Score my AP World History DBQ?

fermata40
Tue, 19 Apr 2011 22:04:15 +0000

Hey there! I’m a sophomore taking AP World History, and today in class as exam preparation we did a practice DBQ. The only thing is our teacher isn’t going to grade it, so I was wondering if anyone would be willing to read it and give it a score from 1 to 9 and provide some suggestions for improvement. This was written in 40 minutes with a 10 minute reading period.

Prompt: Compare the attitudes of Western European countries and the U.S. toward imperialism with the response of indigenous people to imperialism. What types of additional documentation would be useful to determine the attitudes toward Imperialism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries?

The historian Niall Ferguson has written that, for better or for worse, humankind would be completely different were it not for European imperialism in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries. Especially in the 19th century, the European scramble for colonies increased in scale and pace. So widespread were the colonies of Great Britian, for example, thta it was said the sun never set on the British Empire. European justificiations for Imperialism, however, were often fully rejected by native populations.

European colonizers were indisputably greedy, and this contributed to the resentment many natives felt towards them. Document 1, a speech by Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany (a country which was, incidentally, late to the colonizing process) illustrates the fact that Europeans viewed themselves as entitled to colonial possessions, which were to remain their “indisputed possessions” at any cost necessary. Document 6 shows ho completely Europe’s and the U.S.'s domination of the world was: vast percentages of Asia, Africa, Polynesia, and the entirely of Australia were held by Europeans. Document 10, a political cartoon, shows graphically that Europeans were bent on securing as many possessions as possible, even if it meant “Painting South Africa with blood.” The attitude of the U.S. was slightly different. In Document 4, Teddy Roosevelt claims the U.S. felt no land hunger, but he leaves open the possibility of American intervention in “chronic wrongdoing” countries. This arrogant attitude was rejected by the colonized. In Document 8, Gandhi writes that, despite centuries of subjugation, native Indians believe that they alone are the true leaders of India.

Economic concerns were a chief motivation in European colonization, and native populations were extremely angry at what they viewed as the exploitation of their resources. Documents 1 and 3, from the German and French leaders respectively, show that both countries viewed colonial possessions as essential for a healthy economy, especially because they provided outlets for exports and safe harbors and ports for European Navies. As Kaiser Wilhelm II put it, “OUr future lies upon the water.” In Document 2, an English economist states explicitly that it was demand for foreign markets that was responsible for the adoption of imperialism as a political policy in Great Britain. Although Europeans viwed themselves as entitled to economic benefit from their holdings, the colonized resented the exploitation of their resources. In Documents 7 and 8, people living under the thumb of the British beseech the British government to consider not just profit, but human concerns. As Document 7 shows, Britain profited handsomely from unequal trade with China for 200 years, and eventually the Chinese grew angry, specifically at British opium smuggling. Gandhi, in Document 8, wrties more forcefully than Lin Zexu in Document 7 (Lin wrote several decades before Gandhi when the European empires were more powerful), telling Britain it “must abandon the idea of deriving any commercial benefit from us.” all the documents provided in this vein are from the points-of-view of Native peoples critical of economic exploitation; a more complete picture would be provided if documents from colonized people who benefited from trade with Europe were also included, because such people were instrumental in keeping the European Imperial system in place.

The European drive for colonies wasn’t just economically motivated, it was also rooted in Europeans’ belief that through colonization they could actually benefit native peoples. This sentiment was particularly resented by colnized people who suffered at the hands of Europeans. In Documents 4 and 5, Westerners write on the importance of American and Great Britain to improving other nations. Roosevelt takes a condescending attitude that indicates clearly he believes American to be superior to the less-developed countries of the Western hemisphere, while Josiah Strong states bluntly that colonization is necessary for the spiritual salvation of non-Anglo-Saxon peoples. But the reality of colonization was, from the perspective of the colonized, filled with terrible human rights abuses. Documents 8 and 9 show that, for all the Western talk of brining uncivilized peoples to the light of Christianity, many Westerners behaved barbarically during the process of colonization. These documents both deal specifically with the treatment of Indians in Great Britian. In Document 8, Gandhi writes that Indians, as Hindus and Muslims, have no interest in being Christianized. In Document 9, Sarojini Naidu, a female Indian nationalist, writes that “imperial treasures” of honor and female chasitty didn’t prevent British soldiers from stripping women naked and floggin gthem. There was a disconnect between European declarations of the benefits conferred on colonized people and the reality of how the Europeans handled their colonies. Of course, such abuses were not entirely hidden from the view of the European public. The inclusion of documents from Europeans critical of abusive policies would a llow a more nuanced picture of the European attitude toward Imperialism.

Ultimately, Europeans were unable to sustain their colonial holdings. Their justifications for Imperialism were fully rejected by Native populations, who resented European greed, desire for economic expansion, and proselytizing. As Mao Zedong, a post-Imperial leader controversial in his own light wrote, “Imperialism is a paper tiger.”

THANKS A MILLION.