what is colonialism theory?defination?
138034
Comoseshama is wrong.  What he/she explained is conquering a nation.  Colonization is when a country sends citizens (colonists) to set up a settlement in a new region.  This is then controlled by the "Mother Nation," but many colonies had their own government (like local governments).  \nFor the definition:\n\nColonization - To go to and live in a colony or other civilized setting established in a foreign, hitherto sparsely inhabited or virtually unsettled land.\n\nThat is just about what I just explained.  Hope that helps you.
620542
com·mu·nism    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (kmy-nzm)\nn. \nA theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members. \nCommunism\nA system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people. \nThe Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.
659475
It was exploited!\n\nMost of my life the Congo was called "the Belgum Congo" (Find an old atlas and look it up). I therefore deduce that Belgum was the colonial power.\n\nWhen? Sorry, can't help yuo.
550855
Most wars involve some variation of "I WANT what you have and I think I can get away with TAKING it" which is Imperialism. \n\nNationalism is the spin-doctoring brow-beating that ENABLES Imperialism\n\nNow do your OWN research for your take-home essay question as to WHY Hitler, Hirohito, Stalin, Mussolini, Churchill, Roosevelt (and the people who put them in power) roll the dice with OUR lives.
906861
Colonialism is lso the same as: expansionism, colonization, imperialism, interventionism
295942
talk about the colonization, and particularly, what happened when they left. When they left, because the africans wanted freedom, they took all of the educated people with them. They basically left (through various means) the africans with no experience in running their own country, no education, no recourses, no help, etc. Corruption quickly sprang up, lots of civil wars and discontent ensued. Good luck with the essay! Hope that helped a bit!
1164818
As far as I can tell, the Austronesian Theory is a migration theory based on the similarity of languages in Southeast Asia.  Here's what I could find.\n\nThe Austronesian Theory of Migration proves to be one of the most palpable reasons for the interconnection of cultures within Southeast Asia. This unity within a cluster of cultures could be attributed to several criteria: 1.membership in a family of languages; 2. shared Great Tradition; and 3. similar responses to a common physical environment (Zialcita). According to Encarta Reference Library, Austronesian Languages, formerly called Malayo-Polynesian languages, is one of the world's largest language families, both in terms of numbers of languages—more than 700—and geographic spread—covering islands and some mainland areas from Madagascar in the west to Easter Island and Hawaii in the east. Included in this family of languages is Tagalog, from which the Filipino language is mainly based. Fernando N. Zialcita, in his article from Solidarity “The Wood-and-Stone Houses and Its Southeast Asian Cousins” have already stressed on how the idea of a single Great Tradition could recapitulate the similarities between the cultural features of Southeast Asian countries. This could be accredited for the way by which these societies use ornamentations, treat spaces, and ultimately design their structures. The similarity of climate within this region—tropical—is also an important reason to be recognized for the resemblances with which houses are built. Most notable is the house on stilts and all its other features which is a direct response to the tropical environment.
375862
Yes the current problems in Africa are as a factor of colonialism. During colonial days the whites mistreated Africans so badly, that when the new leaders came to power the just copied the same things the whites were doing in the office. The biggest problems facing Africans are corruption, poverty, jobless, illeteracy and lack of good leadership. The leaders in government are not concerned about changing Africa for them all they care is put more cash in their pockets, coz they have given up on trying though they never even tried. though up to today still the west is crushing Africa down, by selling the war lords weapons and even financing them.thats why there are so many rebels who dont even know why they are fighting, and most of them are children.
639184
This book is a classic enthnographic text that needs to be read by all those who are interested in revealling the social forces that shapes our lives as a people living under this last state of Capitalism, that others call a Globalised world. Even though Paul Willis was looking at Working class kids in England, I have found the application of his methodology applicable even in the context of a post Apartheid state like South Africa where we talk of the "historically disadvantaged learner" as an eupermism for the same phenomenon that Willis has studies.\n\nNice light reading matter there.
170593
Oooh i like this question.\n\nOK, imperialism is where other countries use or exploit other countries to serve as colonies, or interfere in other's politics in order to better their own country. In the 1900s, this was extrememly common. The strongest powers of the world: Japan, the US, Britain, France, Holland, Germany, Russia, and other countries all started seizing colonies and interfering in trade. This is morally wrong. It is not correct for us to meddle too much in the business of soverign nations. However, at the time, imperialism became a sort of contest. Countries could be judged as powerful based on the amount of influence they wielded outside their own country. Britain had many colonies, and for that reason they boasted that "the sun never sets on the British Empire", since it extended from India to Africa and the Americas.\n\nIntellectuals and politicians uniformly supported imperialism, saying that it was better for colonized nations anyway. Also, they talked about how some races were superior to others. That is, New Guineans (colonized) were born inferior to the French, say. \n\nNew imperialism is simply the mad rush for colonies in the 19th and 20th century. This includes the Spanish-American war, the Boer Wars, the Indian uprisings, and the British conquering of the African tribes.\n\nOld imperialism took place before, in the 17th and 18th century, when people rushed to claim land in the Americas. The US was born from that, since Britain took the French claims in the area and formed thirteen American colonies. We subsequently broke off, took land from Spain and France and Mexico, and voila, behold the US.\n\nYou shouldnt offer to do anything on the Net. \n\nHope I helped,\n\nThe Wise One
1180858
Hoist by their own petard.  It all stems, not only from the colonization itself, but the laws put in place afterward (British Commonwealth, former French colonies, etc. all have laws making their ex-colonials, eligible for immigration)
159423
If you mean "neo-colonialism", I have heard this term used to describe Japan's actions during WWII.  Neo-colonialism means, literally, "new colonialism".  In other words, the formation of colonies in the modern day.  During (and before) WWII, Japan conquered parts of China, Korea, and other Asian countries, effectively making them Japanese colonies.
429411
The British Empire is only one in a long line of expansive failed empires.  We could look to Greece, the moors and the Romans to get examples of others.\nHistory is too much like philosophy in that there isn't always one right answer.\nIt is clear though that large empires are very hard to maintain. There is a natural tendency for such to become apathetic, ignoring a peoples natural tendency to resent foreign rule. This makes governing impossible.\nI would say Afghanistan is more a function of their support of the "Yanks" more than colonialism...remember the years of the IRA, the US stopped the group's funding maybe it was a payback.
953873
In an age of globalization and transnationalism, broad economic, political, and social forces are pushing societies towards homogenization on the model of the West and North. In the West and North itself, globalization is widely seen as unwelcome Americanization. Some observers contend that these global processes have marginalized nation-states.  Others have noted how local societies, social groups, and even individuals throughout the world have tenaciously resisted these pressures. The phrase “the local and the global” has appeared in recent years as a trope for these contested interpretations of global trends in the programs of disciplinary conferences in the humanities and social sciences, and at area studies meetings. The terms globalization and transnationalism have been so often used and so frequently reinterpreted as to border on cliché. The occasion of a joint annual meeting of the African Studies Association (ASA) and the Canadian Association of African Studies/Association canadienne des études africaines (CAAS/ACEA) in New Orleans provides an appropriate context and venue to take analysis of these contested processes one step further by looking at three of the major arenas of contestation: identity, language, and memory. Hence the Annual Meeting invites papers and panels that deal with these issues in Africa and the diaspora today and in the past.  \nIn recent years, cultural studies in Africa have privileged the study of memory and identity—and by implication, language—in efforts to understand the renewal of civil society, and the horrendous outbreaks of inter-ethnic, civil, and military violence on the continent. Efforts at healing the hostility between ethnic and racial groups, such as theTruth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa and the local and regional truth commissions in Burundi, have also stimulated much thought about the creation, re-creation, and maintenance of national communities. Political studies—which traditionally eschewed examination of these topics as the stuff of humanities or  “soft” social science—have of late also begun to acknowledge the importance of identity politics and popular memory in analyses of contemporary African politics, and more notably, in studies of democracy, revolution, and genocide. It is abundantly clear, for example, that understanding identity politics in Côte d’Ivoire is essential to comprehending the conflict between Ivoirians of coastal origin and those whose forefathers and foremothers came from Burkina Faso, Mali, and other regions of the West African interior in the twentieth centutry.  And well before that, Mobutu’s use of the language of « authenticité, » which was invoked by politicians elsewhere on the continent, served to legitimize his government as a nationalist rather than a neo-colonial regime. \n\nHistorical studies in Africa have for a long time directed attention to the roles of language (and shared culture) in the development of community and difference—whether it be the sense of a “Mande world” among speakers of the Mande languages, or the consolidation of new “worlds” with the spread of languages such as Swahili, Hausa, Arabic, Mossi, and Lingala among peoples and groups across significant stretches of the continent. More recently, Africanist historians have taken a page from the French scholar Nora to explore the significance of “lieux de mémoire,” or “places of memory,” to understand how contemporary understandings of sites of purported historical significance for groups and societies (and countries) affect interpretations of the past, as well as how they sometimes act as touchstones for the revival of past identities or the coalescence of new ones. Obviously identities change through time. A new awareness of the popular use of history has also made it apparent that ordinary people order and identify with historical experiences and events in ways quite different from the ways that professional h
881520
The White Man's Burden is essentially the idea of earlier Europeans that the white man was necessary to the world's order because he educated and civilized the colonies and the world around him. It was especially used during the colonization of Africa. You see, the colonization of Africa was necessary to European growth and expansion. Europeans used the excuses of Social Darwinism and natural superiority as well. They were looking for excuses to colonize Africa, and I believe that there were only two nations that they never took over. I'm not positive, but I believe one of them was Liberia (the country that many later Americans wanted to return the slaves to).\n\n*I'm sorry, are there two parrots in the room or did the fourth answerer do that on purpose? I wrote this, and I don't know if the others know this, but there is such a thing as plagiraism.
893308
Here are some sites that may help you:\n\nhttp://www.answers.com/topic/colonization-of-africa\nhttp://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays/comp/cw25colonizationafrica.htm\nhttp://www.yaleslavery.org/TownGown/coloniz.html
821183
best bet is to look toward something on the Europe and it's colonies in Africa, I believe what the essay is direct toward is how the European countries dived up Africa for their own interest without taking into account the  need of the locals or tribes, \n\nHence leaving a legacy of dived people which is the cause of the in fighting currently\n\nOr the greed for oil or diamond's