Short Essay Eight

Africans living in early and mid-twentieth century Europe had many conflicting opinions about the European culture. Though Africans were accepting of the occasional aspect of European society there were many elements they sought to change. One feature that African intellectuals approved of and participated in was the republican society in Europe. Africans were given many political rights in the many countries of Europe; however, most did not receive the same benefits as a white citizen. Yet this did not stop Africans from taking advantage of the political rights they did have. Several African intellectuals joined organizations to voice their opinions and raise awareness about issues pertinent to them in an attempt to sway public attitudes (Wilder159). Africans were able to manipulate this aspect of European society to push their own agenda. Accepting the political privileges that the European culture offered, the Africans were able to modify the aspects of their culture that they did not find satisfactory. Living in Europe allowed Africans to experience first hand all the racism that existed towards them. Naturally, the African scholars wanted to reform this part of European society. The goal for Africans was to stop racism and create a society that strove for “color-blind social and political equality” (Wilder 165). Blatant bigotry and prejudice was something that Africans desired to alter in European culture. Africans living in Europe were forced to experience racism in their everyday lives and desperately wanted to be free of it. In addition to racism existing in Europe, Africans also wanted to correct the treatment of the African colonies by Europeans. African intellectuals felt that the natives living the colonies in Africa should receive all the same rights as white Europeans. Transforming the way Europeans dealt with their colonies was a crucial aspect of the intellectual African agenda. African scholars preached about colonial reformation and “the demand for a more civilized colonialism” (Wilder 166). The mistreatment of the colonial subject was something that did not sit well with Africans and they aspired to end it. To the Africans, there were many aspects about European society that they found appealing, yet there were many elements that they wanted to alter. African intellectuals were able to use one feature they embraced, the freedom to voice opinions and take actions to change political policies, to modify the elements they did not accept. Racism and the exploitation of African colonies were two facets of European society that were found intolerable by the Africans. It seems that the freedom offered in European society was desirable, but the Africans wanted to extend that freedom to all of Europe’s citizens including the colonists.

Short Essay Seven

During the early twentieth century, Europeans deemed Africans as exotic inhabitants of a far away land. Africans were often seen by Europeans as uncultured and free of the worries of a modern, civilized society. Europeans interpreted the African culture as a way of liberating oneself from the restrictions of modern society. Enticed by the freedom they believed they could experience, Europeans would interact with Africans for this purpose. Taking part in the African culture also allowed the Europeans a chance feel as though they were part of the exotic customs. Europeans considered themselves to be a highly moral society, and the Africans immoral. Participating in African activities, such as the Bal nègre in France, Europeans could disregard their cultural obligations. The Bal nègre in particular allowed the Europeans the ability “to transcend the bourgeois world and enter a fantastic Edenic paradise of primal enjoyments” (Berliner 212). Without leaving the perceived restrictions from European society behind, they thought they would never experience life as the Africans did. Europeans felt they no longer needed to adhere to their culture’s boundaries of acceptable behavior. Participation in African culture was not the only means for Europeans to experience their escape from “cultured” society. Merely observing Africans captivated the Europeans. Performances put on by Africans attracted many Europeans who were fascinated by the shows they put on. Europeans were mesmerized by the performers because they considered their shows to be exceedingly exotic. Every aspect of these performances fascinated the Europeans. The dance moves and the performers themselves were something Europeans were not regularly exposed to and it excited them (Dalton 914). The audience felt as though they left the conservative European society and entered a new more liberating one. Performances allowed Europeans to enter an exotic world full of fascinating details. Europeans allowed themselves to enter African culture in order to transcend cultural restrictions. Participating in activities and events like the Bal nègre let the Europeans believe that they were experiencing this foreign world first hand. Yet, many Europeans can find entrance into the African culture simply by observing them via the theater. Due to European prejudice they deemed the African culture to be primitive and therefore free of the limits that they believed their society placed on them. Europeans believed the Africans to be so foreign that they were captivated simply by watching them. Africans seemed so different to the Europeans that they became an escape of the constrictions of the daily lives of the Europeans.

Short Essay Six

European people have a history of believing themselves to be superior to other races. While imperializing Africa in late nineteenth and early twentieth century, Europeans drew clear distinctions between the natives and themselves, citing themselves as the more cultured race. As Africans began traveling to Europe, white Europeans started to feel threatened by the newcomers. The more contact Africans had with Europeans, the more Europeans falsely felt as though their race was superior and needed to be preserved from the infiltration of impure Africans. According to Europeans, they were the epitome of societal advancement and progression and believed white skin was a marker of this. The attitudes many Europeans had towards the Africans displayed their feelings of pretentiousness. Countless Europeans believed, “skin color was equated with culture, thus eliding racial difference with a level of “civilization”” (Campt 54). Scientists of this era used many evolutionary theories to suggest that Africans were barbaric and not as intelligent as the Europeans. Though many European nations were imperializing Africa, Africans were not granted European citizenship. Laws were put into place preventing Africans from obtaining citizenship or legal rights in European countries. It was a common belief that Africans were unsuitable for citizenship because Europeans believed they were incompetent (Bush 216). The power obtained through citizenship was not something that the Europeans were willing to give to Africans because they believed it should be reserved for the cultured white Europeans. Following WWI, black-French troops occupying the Rhineland were both feared and hated by the Germans because of their own arrogance. Germans were insulted that the French sent African troops to occupy their territory because they believed it was inappropriate for such barbaric people to be watching over a civilized society (Campt 52-53). To the Germans, Africans were not as sophisticated as they were so they should not have been placed in a position of power. The African presence in the Rhineland was quite intimidating due to the fabricated belief that the Africans were so primitive and savage. In the European view, Africans were not considered part of their civilized society for many reasons. Unfortunately, they were denied many legal rights and citizenship because of the pomposity that the Europeans felt. Europeans prevented Africans from receiving power because they felt as though they needed to preserve their race from African influence. Believing that they were superior, Europeans would exclude Africans from many aspects of society. Ultimately, the distinctions Europeans drew between themselves and the Africans led them to think of the African as the “other”.

Short Essay Five

As European countries began colonizing Africa they had the intention of ruling over these countries and including them in their empires. Europeans “saw Africa as a continent of blank spaces” (Mackenzie 10). The European empires set up to conquer the continent in order to compete with other nation and for economic reasons. Still, some historians believe that Europeans did not want to occupy the content but rather they accidentally fell into that position. The only evidence to support this rationalization of European imperialism is that prior to the government’s involvement many European set up their own “cities” within Africa but without European government interference (Mackenzie 14). However, the majority of evidence of the Europeans’ actions in Africa is contrary to this theory and that they, in fact, consciously took over. As soon as European countries began seeing the value in African resources they began competing with one another for these territories. In order to remain in power Europeans had to vie with each for the continent. When the European presence was felt in Africa, Africans quickly lost power in their own government, “By 1900 Africans were debarred from the administrative (‘or political’) branches of colonial government” (Roberts 33). The Europeans were actively taking steps to exclude Africans from governing themselves which clearly shows that they desired complete control over their new colonies. This is also true of the German African colonies where it was never even considered that Africans should be given voting or any other political rights (Roberts 35). Wars were also being fought between the Europeans and Africans over the land they wanted. The empires were willing to fight in order to keep their world status. Economic reasons also provided the European countries with incentives to conquer Africa. African products and resources were able to increase the wealth of European empires. When diamonds were discovered in the interior of Africa there was a race between the European powers to claim the land, which the British ultimately won and exploited the areas minerals for their own benefit (McKenzie 24). The valuable resources that this land provided undoubtedly increased the wealth of the British Empire. Once Europeans began arriving in Africa their intentions became clear, they wanted to eventually conquer the land and exploit its resources. It was considered necessary to do this by the Europeans in order to keep up with other European nations. The eighteenth century saw an influx of Europeans attempting to conquer all of Africa. Africa was simply land to the Europeans that was waiting to be claimed.

Short Essay Four

Africans living as slaves in eighteenth century England struggled to gain freedom. Qhe Africans desperately wanted equality with their white counterparts and the ability to control their own lives. Self- determination was something that the enslaved sought to achieve. Tyrannical masters attempted to have power over every aspect of their slaves’ lives. Many slaves who worked as domestic servants in England would see that white servants had much more authority over themselves. Wages earned by free servants were seen by slaves as a symbol of sovereignty and many slaves fought to receive them. Marriage and religious baptism were liberties given to all white Europeans; however, many slaves encouraged one another to seek out these institutions in order to claim their freedom (Lorimer 60). Slaves saw the privilege to make decisions regarding these important matters as crucial exclamation of their liberty. In the case of Olaudah Equiano, an African enslaved in England who eventually gained his freedom, the privilege to religious choice was an integral part of the definition of freedom. Equiano gained authority over his life by selecting a religion of his choice free from a master’s input (Equiano184). In addition to selecting his own faith, Equiano found freedom through travel, which he did extensively while both enslaved and free. The assertion and struggle for freedom created ill tensions between the Africans and Europeans. Traditionally, slaves were completely dominated by their owners. Slave owners were furious when their slaves began rebelling against them and declaring their right to liberty. Defiance of slave masters displayed the loss of power that the white Europeans had over the Africans. The fear created by this disobedience began “pressuring slaveowners to treat their Black servants as free domestics” (Lorimer 71). Once slave owners realized that Africans demanded liberty they attempted to appease them while keeping their power in place. The slaves’ quest for freedom ultimately left the Europeans fearing their loss authority over them. To slaves in eighteenth century England freedom was defined by the ability to control their lives and having the same rights as white Europeans. Being able to live as an ordinary, wage earning citizen was integral to slaves in their pursuit of freedom. Enslaved Africans were able to affirm these rights through various rebellious acts which complicated their relationship for their white owners. Slave owners were angry with their slaves for taking control of their own lives, but also fearful of any loss of status that would result from the slaves’ freedom. Liberty held various meanings to different slaves, but it was something they all were willing to fight for.

Short Essay 3

As soon as the establishment of slavery came into existence in France there were struggles to end the institution. Motivations to free enslaved people in France were different among different groups of people. Some people desperately fought to free slaves because of religious and cultural principles while others sought personal gain. France, a Catholic country, believed that Christians were superior to followers of opposing religions. French Christians were enticed to emancipate fellow Christians to prove their religion’s superiority. If a slave became a Catholic while enslaved, the French fought to free them. A law was put into place which “granted freedom to Catholic slaves owned by non-Catholics…freedom from Catholic masters depended on their own good graces” (Peabody 32). Non-Catholic masters were not entitled to service from Catholics under French law. Late in the eighteenth century many slaves converted to the religion to become emancipated. French courts were eager to permit and execute this law because it displayed the dominance of their religion over all who resided in France. Another set of individuals in France that tirelessly fought to free slave were lawyers. Countless Africans challenged their slave status in court with the help of attorneys. The main motivation behind the lawyers’ assistance was personal gain. Representing a slave in his or her fight for freedom held rewards for attorneys such as money and a prospering reputation. French lawyer Nicolas De Foissey would often present his bill to the slave he was helping before the judge in order to recover all fees owed to him. Foissey’s action made it clear that “financial motives contributed to the reasons why lawyers, especially procureurs, took on similar cases” (Peabody 103). Lawyers were driven by monetary reasons to free Africans enslaved in France. Due to the many laws concerning the freeing of enslaved persons lawyers were able to benefit tremendously in an anti-slavery crusade. In some instances, however, lawyers felt sympathy for slaves and contributed to the fight for their freedom because of high ideals (Peabody 104). Throughout the eighteenth century in France the struggle to free enslaved people was prominent in society. Slaves were aided in their fight because of many different motivations harvested by the French people. Some were motivated by personal principles while others wanted personal compensation. Though both groups were able to receive something for their efforts, neither one’s reward could compare to the Africans who received freedom.

Short Essay Two

Anti-slavery sentiment was prevalent among all political sectors in British abolitionist movements. Abolitionists consisted of both socially conservative and liberal people who worked together to achieve their goal. Both groups benefitted from slavery during the eighteenth century, yet towards the end of the century they both had turned against it. Those who are socially conservative or members of the “right wing” of society often let religion control their political views. Prior to abolitionist views, conservatives approved of the concept of slavery due to biblical ties to servitude and the ability to convert African slaves to Christianity (Davis 24). As the African slave trade progressed, conservative Britons felt slavery had become a despotic and morally repugnant institution. Leaders of the religious anti- slavery movement preached that the tyranny which was in control of slavery was “transforming slavery into an ungodly evil” (Walvin 167). After being witnesses to the cruelties of slavery, conservatives were quick to see that slavery did not represent their worldly views. On the other side of the political spectrum were the liberal enlightened scholars of the time, or the “left wing” which also wanted to stop slavery. Similar to the conservatives, the “left wing” had condoned slavery before condemning it. Liberal Britons believed that slavery was an inevitable part of human society; one culture would ultimately take over a weaker one making it submissive. Over the eighteenth century however, these enlightenment thinkers realized that slavery was holding back human progression not enabling it. Liberal thinkers desired to end slavery in order to create a progressive society not because of religious injustice. The enlightenment provided a great forum for abolitionists to discuss the hypocrisies of enslaving man while advocating for freedom for all. David Brion Davis writes, “the subject of Negro slavery on the agenda of the European enlightenment, weighing the institution against the general laws or principals that promoted human happiness” (Davis 22). Liberals believed that in order for society to advance, the institution of slavery must be ended because of its conflict with progressive ideals. The eighteenth century was a transitioning period for slavery in Briton. Both right and left wing Britons had reasons for supporting slavery at the beginning. Overall, Britons accepted slavery during the beginning of the eighteenth century for both religious and philosophical principles. However, with increased exposure to the institution both were able to see that it did not coincide with original reasoning for accepting it. In the end the same principles which allowed Britons to eagerly permit slavery and the slave trade provided the rationale for abolishing it.