Luckily, today's critical evaluation of colonisation is no longer blind - and in this course we were asked to explain why the usual economic reasons are so prevalent, versus the real reason of greed and competition.

why economic reasons are used to explain colonisation

As others argued, economic reasons have likely been so widely accepted because they are easier to justify. For instance, if a stated goal of a colonizing power was to open up trade with a captive market and direct the colony’s exports to the imperial government as raw materials, this becomes accepted as truth – when it’s really a truism. The colonizers likely used economic reasons in the beginning when justifying to their taxpayers their reasons for colonizing. Over time, this becomes accepted without much research going into the figures. In fact, the imperial governments may have had these ‘noble’ economic goals when preparing to colonise. However, they quickly realized that the expenses of building infrastructure, maintaining administration, protecting the colony from invasion and insurgence, and other innumerable costs simply didn’t justify the investment.

Another reason for the primacy of the economic explanation is that most of our western academic study is in fact influenced by capitalism and widely accepted economic theory. It ‘makes sense’ to us that the colonists wanted economic gain, why else would they do it? But the lecture notes explain the other reasons, such as maintaining world power supremacy, protecting trade routes to other colonies, obtaining increased military budgets, individual egoists’ desires, etc., all heavily influenced the outcome.

In reading critically about the ‘scramble’ for Africa, this description seems very appropriate – every colonial power seemed to want colonies at any cost, like dividing the world on a Risk board, without really much thought or justification on the reasons. The process unorganized and unplanned, and the colonists assumed power over unsuspecting nations just to keep those nations out of their competitors’ hands.

When reading standard western historical texts, it’s often easier to give the surface economic reason rather than the misguided truth. This economic explanation also helps to veil the current world powers’ continuing negative impact on former colonies in a very real neo-colonialism through the ‘impartial’ implementation of free markets. Throughout history, the colonialists do keep getting richer – so maybe there is basis in the economic reasons after all!

 

Copyright Johanna Voerman Khisa, 2002-03. Reprinting or reposting without permission is prohibited.