CandNo: 144457

What was the historical function of culture in the development of imperialism? How has that function undergone change?

Introduction

So vast and yet so detailed is imperialism as an experience with crucial cultural dimensions, that we must speak of overlapping territories, intertwined histories common to men and women, whites and non-whites, dwellers in the metropolis and on the peripheries…1

This quotation, from Edward Said’s book Culture and Imperialism (1994), effectively

summarizes the complexities and vastness of the relationship between culture and imperialism.

As he notes, imperialism entailed significant cultural dimensions, the effects of which ranged

throughout both the metropolitan and the peripheral territories and their populations. The cultural

dimensions of imperialism and its role in the development thereof have therefore oriented crucial

scholarly work since the decline of colonial legitimacy which was catalyzed by the end of the

Second World War (1939-1945). Contextually, in the aftermath of 1945, international structure

underwent a drastic change, with traditionally powerful and seemingly invincible empires

granting independence to their colonized territories.2 The increase in sovereign, independent

states which resulted from the end of formal empire encouraged scholars, both of Western and

non-Western origin, to re-examine imperialism, essentially to account for its longevity, its

eventual demise and the lasting effects it had on formerly colonized populations. The consequent

rise of Postcolonial Studies as a lone-standing academic discipline and as a field in broader

disciplines such as International Relations, Media, Literature, among others, effectually

embodies these aforementioned aims. Particularly unique to the postcolonial academic approach

is its focus on culture, rather than just the political and economic spheres of international order

and structure. Specifically, the importance of Postcolonial Studies lies in its desire to “bear

1 Said, Edward. Culture and Imperialism. London: Vintage, 1994, p. 72.2 Springhall, John. Decolonization since 1945: The Collapse of European Overseas Empires. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave, 2001, p. 1.

1

CandNo: 144457

witness to the unequal and uneven forces of cultural representation involved in the contest for

political and social authority” which was characteristic of the colonial era.3

In this vein of Postcolonial Studies, this essay aims to account for the roles of culture in

the development of what is now known as “classic imperialism” (1882-1945), and to determine

whether or not these functions have undergone change. For the purpose of this essay, the

definition of culture comes from cultural theorist Michael Fischer, who contends that culture

consists of “the arts, media, styles, religions, value-orientations, imaginaries, world-views, soul

and the like.”4 This loose definition will allow for broader analysis of the different elements of

culture which helped to develop imperialism. Ultimately, this essay argues that the aim of culture

in the development of imperialism was twofold; Western culture was hierarchized as superior

and above all other cultures, effectively encouraging “social Darwinist” justifications for

imperialism and the oppression which it entailed, and secondly, culture was manifested to

condition imperialism throughout the metropole, ultimately to establish it as a norm and as a duty

of the imperial powers. Lastly, this essay will expose how these two functions have not changed,

fundamentally by revealing that notions of imperialism still exist and that such notions still entail

the same cultural dimensions as classic imperialism did. This will also form the structure of the

essay, with Section 1 establishing the function of cultural hierarchies in the development of

imperialism, while Section 2 covers the cultural production of imperial promotion, and Section 3

addresses the consistency of such cultural dimensions in imperialism as it is practiced today.

Literature Review

3 Bhabha, Homi K. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge, 1994, p. 171.4 Fischer, Michael. “Culture and Cultural Analysis.” Theory, Culture & Society 23.2-3 (2006): 360-64. Sage Journals. Web. 12 Dec. 2015, p. 360.

2

CandNo: 144457

Key to determining the historical function of culture in imperialism are works by

reputable scholars such as Edward Said, Homi Bhabha, Frantz Fanon, and Michel Foucault,

among others. Commendably, Edward Said’s work Orientalism (1978) provides key insights into

the creation and circulation of cultural and racial stereotypes. It specifically discusses how

Western imagination of the Orient, by which Said means the Arab and Islamic world, is far off

from the reality of Arab and Muslim countries and their populations. Reminiscent of Michel

Foucault, he examines how perceptions of Oriental inferiority and in effect, Western superiority,

are ideological creations primarily used to justify Western domination over non-Western

populations. Said effectively addresses the binaries that circulate in imperial rhetoric, in which

the West, namely Europe, embodies more “positive” qualities; civilized, moral, intellectual,

technologically capable, whilst the East is defined as barbaric, devoid of morals and values,

lacking in technological and intellectual ability.5 Ultimately, he argues the Orient “is not the

Orient as it is, but the Orient as it has been Orientalized,” and exposes how such

misrepresentations of the Orient were historically driven by a will to govern and dominate the

area.6 In this sense, it is highly relevant to any discussion relating culture and imperialism, as it

attempts to reveal how Eurocentric representations of the culture of “the Other” were used as

both imperial motivation and justification.

Equally important is Said’s book Culture and Imperialism, which has often been

regarded as the sequel to Orientalism. In this work, Said moves away from a focus on the Orient,

instead diverting his attention to metropolitan cultures, and the interdependence thereof with

imperialism.7 He explores a range of cultural work which was produced during the classical

imperial age and effectively demonstrates how the majority of them included subtle pro-imperial 5 Said, Edward W. Orientalism. London: Penguin Classics, 2003. Print. 6 Ibid, p. 104.7 Said, Culture and Imperialism, op. cit.

3

CandNo: 144457

sentiments which ultimately helped to develop imperial pride within the metropole. This is vital

to this essay, as Section 2 explores how culture was manifested to condition imperialism within

the metropoles, essentially to institutionalize it as a norm and as a patriotic symbol of pride and

glory.

Likewise, several chapters in Homi Bhabha’s The Location of Culture (1994) provide

considerable insight into colonial discourse, in which he argues that the “Western metropole

must confront its postcolonial history,” through rethinking traditionally Eurocentric notions of

identity and cultural production.8 Particularly important are his ideas about what he views as

cultural manifestations to promote the colonial “civilizing mission.” As will be discussed in

Section 1, one of the enterprises used to justify imperialism was the “civilizing mission,” in

which European powers deemed it their responsibility to teach the fundaments of modernity to

what they perceived as “barbarous,” “backward” and “static” cultures.9 Bhabha’s considerations

about this are particularly important, as he addresses the interdependencies between cultural

production in the metropole and the development of imperial enterprises, which is highly

relevant to the discussion addressed in this essay.

Moreover, Frantz Fanon’s descriptions of the colonial experience provide notable insight

into the effects of imperialism on culture, therefore making his work considerably important to

this essay. His book, Black Skin, White Masks (1952) is especially prominent to consider when

addressing cultural attributes of imperialism. The book’s relevance lies particularly in Fanon’s

confrontation with the socio-cultural effects colonialism had on colonized subjects. He discusses

the various practices of control which embody colonialism, fundamentally addressing the

8 Bhabha, op. cit., p. 6.9 Spivak, G. C. "Culture Alive." Theory, Culture & Society 23.2-3 (2006): 359-60. Sage Journals. Web. 12 Dec. 2015, p. 359.

4

CandNo: 144457

hierarchies and divisions established by imperial agents in order to maintain dominance over

their subjects, and the effects such differentiations had on those who are subjected to it.10 This is

especially relevant to Section 1 of this essay, which discusses the formation of cultural difference

as a role of culture in the development of imperialism. In addition, Fanon was born in Martinique

in 1925, when it was still a French colony, which indicates he was subjected firsthand to colonial

practice.11 This adds weight to his writings as it provides a rare, firsthand experience of living

under colonial rule, whereas the majority of work which addresses colonialism and circulates

academic disciplines is of Western origin. Ultimately, Fanon’s work and the relevance thereof

lies not only in its exposure of the imperial practice of cultural differentiation, it also embodies a

postcolonial desire to re-examine imperialism from a “Third World” perspective, further adding

to its significance for this essay.

Finally, Michel Foucault’s discourse regarding the relationship between knowledge and

power is vital when addressing the cultural dimensions of imperialism. Foucault’s lecture

addressing the interrelations between truth, right and power is particularly relevant to Western

imperial manifestations of truths, and how the acceptance of such truths helped to build imperial

power. He summarizes his overarching argument by declaring “we are subjected to the

production of truth through power and we cannot exercise power except through the production

of truth.”12 Essentially, he surmises that truth and notions of truth are conceptions built for and

built by agents in power. In other words, power cannot be practiced without the establishment of

truths, whilst truths can only be established by those in power. Re-examining truth and attempts

to contextualize knowledge as such is characteristic of postcolonial scholarship, which further 10 Fanon, Frantz, Ziaddin Sardar, and Homi Bhabha. Black Skin, White Masks. New York: Grove, 2008. Print.11 Ibid, p. vii. 12 Foucault, Michel, and Colin Gordon. Power/knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972-1977. New York: Pantheon, 1980, p. 93.

5

CandNo: 144457

adds to the relevance of Foucault’s work with regards to this essay. Moreover, considerations of

truth as manifested by and for those in power helps to explain how the differentiation of culture

and the establishment of cultural hierarchies, as it was practiced by imperial powers, was so

readily accepted by both the metropolitan and peripheral populations.

Section 1 – Establishing Cultural Hierarchies

One of the functions of culture in the development of imperialism was the manifestation

of cultural hierarchies, which served as both justification and motivation for imperialism and its

development. As David Slater notes, “the ethno-centric construction of cultural difference… has

been intrinsic to the deployment of global power.”13 Through the establishment of cultural

binaries, with European culture as prime and superior at one pole, and non-European cultures as

inferior and in need of European values and morals forming the opposing pole, imperial centers

could justify their expansion as both a duty and a responsibility. As Thomas Fallace observes,

imperial practice was ripe with idealizations of “white culture…as the highest, most civilized

form.”14 To contextualize, the exploration and discovery which resulted from technological

advancements in transportation allowed men from “industrialized” nations like Britain and

France to travel to areas which were previously deemed unreachable. Extensive European

movement abroad was effectively accompanied by the extensive movement of European values

and ideas, which ultimately caused notions of Europeanisation and Westernization to achieve

13 Slater, David. "Post-colonial Questions for Global times." Review of International Political Economy 5.4 (1998): 647-78. Taylor and Francis. Web. 5 Dec. 2015, p. 669. 14 Fallace, Thomas. "Recapitulation Theory and the New Education: Race, Culture, Imperialism, and Pedagogy, 1894–1916." Curriculum Inquiry 42.4 (2012): 510-33. Taylor and Francis. Web. 31 Dec. 2015, p. 512.

6

CandNo: 144457

global prominence.15 In essence, the technological developments exhibited in Europe and the

lack thereof beyond Europe was a significant catalyst of the European superiority complex which

convinced them of their right to dominate others. Evidence of this superiority dynamic is found

in writings by colonial advocates. For example, French imperialist Jules Harmand said in 1910;

It is necessary, then, to accept as a principle and point of departure that there is a hierarchy of races and civilizations, and that we belong to the superior race and civilization… The basic legitimation of conquest over native peoples is the conviction of our superiority.16

Harmand then goes on to discuss what he perceives as moral superiority of the French in relation

to their colonized subjects.17 Palpably, the conviction that European powers embodied superiority

not only in technology but also in morals, and in effect, culture, played an important role in the

development of imperialism. Moreover, other advocacy of imperialism is riddled with similar

sentiments about the oppositional relationship between European imperial culture and non-

European cultures. In Orientalism, for example, Said notes how British imperial proconsul

Evelyn Cromer wrote in his chronicle about Egypt that Europeans are “close reasoner[s]” and

“natural logician[s]” while Egyptian Arabs are “deficient in logical faculty” and “incapable of

drawing the most obvious conclusions.”18 Again, this indicates a significant function of culture

was to establish the culture of the “Other” as deficient in relation to European culture, therefore

suggesting Europeans had a right to dominate over those considered subordinate.

Notably, the validity of positioning cultures in a hierarchical order had scientific roots,

with notions like “Social Darwinism” ultimately promoting White cultural supremacy on

scientific grounds. It is important to note how, prior to 1916, social scientists strongly believed in

15 Said, Culture and Imperialism, op. cit., p. 158.16 Harmand, cited in Said, Culture and Imperialism, op. cit., p. 17.17 Ibid.18 Cromer, cited in Said, Orientalism, p. 38.

7

CandNo: 144457

the ability to place different cultures along a linear line of moral development, with savagery as

the first stage and civilized, reasoning cultures as the last stage.19 The aforementioned

technological advancements of European powers led social scientists to firmly contend that

European culture embodied the final stage of moral development; modernity and civilization. In

comparison, the lack of similar industrial and militaristic capacity amongst non-European

cultures was translated as a lack of intellect and moral ability. Therefore, non-European cultures

were discriminately placed at the lesser end of the spectrum, and were scientifically rationalized

as morally backwards and underdeveloped. This resulted in the legitimation of scientific racism

like “Social Darwinism” which claimed it was the natural, inherent right of “advanced” cultures

to dominate over what were perceived as infantile cultures.

These notions of scientifically proven superiority also promoted what is commonly

referred to as the “civilizing mission.” The “civilizing mission” embodied the belief that

imperialism was not only the right of the presumably superior West, but also a duty. As was

aforementioned, European culture was deemed the most civil, and in effect, the metropoles could

justify their imperial enterprises by claiming it was their duty to civilize those cultures at the

lower end of the cultural hierarchy spectrum.

Another manner in which the primacy of cultural differentiation in the development of

imperialism can be seen is in firsthand accounts of colonialism, written by those who were

colonized. As was aforementioned, Frantz Fanon’s Black Skin, White Masks provides noteworthy

insight into the colonial experience and the psychoanalytic effects of cultural differentiation as it

was practiced by imperial powers. Fanon notes how “what is often called the black soul is a

white man’s artifact.”20 Comparable to Edward Said’s Orientalism, Fanon reaffirms that the

19 Fallace, op. cit., p. 516. 20 Fanon, op. cit., p. 6.

8

CandNo: 144457

perceived inferiority of black man and “black culture” is in fact imagined by white colonizers in

order to justify what was often viewed as their right to dominate. Moreover, in his book he notes

how the oppressive situation within which black men and women found themselves cannot be

adequately explained without consideration of socio-economic conditions.21 The book was

published in 1952, which indicates the primary socio-economic condition which he refers to is

imperialism. Evidently, Fanon further exposes the interdependence between establishing an

inferiority complex amongst colonized populations and the role of that in developing and

maintaining imperialism. As he remarks, “White civilization and European culture have forced

an existential deviation on the Negro;”22 a deviation which, in turn, has led many to accept

European cultural superiority as fact, rather than as created, which effectively helped to develop

imperialism.

Similarly, as Gayatri Spivak observes, “Every definition or description of culture comes

from the cultural assumptions of the investigator.”23 This is further evident in the systems of

education established in the metropoles and the peripherals during the age of classic imperialism.

In her essay, Can the Subaltern Speak? (1983) Spivak remarks how positive notions of

modernity and patriotism were taught to be attributes of European culture, further enforcing the

notion of European cultural superiority.24 She relates this specifically to her country of origin and

former British crown colony; India, in which she notes that celebrated concepts like nationalism

were majorly dominated by elitist figures who embraced and embodied British culture. She

specifies that discourse which circulated India and which regarded Indian nationalism, for

21 Ibid, p. 4. 22 Ibid, p. 6.23 Spivak, Culture Alive, op. cit., p. 359.24 Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. "Can the Subaltern Speak?" Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory: A Reader. Ed. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman. New York: Columbia UP, 1994, p. 79.

9

CandNo: 144457

example, always confirmed nationalism as a process whose achievements are credited primarily

to British colonial rulers, administrators and culture.25 Said confirms this in his work when he

notes how; “In the system of education designed for India, students were taught not only English

literature but also the inherent superiority of the English race.”26 Effectively, both Spivak and

Said address how cultural hierarchies and the inferiority of non-European cultures were trained

into local mentality, further reaffirming Said’s notions of orientalism and the manifestation of the

inferiority of non-European culture as fact rather than fiction.

Evidently, a hugely significant function of culture in the development of imperialism was

to hierarchize different cultures in attempt to justify and promote imperial practice. In order to

validate governance over overseas territories and their populations and cultures, European

imperial rhetoric circulated notions of “savagery” and “backwardness” as characteristic of non-

European cultures, while simultaneously promoting the presumed superiority of European

culture. The consequent dynamic of European culture as superior over cultures of “the Other” led

many European powers to believe it was their inherent right and duty to dominate over

“subordinate” peoples, thus developing imperial practice and sentiment.

Section 2 – Conditioning Imperialism through Culture

Take up the White Man’s BurdenSend forth the best ye breedGo bind your sons to exile

To Serve your Captive’s needs.To wait in heavy harnessOn fluttered folk and wild

Your new-caught, sullen peoples,

25 Ibid.26 Said, Culture and Imperialism, op. cit., p. 121.

10

CandNo: 144457

Half-devil and half-child.Take up the White Man’s Burden.27

As is evident from this extract from Rudyard Kipling’s poem, The White Man’s Burden

(1899), another role of culture in the development of imperialism was to promote and condition

colonial practice throughout the metropolitan publics. Metropolitan support for imperialism was

vital for its maintenance, which suggests why European cultural productions during and after the

classical imperial age were riddled with pro-imperial sentiment. This abstract from The White

Man’s Burden, for example, perfectly exemplifies how different forms of culture, like poetry,

were manifested to encourage and justify colonial practice. Kipling particularly emphasizes how

the continuance thereof was considered noble, suggesting it was the inherent duty of the “White

Man” to enlighten their colonized subjects, belittled as “half-devil and half-child.”28

Moreover, poetry was not the only aspect of literary culture which embraced imperialism

and indirectly encouraged its continuance. In Culture and Imperialism, Edward Said extensively

explores other manners in which culture was manifested and manipulated to entail imperial

advocacy.29 He observes that many novels, contemporarily revered as exemplary literary classics,

are subtly infused with imperial sentiment and notions of the “glory” of empire. In regards to the

British Empire, for example, he notes how popular authors like Joseph Conrad, even Arthur

Conan Doyle of the highly popular Sherlock Holmes books, reflected pro-imperial values in their

works through references to colonized territories.30 Similarly, Jennifer Fraser notes how authors

like Coyle often portrayed their nations’ colonies as “alluring and exotic,” often through

27 Kipling, Rudyard. "The White Man's Burden." Peace Review 10.3 (1998): 311-12. Taylor & Francis. Web. 25 Dec. 2015, p. 311. 28 Ibid.29 Said, Culture and Imperialism, op. cit. 30 Said, Culture and Imperialism, op. cit.,

11

CandNo: 144457

romanticizing and sensualizing foreign environments and their populations.31 Evidently,

metropolitan literary culture generally embraced and subtly promoted imperialism through both

degradation of non-White populations, as Kipling does in his poem, and through appealing

references to the landscape and potential riches that entails territorial acquiescence of overseas

land.

Similarly, in The Location of Culture, Bhabha effectively addresses how literary culture

was used to promote the aforementioned concept of the “civilizing mission.” He notes how

novels set in colonized territories often included instances of religious revelation, in which a

character of non-European descent comes across the Bible, and that the discovery ultimately

changes them for the better.32 Bhabha comments on novels that exhibited such evangelism as

such;

Written as they are in the name of the father and the author, these texts of the civilizing mission immediately suggest the triumph of the colonialist movement in early English evangelism and modern English literature.33

Ultimately, he translates these positive discoveries of the Bible in literary culture as

manifestations of European religious superiority. This reveals another manner in which literary

culture was used to promote a superiority-inferiority dynamic between imperial powers and their

peripheries, fundamentally by claiming imperial practice was valid due to its desire to promote

notions of religious correctness, enlightenment, civilization and modernity.

Notably, Said and Bhabha’s ideas are reminiscent of Foucault’s “truth, power and rights”

paradigm. Foucault claims that “the essential role of the theory of right, from medieval times

31 Fraser, Jennifer. "Imperial Contradictions in Arthur Conan Doyle's The Sign of Four." Studies by Undergraduate Researchers at Guelph 5.2 (2012), p. 19.32 Bhabha, op. cit., pp. 102-105. 33 Ibid, p. 105.

12

CandNo: 144457

onwards, was to fix the legitimacy of power…”34 This is evident in literary cultural productions

in nations like Britain during the classical imperial age. Representations of non-European

cultures and people as backward and void of enlightenment values, and the consistency of such

representations, promoted such stereotypes as concrete knowledge, rather than as manipulated

fiction. In effect, it becomes clear that literary culture played an important role in the sustenance

and development of imperialism through establishing non-European inferiority as fact. Said

efficiently summarizes this as follows;

“When it came to what lay beyond metropolitan Europe, the arts and the disciplines of representation – on the one hand, fiction, history and travel writing, painting… depended on the powers of Europe to bring the non-European world into representations, the better to be able to see it, to master it, and above all, to hold it.”35

Fundamentally, Said accurately observes how representations of the “Other” played a vital role

in developing imperial power, ultimately contending that he who is in control of representation,

is in control of what is being represented. This is significantly comparable to Foucault’s

aforementioned work regarding the creation of truth as a manner in which to attain power.

Translated into imperial terms, this effectually indicates that imperial representations of the

“truth” of non-European subordination were vital to developing imperial power.

Moreover, the role of culture in the metropoles in developing imperialism expanded out

of the literary field and into social and public life. Specifically, metropolitan culture often

glorified imperialism through eroticizing colonized subjects in exhibits and museums. Imperial

historian Eric Hobsbawm remarks how “colonial exhibits were a hit” and that “British jubilees,

royal funerals and coronations were all the more impressive because, like ancient Roman

triumphs, they displayed submissive maharajahs in jeweled robes – freely loyal rather than

34 Foucault, op. cit., p. 95.35 Said, Culture and Imperialism, op. cit., p. 119.

13

CandNo: 144457

captive.”36 In this sense, non-European culture was put on display in a fashion reminiscent of

animal zoos today, likely to further build upon the conviction of European superiority which so

effectively drove imperialism.

Ultimately, analysis of culture in the metropole reveals that an important function thereof,

in the development of imperialism, was to encourage and sustain pro-imperial sentiments of

glory, adventure, and the duty to modernize in what Kipling evidently calls the “White Man’s

Burden.”37 Different elements of culture; literature, social culture, popular culture, entailed

sentiments of the “normalness” of imperialism, evidently to suggest it was an intrinsic character

of “Englishness,” “Frenchness,” “Dutchness,” or just “Europeanness” in general. This helped to

develop imperialism through ensuring continued metropolitan support of imperial enterprises.

Furthermore, the culture of the “Other” was put on display in the aforementioned colonial

exhibits, indicatively to build upon the imperial superiority complex which was so essential to

the development of imperialism. In sum, metropolitan culture was infused with pro-imperial

sentiments not only through literary arts, but also through public degradation of “Other” cultures

under imperial dominance.

Section 3 – How if at all, have these functions changed?

Finally, this section will discuss whether the aforementioned roles of culture in the

development of imperialism have changed today. Firstly, it is important to consider the various

viewpoints which address whether or not imperialism still exists today, and if it does, how does it

differ from empire as it was practiced in the 19th and early 20th century? Scholars like Homi

Bhabha and Gayatri Spivak have critiqued contemporary international order and the powers

36 Hobsbawm, Eric J. The Age of Empire: 1875 - 1914;. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1987, pp. 70-71.37 Kipling, op. cit., p. 311.

14

CandNo: 144457

which dictate it for their continuance of imperialism, albeit in a subtler, less direct manner as is

often associated with classic imperialism. Bhabha specifies;

I am equally convinced that, in the language of international diplomacy, there is a sharp growth in a new Anglo-American nationalism which increasingly articulates its economic and military power in political acts that express a neo-imperialist disregard for the independence and autonomy of peoples and places in the Third World.38

Ultimately, he translates contemporary interventional acts by the USA and Britain, for example,

as contemporary forms of imperialism; commonly termed as neo-imperialism. An important

question to ask now is, if the decolonization period brought an end to formal empire, what does

neo-imperialism embody? Pan-Africanist Kwame Nkrumah, who is largely associated with the

theory of neo-imperialism, defines it as a situation in which “the State which is subject to it is, in

theory, independent…” but that “in reality its economic system and thus its political policy is

directed from outside.”39 He goes on to support such claims by remarking how organizations like

the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank are in fact pawns of neo-imperialism

due to their American backing. Furthermore, he notes how control of the world market is

fundamentally at the hands of the USA, and that although aid is given to “less developed”

countries, it is most often with strict conditions, for example, that they follow democratic models

of governance or that known American allies are put into power.40 Lastly, he mentions that neo-

imperialism, although primarily economic, has several forms, such as military aid and

international intervention on “humanitarian” grounds; fundamentally anything which disrespects

the sovereignty of a nation.

38 Bhabha, op. cit., p. 20.39 Nkrumah, Kwame. Neo-colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism. New York: International, 1965, p. 1.40 Nkrumah, op. cit., p. 8.

15

CandNo: 144457

If this is the case, then what must be addressed now is whether or not neo-imperialism

entails the same functions of culture as classic imperialism did. As was described in Section 1,

one of the primary roles of culture in the development of imperialism was to establish cultural

hierarchies between imperial powers and their colonized subjects. Edward Said summarizes it as

such;

“The representations of what lay beyond insular or metropolitan boundaries came, almost from the start, to confirm European power. There is an impressive circularity here; we are dominant because we have the power (industrial, technological, military, moral), and they don’t, because of which they are not dominant, they are inferior, we are superior…”41

Remarkably, although Said wrote this in reference to the age of classical imperialism that existed

up until the end of the Second World War, the superiority-inferiority paradigm which he

discusses in this quotation is still practiced today, but arguably more so by the USA than by

Europe. Case in point is the American invasion of Iraq in 2003.42 Although there were numerous

justifications for the invasion, one very prompt one was that “liberating” the oppressed Iraqis and

the hope of transforming Iraq into a democracy was more important than respecting Iraq’s

sovereignty. This is extremely reminiscent of the “civilizing mission” which was used as

justification for formal empire. Again, there is a notion of Western, in this case, American desire

to spread its values to cultures which are perceived to exhibit antithetical values. Equally

important to consider is the rise of the US as the global power, and that this has further

developed an image of Western superiority over non-Western cultures. Contextually, the fall of

the USSR and the end of the Cold War resulted in the US becoming the leading world power. In

effect, values associated with the US, such as liberalism and democracy, were seen as victorious

over all others. This built upon notions of US superiority, which in terms of Foucaultian thoughts

41 Said, Culture and Imperialism, op. cit., p. 127.42 Kiely, Ray. Rethinking Imperialism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010, p. 196.

16

CandNo: 144457

about right, truth and power, suggests why the US views it, solely, has the right to intervene

internationally and ultimately to practice neo-imperialism.

The other established function of culture in the development of imperialism was to

condition imperial motives throughout the metropoles. Notably, this is still a highly relevant role

of culture today, with neo-imperial conceptions of Western superiority directing a range of

cultural productions. As John Rowe states, “US cultural production… conditioned American

citizens to accept the undisguised militarism and jingoistic nationalism now driving US foreign

policy.”43 There is accuracy in Rowe’s remarks, as contemporary Hollywood movies often

portray Latin American, African or Arab characters as dirty, unkempt and uncivilized, while

American or European characters are most often portrayed as heroic, victorious, liberating

forces.44 Phrases like “land of the free,” have become commonplace in movies which illustrate

America as the most liberal, peaceful place, particularly in comparison to Middle Eastern,

African and Latin American countries. Taking big budget Hollywood movies like The Hurt

Locker45 as an example, one can see many allusions to American heroism versus Arab barbarism,

not only in regards to the people, but also the landscape. Furthermore, considering the film was

set during the highly controversial Iraq War, it can also be seen as propaganda for the necessity

of international intervention as is embodied by American foreign policy. Although directorial

intent in promoting notions of Western superiority is debatable, the fact remains that filmic

cultural representations of the West and the non-West is consistent with how literary culture

represented European culture and non-European culture during the classical imperial age.

43 Rowe, J. C. "Culture, US Imperialism, and Globalization." American Literary History 16.4 (2004): 575-95. JSTOR [JSTOR]. Web. 6 Dec. 2016, p. 575.44 Shaheen, Jack G. Hollywood’s Verdict on Arabs after 9/11. Northampton, MA: Olive Branch, 2008, p. 25. 45 The Hurt Locker. Dir. Kathryn Bigelow. Perf. Jeremy Renner and Anthony Mackie. Voltage Pictures, 2008. DVD.

17

CandNo: 144457

Fundamentally, both aforementioned roles of culture in the development of classic

imperialism exist today, but instead to develop contemporary, arguably subtler neo-imperialism.

To summarize, cultural differentiation is still used as a means to justify international

intervention, whether such intervention is militaristic, economic or humanitarian in form.

American foreign political discourse often promotes notions of “liberation” and “freedom” as

excuses to disregard another nation’s sovereignty, which is largely reminiscent of the civilizing

mission of classic imperialism. Furthermore, these ideas are infused into cultural productions,

particularly in the film industry which is remarkably similar to how literary culture was

manifested to advocate classic imperialism as a norm, right, and duty.

Conclusion

Ultimately, culture had two principal functions in the development of imperialism.

Primarily, it was used as justification for imperialism through establishing a hierarchal

relationship between European culture and non-European cultures, with the former as dominant

and the latter as subordinate. The scientific grounds for such discrimination effectively

developed imperial justifications like the “civilizing mission,” in which imperial powers

developed colonial practice by claiming it was their duty to spread values of modernity and

civilization.

Secondly, culture was manifested to condition and promote imperialism in the

metropoles, whose continued support for imperialism was vital for its maintenance and

development. The importance of consistent metropolitan support in developing imperial practice

cannot be undermined, and the manifestation of different elements of culture in advocating and

accepting imperialism as a positive enterprise further reveals this. Through literary reference to

18

CandNo: 144457

the subordination of non-European cultures and the enlightening character of imperial presence,

imperialism was promoted as both a positive, charitable enterprise and as an intrinsic attribute of

“Europeanness.” In addition, the consistency of such representations aided in establishing

cultural discrimination as truth, rather than as an imagined ideology to justify imperial

expansion.

Finally, although there are various viewpoints regarding the existence of neo-imperialism

and the extent thereof, it is evident that culture is continually used to establish a hierarchal

relation between the West, predominantly the USA, and the non-West. The modern age has

shifted popular culture from the written, literary field, to the televised, media field. In effect, neo-

imperialism and the conviction of American superiority which permits such imperial practice

often directs the characterization of filmic characters, with American characters portraying

positive qualities, and non-American characters embodying negative qualities. As such, it is

apparent that cultural dimensions of contemporary neo-imperialism correlate with the cultural

dimensions of classic imperialism.

Bibliography

Bhabha, Homi K. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge, 1994. Print.

Fallace, Thomas. "Recapitulation Theory and the New Education: Race, Culture, Imperialism, and Pedagogy, 1894–1916." Curriculum Inquiry 42.4 (2012): 510-33. Taylor and Francis. Web. 31 Dec. 2015.

Fanon, Frantz, Ziaddin Sardar, and Homi Bhabha. Black Skin, White Masks. New York: Grove, 2008. Print.

Fischer, Michael. “Culture and Cultural Analysis.” Theory, Culture & Society 23.2-3 (2006): 360-64. Sage Journals. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.

Foucault, Michel, and Colin Gordon. Power/knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972-1977. New York: Pantheon, 1980. Print.

19

CandNo: 144457

Fraser, Jennifer. "Imperial Contradictions in Arthur Conan Doyle's The Sign of Four." Studies by Undergraduate Researchers at Guelph 5.2 (2012): 19-21. Print.

Hobsbawm, Eric J. The Age of Empire: 1875 - 1914;. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1987. Print.

Kiely, Ray. Rethinking Imperialism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. Print.

Kipling, Rudyard. "The White Man's Burden." Peace Review 10.3 (1998): 311-12. Taylor & Francis. Web. 25 Dec. 2015.

Nkrumah, Kwame. Neo-colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism. New York: International, 1965. Print.

Rowe, J. C. "Culture, US Imperialism, and Globalization." American Literary History 16.4 (2004): 575-95. JSTOR [JSTOR]. Web. 6 Dec. 2016.

Said, Edward. Culture and Imperialism. London: Vintage, 1994. Print.

Said, Edward W. Orientalism. London: Penguin Classics, 2003. Print.

Shaheen Jack G. Guilty: Hollywood's Verdict on Arabs after 9/11. Northampton, MA: Olive Branch. Print.

Slater, David. "Post-colonial Questions for Global times." Review of International Political Economy 5.4 (1998): 647-78. Taylor and Francis. Web. 5 Dec. 2015.

Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. "Can the Subaltern Speak?" Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory: A Reader. Ed. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman. New York: Columbia UP, 1994. 66-111. Print.

Spivak, G. C. "Culture Alive." Theory, Culture & Society 23.2-3 (2006): 359-60. Sage Journals. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.

Springhall, John. Decolonization since 1945: The Collapse of European Overseas Empires. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave, 2001. Print.

Filmography

The Hurt Locker. Dir. Kathryn Bigelow. Perf. Jeremy Renner and Anthony Mackie. Voltage Pictures, 2008. DVD.

Word Count (excl. footnotes and bibliography) - 5019

20