and even though this strategy was not successful in some cases like Igbo people of Nigeria it a thorn in the flesh of British rule. It was the same strategy that the Mau Mau of Kenya would use in resisting the white rulers in their fight for independence (Anderson, 155). In the more organized kingdoms like the Mandinka of Senegal, a more direct confrontation took place, and the battles were spirited, but rarely African armies prevailed against the formidable European forces. Among the Nandi community of Kenya, the British only won after assassinating their leader, Koitalel Arap. Not all kingdoms resisted colonization, though, some blatantly welcomed the colonizers, albeit unknowingly, as most realized later that there was no good out of being colonized. Funny enough, some kingdoms like the Baganda only collaborated just because rival kingdom Banyore resisted (Johnston, 67). The Europeans easily conquered the already-divided kingdoms as the Africans failed to see past the ancient inter-regional rivalry (Englebert, 22). Failure to view the whites as the common enemy was the biggest downfall of the African rulers. In fact, some communities assisted the colonizers in subduing other communities and as such the European expansion was not just purely by white hands, but black ones too. However, the reasons for collaborating were more complex, as some rulers thought collusion would protect their independence while others hoped for better trade deals. Even the collaborators would later see they had been duped, and that it was to their disadvantage cooperating with the white settlers.
After the introduction of plantation farming and commercial agriculture, land as a factor of production became increasingly commercialized. Scores of people became landless because of evictions from their ancestral lands, and these became a source of cheap labor (Michalopoulos and Papaioannou, 113). Slavery had long been abolished, but the low wages that a laborer got from working for the whites was another type of bondage. Taxes were forcefully imposed too. Families were torn apart. Prior to the invasion, the African continent existed as one continuous land mass, but the scramble for Africa left it divided into many states, without considering any ethnic lines (Michalopoulos and Papaioannou, 114). The people of Yoruba in West Africa, for instance, are scattered in more than four countries that were colonized by 3 different European powers. Later, because of such partitions, it became hard for African nations to trade amongst themselves because the European infrastructure only supported exportation of raw materials back to their home countries. Africa lost plenty of natural resources. Last, but not least, cultures and traditions of the natives were lost as new languages were learned and African children became assimilated into the European learning system. Both the colonization process and the struggle for independence came at a cost, and most men of fighting age paid the ultimate price during these perilous times.
On the positive side, a lot changed in the lives of the Africans. With the Western civilization as the standard measure of progress, the countries that were never colonized lagged behind in terms of advancement (Nunn, 170). Without colonization, some regions of the African continent would still be inaccessible and closed to the real world. There was some good in colonizing Africa. The spread of Christianity was closely associated with starting of educational centers that have remained to date (Delavignette, 134). As a matter of fact, it is those schools started by the missionaries that would produce the leaders that fought for the independence of the African countries; Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana and Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya are just examples. Nkrumah went to the Catholic Mission while Kenyatta attended the Church of Scotland Mission (Englebert, 74). Some of the railway lines and bridges have weathered decade after decade and are still in use. Learning new languages have enabled Africans to compete globally, and the bilateral links between independent states and their colonial masters have proven fruitful. The presence of European authorities quenched most of the tribal war that characterized decentralized governments in native Africa. Undoubtedly, the impact of colonization on the African societies is indelible, and not all of it is negative (Nunn, 166).
Following of the closure of the Second World War, some African young men who had gained some level of education and secured civil servant jobs in the European governments began coalescing together. Political parties were formed as a consequence, and Pan-African ideologies grew in the hearts of the young leaders. Notable names that championed for an independent Africa include Patrice Lumumba, of Congo and the popular Nelson Mandela. Struggle for independence took either passive or active stances and violence was not very far from this struggle. Diplomatic emissaries would champion for independence of colonized countries through negotiation and networking among the elite African leaders (“Kenya Independence Talks: From the Archive, 5 April 1962,” n.p). Violent resistance was mounted through guerilla warfare in East Africa, and most of the leaders were detained for years. School children participated in resisting apartheid in South Africa before independence was achieved in 1994 (Ozler and. Hoogeveen, 101), the last of the lot to achieve independence. Most nations attained their independence shortly before and after 1960, a year that had been declared the ‘Year of Africa’ (Ayitey, n.p). The transition between the new and the old governments was normally peaceful and in some countries continued cooperating with the colonial masters continued even after achieving self-rule.

Works Cited
Anderson, David. Histories of the Hanged: The Dirty War in Kenya and the End of Empire. WW Norton & Company, 2005.
Ayitey, Charles. “Greatest Anti-Colonial Speeches of the Independence Era.” Face2Face Africa. N.p., 2013. Web. 17 Feb. 2018.
Delavignette, Robert Louis. Christianity and Colonialism. Vol. 97. Hawthorn Books, 1964.
Englebert, Pierre. “Pre-Colonial Institutions, Post-Colonial States, and Economic Development in Tropical Africa.” Political Research Quarterly 53.1 (2000): 7-36.
Gall, Lothar. Bismarck, the White Revolutionary: 1851 [ie 1815]-1871. Vol. 1. Taylor & Francis, 1990.
Johnston, Harry H. A History of the Colonization of Africa by Alien Races. Cambridge University Press, 2011.
“Kenya Independence Talks: From the Archive, 5 April 1962.” The Guardian. N.p., 2013. Web. 17 Feb. 2018.
Michalopoulos, Stelios, and Elias Papaioannou. “Pre‐Colonial Ethnic Institutions and Contemporary African Development.” Econometrica 81.1 (2013): 113-152.
Nunn, Nathan. “Historical Legacies: A Model Linking Africa’s past to Its Current Underdevelopment.” Journal of Development Economics 83.1 (2007): 157-175.
Ozler, Berk, and J. G. M. Hoogeveen. “Not Separate, Not Equal: Poverty and Inequality in Post-Apartheid South Africa.” (2005).