HIEU 137: Essay #2

In his 1839 letter to Queen Victoria, Lin Tse-Hsu argues that the practices of the British Empire are unjust and exploitative of the Chinese and other peoples in Southeast Asia. Tse-Hsu discusses the forced trade of opium, as well as the harvesting of it in India. As he aptly puts it, “The goods from China carried away by your country not only supply your own consumption nd use, but also can be divided up and sold to other countries” (Garfield, 246). The author’s criticism of the regime established in China by the British clearly outlines the concept of an economy of extraction. The raw materials harvested from one location, such as the opium in India, are not sold there, but rather refined or sold elsewhere, leaving the producing nation with nothing, and often being forced to purchase these goods back at a much higher cost. His discussion of new anti-opium policies being enforced by the Chinese government is an example of their pushback against these exploitative practices.

In the Meiji Constitution of 1889, the Japanese made clear their intention to unify nearby territories under their rule, invoking divine intervention and the state religion to compel cooperation from local groups. The excerpts from the text discuss the emperor’s divine lineage, which traces back to the gods hundreds of years ago, thereby justifying their expansion. Using this, the state requires all those under its flag to worship at local shrines, stating, “Schools … all without exception have their primary significance in the cultivation of national character (State Shinto Sources, 3). This discussion of national character is the main idea behind Japan’s colonial movement. By creating a unifying identity and forcing everyone to adhere to it, you foster a false sense of unity that allows you to exert tighter control over different areas. This is very similar to the colonizing and “civilizing” missions in Africa and the Americas, except that here the Japanese emperor wanted all his people to focus on him and the government by following the state religion, giving him more direct control over his newly acquired territories.

In Japan’s Colonization of Korea: Discourse and Power, Alexis Dudden discusses how the Japanese used their “enlightened” and “westernized” status to take control of and defend Korea as a sort of colony. Not only did they control it, but they also had the support of European nations, which were also vying for control of various territories in Southeast Asia. Dudden explains that reporters and officials in New York, London, Paris, and elsewhere believed Japan was justified in controlling Korea because its ruler was not “civilized” by Western standards (Dudden, 16). The use of “modernizing” and “civilizing” in their justifications demonstrates the motive behind Japan’s control of Korea. Using the same arguments as the Europeans, the Japanese hoped to join the Western world and leverage its strength to exploit vulnerable territories, including Korea. This supports our discussion of Japan’s unique role in Southeast Asia as one of the only territories to be a part of the colonizing movement, as their trade of products and ideas with mainly the United States gave them an advantage against the “underdeveloped” nations of China and Korea, who had been exploited for too long to go through a modernizing movement in the same way.

“Case Against the United States” is a 1899 piece by Emilio Aguinaldo, arguing that America’s treatment and control of the Philippines are contrary to how it governs its own country. The author angrily points out that the United States promotes the false idea that the island nation cannot govern itself, and proceeds to give historical examples of Western-style governmental systems that once existed in the Philippines. He then pleads for the opportunity to develop as the original colonies did under Great Britain (Aguinaldo, 3). This argument demonstrates the imbalance in power between the colonizing nations of the West and their exploited holdings, as the United States and its people saw themselves above the nation of the Philippines, despite believing they were there to save them from the Spanish. Interestingly, Aguinaldo concedes that there are some “savages” living in the Philippines, referring to nomadic peoples in certain regions. This part of the excerpt shows how deeply rooted the ideas of white supremacy and the “civilizing” mission were in Southeast Asian societies.

“Preparing our Moros for Government” is a 1906 text in which its author, R. L. Bullard, argues that the people of the Philippines are “oriental savages” who need to be trained and taught the ways of the West so they can be properly governed by the United States. The author also describes his encounters with people across the islands. He paints himself as a benevolent figure bringing technology and civilization to them, saying, “that we had come to bring the Moros all the valuable and useful things which they saw we had” (Bullard, 2). Clearly, this is not how events played out, as the Philippines was yet another example of a territory exploited under the policies and practices of neocolonialism in Southeast Asia. Additionally, it’s important to consider the perspective from those back in the United States. At the time, their only source of information regarding our invasion of the Philippines was sources like this that painted them as incompetent and unworthy of modernity, demonstrating why much of the American population was in favor of continuing this “civilizing” mission.

Chapters 3 and 4 of Daniel Immerwahr’s How to Hide an Empire (2019) discuss two key historical concepts: the exploitation of poorer laborers by the United States in an effort to harvest guano for farming and trade, and the false narrative about frontiersmen and living like a “true” American that was perpetuated by powerful men like Teddy Roosevelt at the turn of the century. First, the author breaks down the fallacy of the United States, focusing on its “civilizing” of colonies rather than exploitation, and on its use of island natives to perform intensive labor. As he describes, “(the job) offered all the backbreaking labor and lung damage of coil mining … Respiratory diseases … were common” (Immerwahr, Ch. 3). Though the United States attempted to claim its ownership of these guano islands in the Pacific and Caribbean as being beneficial to society, it was only done on the backs of workers who were often tricked or forced into this kind of labor, establishing the United States’ involvement with economies of exploitation. They structured the labor imbalance to offer low wages, allowing them to reap most of the profit. In Chapter 4, Immerwahr continues this discussion of the false notions that the United States and its government propagated to its citizens. Rich politicians like Teddy Roosevelt spoke of the glory of living on the frontier and of exploring new land, believing that their society lacked this kind of development. His belief that expansion was best for the United States led to his actions in the Navy that would lead the U.S. to war with Spain in 1898, where the U.S. took control of the Philippines (Immerwahr, Ch. 4). What is most interesting about this situation is its parallels to the Manifest Destiny period of the America decades earlier, but with the added romanticism of what was actually a harsh, violent period. The United States government saw great value in exploiting poorer people and nations in the Caribbean and Pacific, and the American people were told to support a mission that would bring peace, prosperity, and civilization to those who needed it. With a combination of economic incentives and effective propaganda, it is easy to see how systems like this not only came to be, but, as Immerwahr explains, were hidden from the public for a long time. (396)

“The Cherokee Removal through the Eyes of a Private Soldier” touches upon the Indian Removal Act of 1830 by President Andrew Jackson, and the ensuing horrors involved with relocating tens of thousands of native americans across the Mississippi in what became known as the Trail of Tears. John G. Burnett describes the nature of forced relocation from the East coast towards Oklahoma; how they left behind their posessions and their homes, how they died of diseases frequently, how they slept in the cold and endured terrible conditions, but most of all, how this kind of mistreatment would continue for years after, as settlers and bandits would repeatedly ignore the rights of the Natives on their newly granted lands (Burnett, 1-3). This is a rare example of a perspective from someone involved in colonialism and the “civilizing” mission who was opposed to its enactment. Burnett’s account demonstrates the power of enlightened ideals and the mission to “civilize” non-Western peoples, as these notions of society and prosperity drove them to massacre various native peoples all across the nation. It shows how Americans felt superior enough to the Native tribes that they could exploit their vulnerability, take their land, and even commit genocide on them if they felt it necessary.

In the chapter titled "The Physical Features of the Argentine Republic…" (1845), Domingo Faustino Sarmiento discusses the Argentine Plains in the southernmost part of South America. Specifically, he discusses the lives of the people in the region, mainly the gauchos. Sarmiento argues that those of native or black heritage are lazy and incapable of working productively in modern industry, and that the gauchos and other rural “peasants” cannot be part of a “modern” society (Sarmiento, 129-132). Clearly, this perspective is inspired by Enlightenment ideals of modernization, but what’s most interesting is the comparison with other societies. Sarmiento looks favorably at both current and ancient Western Societies, especially the United States. His application of American ideals and social beliefs to Argentine society shows the widespread nature of Western imperialist beliefs. It also helps show the “infighting” in nations hoping to join the “modern” movement, as the upper classes would look down on and criticize native or poorer populations as uncivilized, even though they are the cause of the destitute conditions.

First Nations in the USA is a segment in a larger text about imperialism and colonialism, and their impact on native and minority populations in many parts of the world. This section specifically details the experience of the Cherokee Nation in the United States. As the authors explain, the Cherokee were subject to the earliest forms of the removal and “conversion” to a more “modern” societal image. Essentially, they were moved west from their home in Georgia and repeatedly moved farther and farther away as the country and white settlements expanded. They were also the victims of “civilizing” missions, as the government put native children into boarding schools meant to remove their culture and turn them into “proper” Americans (Franke & Wilmer, 190-194). The Cherokee experience and other experiences from various native groups are extremely unique in the world context because they were the victims of relocation, forced conversion, and genocidal killing, as the United States continually changed its perspective on what to do with the natives on “their” land. This attitude towards human populations demonstrates a sense of superiority over native populations in North America. They treated them as less than human, deciding what to do with them without representation. (209)

The Emancipation Manifesto of February 19, 1861, issued by Tsar Alexander II, is a document that detailed the abolishment of serfdom in Russia. Russia had been under a system of essentially slavery, where the peasants were legally tied to the land and subject to the decisions of their liege lords. While this manifesto seems to outline an end to that system and greatly improve the lives of the peasants, it leaves some major problems. The biggest one is that the nobles retain their property ownership and “grant the peasants perpetual use of their household plots in return for a specified obligation” (Emancipation Manifesto, 2). Though the serfs were now free and more independent, they were forced to pay back immeasurable debt to their lords, locking them into a cycle of having to pay everything they earn to pay it back. Their lives barely changed, which demonstrates the influence of the lords in Russia. Similar to imperialist and neo-colonialist movements worldwide, the situation for the serfs is almost the same as an economy of extraction. What the Russian lords and royalty essentially set up is a system in which laborers work for free or extremely low wages to produce goods, mirroring the systems established in Southeast Asia by other European countries.

The Edict of Gulhane (1839) is a document issued by the Ottoman government outlining major reforms. In this document, they detail changes to the legal system and its enforcement, a new system of military drafting, and, most importantly, their emphasis on establishing a central Ottoman identity. As the authors write that by helping the citizens of the empire and instilling “ardor in [their] affairs,” the citizens will feel a growing “love for the Prince and country, but also his devotion to his native land” (Edict, 1). The goal for the Ottoman government was to create a national identity, an amalgamation of many cultural backgrounds that made up the empire at the time. This is an example of a modernist movement, as the Ottomans hoped to join other European nations in building a nation-state and a national identity. Their program was very similar to the colonizing and expansionist ideas in Japan, in which claims to Hokkaido and other islands were accompanied by the construction of temples and shrines to secure support for the state religion and the emperor.

In Chapter 2: The Ottoman Civilizing Attitude…, Patrick Adamiak argues that the goal of the civilizing mission in the Ottoman Empire was aimed at the populations within its borders, not at those on the outskirts. A general trend that we see across the world during the turn of the century period is that as countries expanded their holdings on their continent (United State) or to other continents or islands (European nations, Japan, and also the United States), they pushed the newly-added populations into a program of “civilizing” and “modernization” under the Western definition, to create a more enlightened society. Yet, in the Ottoman Empire, Adamiak explains that instead of this usual model, the Ottomans focused internally on their many internal borders. He details how areas such as the deserts of North Africa and the Middle East, near modern-day Iran, had many historical influences and thus were not uniformly under the government's direct control (Adamiak, 18, 37-40). The Ottomans sought to consolidate control within their empire as its outermost borders were continually shrinking due to conflicts with European nations. Coupling this with their goal of creating a national identity of Ottomans, and it's clear why they focused so heavily on uniting the populace. The aim of unification demonstrated their push for a more Western, Enlightenment-based society, as they hoped to become a European nation by mimicking their development in an era when many empires were becoming formal nations. This program would continue into World War 1, which they were involved with and which saw their resort to genocide and harsher government action to create this Turkish-based Ottoman identity.