Heather DeLancett WI European Imperialism Prof.

Michael Bitter Short Paper #5 Spring 2011

Racism & Nationalism in New Imperialism

In our most recent readings, Hannah Arendt proposes the phenomenon of High Imperialisms constructed racism as an emergency explanation of human beings whom no European or civilized man could understand and whose humanity so frightened and humiliated the immigrants that they no longer cared to belong to the same human species.1 Having read only excerpts of her far-ranging treatise The Origins of Totalitarianism, it appears to me that she is positing that racism was an extension and substitution for nationalism as a principle of the body politic which was discovered as a new device for political organization and rule over foreign peoples as late as the first decades of imperialism- by which she seems to mean the era of New or High Imperialism generally classified between the late 18th century through the early 20th century.2 While this possible argument as a new device is very disturbing to me, especially coming from an author examining the history of Anti-Semitism - Part One of The Origins of Totalitarianism, there is merit to the idea that racist ideologies are an offshoot and extension of nationalist ideologies when played out on a global stage. When discussing Continental Imperialism in the subsequent chapter, Arendt takes a closer look at what I would consider already historically well established political racial constructions that were prevalent and utilized to form nationalism notions in the first place. The author does not seem to
1

Hannah Arendt. Imperialism Part Two of The Origins of Totalitarianism. (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich: New York & London, 1968) p. 65. 2 Ibid.

consider these under the label of racism and prefers to describe this as a different type of phenomenon, perhaps because these continental race difficulties were between peoples of more similar genetic characteristics. Specifically, the long-standing contempt of one another by the Christians, Jews, and Muslims seems glossed in terms of tribal nationalisms instead of the much more pervasive racial constructions allowing them to consider each other heathen savages despite religious conversions, education, or geographical location. I agree that the strictly contrasted black/white racism prevalent in the High Imperialist politics of African exploits can correctly be seen as an extension and mutation of nationalistic ideologies. I would argue for the reverse also that nationalism during the rise of nation states can also be seen in part as an extension and mutation of pre-existing racist ideologies. In her chapter on Continental Imperialism, Arendt makes a distinction between the psychological elements of chauvinism and tribalism. She describes the chauvinistic impulse as past oriented, extroverted, concerned with visible spiritual and material achievements of the nation and tribalism as mythical future oriented, introverted, concentrated on the individuals own soul which is considered as the embodiment of general national qualities.3 Again, I think she puts the cart before the horse in describing tribalism as a phenomenon of the nation, rather than vice versa, but she very aptly describes tribalism: Politically speaking, tribal nationalism always insists that its own people is surrounded by a world of enemies, one against all, that a fundamental difference exists between this people and all others. It claims its people to be unique, individual, incompatible with all others, and denies theoretically the very possibility of a common mankind long before it is used to destroy the humanity of man.4 The ways in which each nations racism expressed itself during the High Imperialism era can be analyzed between these two facets that she offers. From Baycrofts article5, we could plot, (at least in

3 4

Ibid. p. 107. Ibid. 5 Timothy Baycroft. Nationalism in Europe 1789-1945. (Cambridge Univ. Press: ?, 1998) p. 61-70.

generalizations), Britain to be on the extreme side of chauvinism derived from their cultural past accomplishments and displaying a higher willingness to tolerate differences - such as the initial notions of the brown Englishmen in India. Germany, the fledgling nation still struggling with establishing a nationalistic identity could be seen to have exhibited the extreme internalized tribalism of intense conflict with differences, both racial and cultural. France, with its established cultural chauvinism, but facing challenges to nationalistic prestige from the Franco-Prussian war embarrassments, could be generalized to be somewhere in the middle of these two extremes. Hannah Arendt echoes Emil Deckerts sentiment that Continental Imperialism starts at home, and develops the thought that overseas imperialists had a certain basis of authentic experience, where those in the homeland formed race concepts which were completely ideological. 6 Both nationalism and racism seem to be ideological constructs binding groups by arbitrary commonalities to the exclusion of any differences from those shared characteristics and seem rooted in traditional notions of tribalism. Later in the reading, Arendt states that racism was used in the society of whites and blacks in South Africa before imperialism exploited it as a major political idea.7 From my perspective, racism is always politically constructed, and the intensity of hatred and dehumanization towards another group/race is, at the bottom line, based on how much profit stands to be gained from the practice. During High Imperialism, it seems that dark-skinned Africans became the most profitable for political exploitation to the extent that racist ideologies of black/white superseded previous racial constructs.

Hannah Arendt. Imperialism Part Two of the Origins of Totalitarianism. (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich: New York & London, 1968) p.104. 7 Ibid. p. 75.

Bibliography
Arendt, Hannah. Imperialism: Part Two Of The Origins Of Totalitarianism . New York & London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1968. Baycroft, Timothy. Nationalism in Europe 1789-1945. ?: Cambridge University Press, 1998.