1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Ierofanga [76]
4 years ago
8

During the early 20th century, many Western thinkers and political philosophers defended the principles of universalism and equa

lity. But, ironically, these same individuals also defended the legitimacy of colonialism and imperialism. What was the most common argument for legitimizing imperialism
History
1 answer:
Leto [7]4 years ago
3 0

Answer:

The "CIVILIZING MISSION" argument

Explanation:

Colonialism is a practice of domination, which involves the subjugation of one people to another. One of the difficulties in defining colonialism is that it is hard to distinguish it from imperialism. Frequently the two concepts are treated as synonyms. Like colonialism, imperialism also involves political and economic control over a dependent territory. The etymology of the two terms, however, provides some clues about how they differ. The term colony comes from the Latin word colonus, meaning farmer. This root reminds us that the practice of colonialism usually involved the transfer of population to a new territory, where the arrivals lived as permanent settlers while maintaining political allegiance to their country of origin. Imperialism, on the other hand, comes from the Latin term imperium, meaning to command. Thus, the term imperialism draws attention to the way that one country exercises power over another, whether through settlement, sovereignty, or indirect mechanisms of control.

The legitimacy of colonialism has been a longstanding concern for political and moral philosophers in the Western tradition. At least since the Crusades and the conquest of the Americas, political theorists have struggled with the difficulty of reconciling ideas about justice and natural law with the practice of European sovereignty over non-Western peoples. In the nineteenth century, the tension between liberal thought and colonial practice became particularly acute, as dominion of Europe over the rest of the world reached its zenith. Ironically, in the same period when most political philosophers began to defend the principles of universalism and equality, the same individuals still defended the legitimacy of colonialism and imperialism. One way of reconciling those apparently opposed principles was the argument known as the “civilizing mission,” which suggested that a temporary period of political dependence or tutelage was necessary in order for “uncivilized” societies to advance to the point where they were capable of sustaining liberal institutions and self-government.

You might be interested in
which organizational structures in the league dealt with electing non permanent members to the council and only met once a year
sleet_krkn [62]

Answer:

Assembly.

Explanation:

<u>The Assembly was a body of the League of Nations which only met once a year in Geneva.</u> It consisted of  three delegates of each country that was a member of the League.

On the other hand, <u>the Council was an executive body and counted 8 members:</u> four permanent and four non-permanent. The Assembly was assigned to choose the non-permanent members.

5 0
3 years ago
At its peak the Inca city of Cuzco had between 100,000 and _______ people?
vladimir2022 [97]
At its peak the Inca city of Cuzco had between 100,000 and 300,000 people.
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which right does Article I, Section 11 of the Washington State Constitution protect?
frosja888 [35]
Your answer is freedom of rely
5 0
3 years ago
What was the purpose of the immigration act of 1990?
Whitepunk [10]
The purpose of the immigration act of 1990 was to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to change the level, preference system for admission, to provide for administrative naturalization, of the immigrants of US, and for other purposes.
7 0
3 years ago
Insider trading is a worse crime than smuggling? why or why not?
zalisa [80]

Answer:

Insider Trading is really very illegal because it makes companies difficult to get capitals. It's very unfair and discourages ordinary people from participating in markets. insider trading tends to discourage corporate investment and reduce the efficiency of corporate behavior. However, smuggling have good effect like trade misinvoicing

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What expirements did Anotine Lavosier use to disprove the phlogision theory?
    14·1 answer
  • What is a tenement?
    6·2 answers
  • What was a result of the French and Indian War that eventually led to the American Revolution?
    9·1 answer
  • Can someone help me with thisss
    6·1 answer
  • What is the danger of populism
    13·2 answers
  • Why does Machine Politics emerge? How did Machine Politics expand so rapidly? Help!!! I don't understand!
    5·1 answer
  • Please answer ASAP!!!<br><br> What happened to the Iroquois people after the Battle of Newtown?
    6·1 answer
  • Which of the following IS NOT a contributing factor that led to the economic boom in America
    15·2 answers
  • How did President Obama change the country's approach to the War on Terror?
    14·1 answer
  • How does plate movement create mountains
    8·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!