New Imperialists : Ideologies of Empire
New Imperialists : Ideologies of Empire
New Imperialists : Ideologies of Empire
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
122 The <strong>New</strong> <strong>Imperialists</strong><br />
exports picked up sharply. Nearly one-third <strong>of</strong> demand for cloth in<br />
Bengal and Bihar was met by British imports. 54 The era <strong>of</strong> free trade was<br />
one in which Britain’s powerful export economy dominated not only the<br />
world economy but those <strong>of</strong> its colonies as well:<br />
Between 1885 and 1913 India took two-fifths <strong>of</strong> Britain’s total<br />
exports <strong>of</strong> cotton goods, based on low customs duties which<br />
worked to Britain’s advantage. India’s share <strong>of</strong> Britain’s imports fell<br />
to about 10 percent by 1900 and its share <strong>of</strong> India’s total exports<br />
fell from one-third in 1890 to one-quarter twenty years later, less<br />
than either Europe or Asia. 55<br />
As Davis summarizes: “The looms <strong>of</strong> India and China were defeated not<br />
so much by market competition as they were forcibly dismantled by war,<br />
invasion, opium and a Lancashire-imposed system <strong>of</strong> one-way tariffs . . .<br />
the use <strong>of</strong> force to configure a ‘liberal’ world economy is what Pax<br />
Britannica was really about.” 56<br />
Famine and Free Trade<br />
But it was not for lack <strong>of</strong> ideological commitment that India failed to<br />
overcome its essentially pre-capitalist dynamic in the second half <strong>of</strong> the<br />
nineteenth century. Colonial <strong>of</strong>ficials both at home and in the colonies<br />
saw their “civilizing mission” as imparting the benefits <strong>of</strong> economic<br />
“improvement” and Christian piety. The “gentlemanly capitalism” 57 that<br />
dominated in the colonial administration sought to link the socialproperty<br />
relations which lay at the heart <strong>of</strong> England’s seventeenth- and<br />
eighteenth-century agrarian capitalist revolution with the newer forms<br />
<strong>of</strong> financial and service capital that came to prominence in the later<br />
nineteenth century. These <strong>of</strong>ficials had read their Locke on property,<br />
enclosure, and “improvement.” They were also avid proponents <strong>of</strong> the<br />
latest principles <strong>of</strong> political economy espoused by Malthus, Bentham,<br />
and Mill. It was the liberal empire – so vaunted by Ferguson – which<br />
encouraged not just chronic economic underdevelopment, but which<br />
bears responsibility for the deaths <strong>of</strong> millions due to starvation during<br />
the two great waves <strong>of</strong> famine which swept India in 1876–79 and<br />
1896–1900.<br />
Between 5.5 and 12 million died in the famine <strong>of</strong> 1876–79 and<br />
mortality rates were highest in areas best served by railways. As Mike