Imperialism, World Wars, and Totalitarianism: 1900–1945

The Logic and Reach of Imperial Expansion

Imperialism, often considered the final stage of capitalism, was a logical continuation of industrialization, the development of trade, and colonization. Global trade and the exchange of goods united Europe, Africa, America, and Asia into an integral economic organism. The imperial system, as well as interaction among the major colonial superpowers, guaranteed economic stability and peace. Colonies served as perfect markets for goods produced in metropolitan countries and functioned as emergency outlets in cases of overproduction, helping to prevent local or global economic crises.

Colonies also served as suppliers of raw materials for metropolitan industry. To prevent movements for political and economic independence, colonies were not permitted to develop their own industrial capacity; their economic activity was deliberately limited to farming and mining. Alongside the traditional colonial systems maintained by France, Great Britain, and Belgium — each of which held vast possessions worldwide — American imperialism introduced a different model, one without formal colonial possessions. American imperialism differed from the British and French varieties in that it penetrated independent countries, making their single-sector economies dependent on price policies set by American corporations.

American imperialists used a variety of methods to extend their spheres of influence in the Western Hemisphere: the bribery of corrupt officials, support for political opposition against unwanted regimes, and even open military intervention, which typically ended with the installation of puppet governments. These methods were employed in the Philippines, Cuba, and Puerto Rico.

The effects of imperialism were quite different for colonies and imperial metropolises alike. On one hand, the exchange of goods ensured economic stability; on the other, the imperial ambitions of the great powers contributed directly to World War I. Colonies experienced predominantly negative impacts: industrial backwardness, dependence on metropolitan economies, poverty, social injustice, and discrimination.

Contemporary Debates Over Imperialism

The appearance of imperialism as a new world order at the beginning of the twentieth century provoked ongoing debates about its real effects on civilization. Contemporaries either supported imperialism or sharply criticized it. Rudyard Kipling, for example, insisted that imperialism was a logical continuation of civilizational progress and was vital for western civilization's survival, as it prevented economic and social crisis, guaranteed the exchange of goods, promoted trade, and maintained stability in the western world. This view is broadly conservative; Kipling also supported ideas of racial and cultural superiority of western civilization, which he treated as a justification for colonial expansion.

On the other hand, J. A. Hobson considered imperialism to be one alternative path of economic development, global in character and driven by the concentration of wealth within a single country. Hobson argued that for the world economy to develop, that concentrated wealth needed to be redistributed overseas, which would promote the development of both metropolitan and colonial economies. The growth of the anti-imperialist movement was a response to imperialism's destructive influence on colonial societies, which found themselves in total dependence on imperialist states. Anti-imperialist movements emerged in India, China, and Latin America. Even the incident that triggered World War I had an anti-imperialist dimension, as Serbian revolutionaries feared that Serbia would become a dependent territory of Austria-Hungary.