MAKING OF THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD

An important theme highlighted from Monday’s lecture the industrialization of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in the early 19^th century. Professor Holt mentioned that the emancipation of slavery during this time lead to a need for labor in the production of goods. In anticipation for cheap labor, migrants in large numbers fled to the city in hopes of finding new opportunities. This influx in the population leads to the industrialization of this major import hub, particularly famous for their coffee exports, a major economic contributor to the ever-growing city. Thus, with the end of the transatlantic slave trade treaty, the city paid in full for European immigrants to work these coffee farms. Prof Holtz mentions a correlation between the increase in population post this industrialization, and the increase in poverty associated with this factor. I find it interesting that Mexico’s period of industrialization follows these same trends, highlighted in this weeks reading, “The Export Boom as Modernity” (pgs. 84-87). In some form or other, politics, either dirty or clean, paved the way for a new life in these countries. One decision of power influenced heavily by money, swayed another power to ultimately change the trajectory of the country’s values and environment. I also find it interesting to note both the influence and power of money found within the confinements of de Janeiro and Mexico, decreased the margins ten-fold for “true democracy” – democracy held within its people. This unwavering dynamic, with the help from technological advancements, shows us that someone richer, and more powerful, outperforms the less fortunate and sooner or later the country undergoes drastic changes (i.e. import/exports of goods). This power dynamic shifting from an influence of money is also found at the center of the Battle of Adwa, between the Ethiopians and the Italians of the late 18^th century to early 19^th century. Yet again, we see the need for a European country, one with more power and wealth, to impede on the demographics and politics of another less powerful and poorer. In sum, I agree with the idea of industrialization being the main driving force for the drastic changes found within these cities, however in addition to this, I believe the influence of politics, which in turn is influenced by money, really gave the citizens no choice on whether or not the change was one they needed for good. The change happened all around them (Africa, Brazil, Mexico), and the citizens did not have any say in these matters.

For countries in Latin America, Africa, and Asia that were threatened by the expansion of European Imperial powers, how they could protect their self determination and territorial integrity as peoples became an existential question. In Latin America, native populations such as that in Brazil were successfully ethnically cleansed, in many cases, in order to make room for development. Likewise, many African and Asian countries were conquered or had the influence of Europeans powers imposed upon them by the early 20th century. The elites of the remaining free non-imperial states then had to reckon with the question of protecting themselves urgently.

In Africa, the Ethiopians attempted to play various powers – the British, French, and Italians against each other, but repeatedly found themselves to trade. The end result was that they were able to protect their own independence by fighting back against invading powers by having their soldiers armed with European arms and a leader in king Menelek II who was able to organize a proper defense. The Japanese, in a somewhat similar fashion, decided that for the sake of self preservation, their government needed to be reformed into a European-style nation state that would be respected by Imperial powers. Fukuzawa Yukichi explains this mentality as “We should leave [the ranks of East Asian countries] to join the camp of the civilized countries of the West.” In the first half of the 20th Century, Japan was arguably the most successful non-Western nation in adopting Western Imperial Bureaucracy and statecraft.

The examples of Ethiopia and Japan show an similar decision being made by the ruling classes of the countries – to sacrifice some amount of traditional practice and shifting away from traditional methods of state organization in order to protect self determination and cultural practices from Imperialism in the long run. In Ethiopia and especially Japan, however, the adoption of some imperial systems resulted in both of the countries being conquering powers – Ethiopia conquered surrounding territories under Menelek II and Japan becoming a brutal Imperial power in its own right between 1900 and 1945.

The 1900s are the most notable years in history for modernization of less-developed countries. While this is true, the beginning of modernization in Japan started in their Kaei years, described as the period from 1848-1854. This era opened Japan to the Western world, where influences of political, social, and economic nature started to encroach on the customs and traditions of old Japan. Yukichi equates this eastward cultural expansion to measles, with the culture of the western world having the possibility of disrupting “ancient manners and customs has changed little for the past hundreds and thousands of years” (Yukichi 131).

One of the reasons why Yukichi defends Japanese ideals so vehemently, setting aside his national pride, is because of Western civilizations grouping East Asian countries into one block of ideologies, not caring for the great history, and differences, between China, Korea, and Japan. Western society tries to push their technology and politics into a world that they have no place in, forcing these East Asian countries to feel that they need to adapt or be left behind. Yukichi argues that instead of trying to keep the same traditions and refuse the technology of the western world, Japan should remember their tradition and accept the new parts of the world into their lives so they can continue to progress without losing values that are important to them. He goes as far to say that “Rather, we should leave their ranks to join the camp of the civilized countries of the West,” (133) which he rationalizes as the best course of action for Japan to keep up with the Western world in leaps and bounds of technology.

 

When reading through some of the third- and first-person accounts around 1900 for this week, I noticed that there was a pervasive necessity among elites and thinkers of the time to push for industrialized “progress”, even if it meant cruelty inside the nation or betrayal of possible allies. “On De-Asianization”, by Fukuzawa Yukichi, paints the picture of a Japan needing  to do away with general Asian traditions in order to survive. Yukichi, both fearful of “civilization” and in awe of it, argues that one must not resist it, but rather “help its spread with all its might so that his fellow countrymen will be immersed in its ways as soon as possible”. The necessity would stem from resistance from, and intimidation towards western industrialized countries and their eastward advances. If they stand idle, and dwell in the supposed backwardness of Asia, like China and Korea at the time, Japan would risk being swallowed up by western imperialist ambitions. Yukichi asserts that Japan must take the initiative in the coming struggle, and to dissuade any connections with China and Korea, thus wishing to “behave towards them as the Westerners do”. Yukichi would perceive the approaching “civilization” as such a powerful force that he would rather ally with its morals and dictations rather than ally with countries rejecting this force.

Moving to Mexico in “Latin American since Independence”, a similar initiative took place. Porfirio Diaz, president of Mexico for more than 30 years, asserts in an interview with James Creelan the necessity of his rule. He believes that the future fate of Mexican democracy is not harmed by his long occupation of the Presidential office. In fact, he asserts democracy to be the highest, fairest form of government, but that “in practice it is possible only to highly developed peoples”. This resonates with the attitude of Yukichi, who had little hope for the “less developed” Koreans and Chinese.

The forward progress of railways and telegraphs, and their success in Mexico, are recounted by Diaz in page 102 . He adds to the success by indicating the necessities he had to impose, like making “robbery punishable by death” and harshly punishing those who did little to stem the cutting of telegraph wires. He admits he and his tactics were harsh, but that it was all “necessary then to the life and progress of the nation”, and that the results justify the cruelty. This mirrors the attitude of Yukichi, who believed in a strong national stance against those who would stand against progress, in order to encourage a more advanced and rich national society. In Diaz’s case, he exercised this ideal internally for the good of the nation.

However, one must make note of the lack of focus on negatives of progress. in Yukichi’s case, he admitted that civilization “is always accompanied by both harm and good, but by more good than harm” in page 130. As an idealist, he can ruminate on the necessities of the new age of “civilization” all he wants, but he fails to take up inspection of the harm it could bring Japan. Additionally, one could even make the argument at the time that regional alliances and ties could act as an additional buffer to industrial empires from the west, in addition to practicing “civilization” as a country. In the case of Diaz, there is the bias from the interviewer to contend with. Diaz can speak of national progress as much as he likes, and justify it however he wishes, but there is no reason to believe all who live in an “advancing” state would benefit equally from progress. Only 2 years after this interview, the Mexican Revolution would begin, ending the Mexican dictatorship in 1920. This war occurred largely in part to the exploitation of the lower classes throughout Diaz’s so-called era of prosperity. Proper national “progress”, it seems, needs to be indeed a national push, not just a push to benefit the elites and upper classes more generally.

There are many ways and means by which nations can modernize and adapt to rapidly changing times. However, While countries attempted and proposed different means of modernization throughout the discussed time period, many nations looked to reshape not just technology and innovation, but identities and values as well. However, one can essentially lump these conquests into two basic ideas of modernization. The first deals with exploited states had to adapt and grow if they wanted to remain in the mix and have a stable structure on which to run. The second deals with westernization. These two theories overall shape the process of modernization in 1900.

In The Export Boom of Modernity, the discussion of Latin American modernization is somewhat unique compared to the rest of the world. They had to struggle out of the poverty and end of slavery that had come with the previous centuries. Their important exports such as sugar, rubber, copper, etc. were all needed in the North during the time. Much like the Brazil in-class lecture, port cities began a period of urbanization and rapid growth with Latin America as whole.

However, for some countries this growth had been in the works for some time now. Mexico was a prime example. President Porfirio Díaz’s 34 year reign from the 1800’s into the 1900’s showed expansion, promise, and much more. Infrastructure and public projects were at an all-time high. Similarly, Argentina was also one of the most prosperous countries at the beginning of the 1900’s. Their sleek, modern city of Buenos Aires along with its massive population growth shot Argentina up the list. Through photography, the concept of modernity intensified greatly. There is much power in high quality images. The revolution of type photographs was essential to the identities of different places.

Through all this, the modernization of the 1900’s became a quickly growing trend and helped eventually globalize and form the world we see today.

 

 

From class discussions/lectures as well as the readings this week, one theme stuck out to me as we learned about different regions of the world and their experiences during the early 1900s. This theme had to do with the perception that western culture was superior to others, such as East Asia, and Latin America. After listening to Professor Holt’s lecture on Rio De Janeiro, as well as reading Fukuzawa Yukichi’s “On De-Asianization”, I found the viewpoints of both the Japanese and Brazilians to be very similar.

Looking at Yukichi’s work, it was very clear to see the bias he had against the rest of Eastern Asia due to their lack of westernization. Yukichi states “This should be regarded a great misfortune for our country of Japan. To plan our course now, therefore, our country cannot afford to wait for the enlightenment of our neighbors and to co-operate in building Asia up” (Yukichi 133), meaning Japan could not wait to westernize for the fear of a bad image in the eyes of western nation-states. They saw western culture as superior to their own; so much so that they were willing to abandon their own to westernize. Likewise, with Professor Holt’s lecture on Rio De Janeiro, it was clear that the city, along with many others in Latin America, wanted to mimic the western society. I found it interesting how they spent tons of their money in order to built a more European looking city.

I believe that regions who had not yet westernized/modernized responded like this for the fear that if they did not get up to the standards of the European superpowers, they would get treated like such. I think this apprehension is correct considering the experiences of African nations throughout this time. I thought it interesting how European nations came together to split up Africa during the Berlin Conference. This partly due to the lack of modernization found in Africa at the time.

Overall, I think that the theme of pressured westernization is very prevalent in regions around the world. Due to the experiences of imperialism in Africa, I understand region’s want to westernize due to their apprehension of European forces. It is interesting however, to observe the Japanese viewpoints of other Eastern Asian nations. I think it can play into the perception of western dominance of this era.