Had the US participated in the Scramble for Africa, which parts of Africa could it have acquired?

May 2014
17,694
SoCal
#1
Had the US participated in the Scramble for Africa, which parts of Africa could it have acquired? Liberia was already independent during this time and thus I would think that it would be off-limits for US expansion, but what about other parts of Africa?

Also, how would the US have managed and developed whatever African colonies it would have managed to acquire in this scenario?
 
May 2016
5,349
Portugal
#2
Had the US participated in the Scramble for Africa, which parts of Africa could it have acquired? Liberia was already independent during this time and thus I would think that it would be off-limits for US expansion, but what about other parts of Africa?

Also, how would the US have managed and developed whatever African colonies it would have managed to acquire in this scenario?
Liberia – so here I don’t agree with you. Independent countries and kingdoms were smashed by the Europeans and the USA.

And, speculating a bit, most probably the territories that later would belong to the Free State of Congo.

It was a private initiative. The USA citizen Henry Morton Stanley had influence in the project since the beginning and if properly motivated it could lead all the process to a USA influence taking the king of Belgium out of the picture.

About the management, I think that would be quite similar to the European. Probably closer to the British model than to the French or Portuguese one.
 
Likes: Futurist
May 2016
5,349
Portugal
#4
What were the major differences between the British model and the continental ones?
Fair question in the sequence of my previous post. A full answer would be long and would derail the thread, so I will try to be as short as possible. Probably this would be worth a thread if one still doesn’t exist.

First of all I didn’t state that it was a British vs. continental issue. Don’t think it is. I think that albeit there are common features to all the European countries, there are also national features and even differences among the models developed by the nations (for instance the initial model that Portugal adopted in Angola and in Mozambique were quite different, see the question of the “Prazos” in Mozambique here: Prazo - Wikipedia). So maybe I should have used the plural in "model".

So, even with contradictions inherent to generalizations, the French colonial system was based on colonial rule and direct control over its colonies that led to a program of cultural export and assimilation.

The British in some colonies like Nigeria and Kenya seemed to develop a system of “indirect rule” where unlike the French they didn’t seem to be interested in assimilating the indigenous, but to maintain the status quo.

The Portuguese had the French system as a model by the late of the 19th century and 20th, with assimilation “policies” and (pseudo)paternalistic policies since the “lançados” of the 15th century and the inheritance in the 19th century of a feudal system developed since the beginning of the exploration with vassal kings (in theory) everywhere. But as pointed before in Mozambique in the sequence of the Scramble for Africa and due the scarcity of capital the territories were simply granted to huge European private companies, passing from the Feudal concept of the Prazos to a more capitalist model, probably a bit on the British example in Rhodesia. That didn’t happen in Angola at the same level. Naturally with the emergence of the colonial war the concepts changed. The status of the indigenous was abolished in 1961 and huge investments were made in Africa.

Italian, German, Belgian (post-Free State of Congo) and Spanish colonies and policies had their own characteristics.
 
Likes: Futurist

Similar History Discussions