Imperialism

Cet article est une exploration critique de la raison pour laquelle «la question afro-juif» est une question en premier lieu. Une grande partie de celui-ci, selon l'auteur, vient de l'ignorance de l'histoire juive et qui sont des personnes juives.

Ever since its publication in 1966, Tussen Neutraliteit en Imperialisme (‘Between Neutrality and Imperialism’) has been the standard work on Dutch policy towards China between 1863 and 1901. In this study the author, F. van Dongen, stresses the adherence to neutrality towards the strong European neighbour states as the fundamental guideline for Dutch foreign policy, not only within Europe but also in the Far East. This policy stemmed from the fact that the European balance-of-power system had been extended to China in the late nineteenth century, through the participation of most European states in imperialist policies concerning that country. According to Van Dongen this adherence to neutrality slowed down imperialist tendencies, as the Netherlands were anxious to avoid entering in conflicts between the great powers, but at the same time the Dutch were forced to ‘play a modest part in the common Western policy towards China’. Whenever the great powers took a united stand the Netherlands must follow suit. So as a result of its European policy the Netherlands joined the imperialist powers in China, although usually careful not to take the initiative. The Netherlands were, therefore, classified by Van Dongen as a reluctant and generally passive element of imperialism in China: ‘the Dutch were at worst accessories after the fact’. Finally he concluded that whenever Dutch actions concerning China ‘savoured of imperialism, this was not the result of a deliberate policy to exercise control over the empire or to obtain Chinese territory, but an almost accidental by-product of the general aim of promoting the Netherlands’ economic interest'.

The revelation that the U.S. Department of Defense had hired anthropologists for its Human Terrain System project—assisting its operations in Afghanistan and Iraq—caused an uproar that has obscured the participation of sociologists in similar Pentagon-funded projects. As the contributors to Sociology and Empire show, such affiliations are not new. Sociologists have been active as advisers, theorists, and analysts of Western imperialism for more than a century.

The collection has a threefold agenda: to trace an intellectual history of sociology as it pertains to empire; to offer empirical studies based around colonies and empires, both past and present; and to provide a theoretical basis for future sociological analyses that may take empire more fully into account. In the 1940s, the British Colonial Office began employing sociologists in its African colonies. In Nazi Germany, sociologists played a leading role in organizing the occupation of Eastern Europe. In the United States, sociology contributed to modernization theory, which served as an informal blueprint for the postwar American empire. This comprehensive anthology critiques sociology's disciplinary engagement with colonialism in varied settings while also highlighting the lasting contributions that sociologists have made to the theory and history of imperialism.

Contributors. Albert Bergesen, Ou-Byung Chae, Andy Clarno, Raewyn Connell, Ilya Gerasimov, Julian Go, Daniel Goh, Chandan Gowda, Krishan Kumar, Fuyuki Kurasawa, Michael Mann, Marina Mogilner, Besnik Pula, Anne Raffin, Emmanuelle Saada, Marco Santoro, Kim Scheppele, George Steinmetz, Alexander Semyonov, Andrew Zimmerman

Frontiers in colonial New Zealand were not simply lines on maps, but zones of contact and encounter. Beyond the Imperial Frontier explores these zones to discover the different ways Māori and Pākehā ‘fronted’ one another across the nineteenth century. Beginning with a pre-1840 era marked by significant cooperation, Vincent O’Malley details the emergence of a more competitive and conflicted post-Treaty world. As a collected work, these essays also chart the development of a leading New Zealand historian.
Table of contents

List of Maps
Acknowledgements
A Note on the Essays

1. Frontier Histories: An Introduction
2. Cultural Encounter on the New Zealand Frontier: The Meeting of Māori and Pākehā before 1840
3. Manufacturing Chiefly Consent?: James Busby and the Role of Rangatira in the Early Colonial Era
4. Beyond Waitangi: Post-1840 Agreements between Māori and the Crown
5. English Law and the Māori Response: A Case Study from Grey’s New Institutions in Northland
6. Reinventing Tribal Mechanisms of Governance: The Emergence of Māori Rūnanga and Komiti in New Zealand before 1900
7. Te Riri ki Waikato: The Invasion of Waikato and Its Aftermath
8. The New Zealand Settlements Act 1863 in Wider Context: Local and International Precedents for Land Confiscation
9. The East Coast Petroleum Wars: Raupatu and the Politics of Oil in 1860s New Zealand
10. Frontier Justice?: The Trial and Execution of Kereopa Te Rau
11. Reconsidering the Origins of the Native Land Court: Neo-Revisionist Challenges to Orthodox Interpretations
12. The Curious Case of Tiritiri Matangi Island: Terra Nullius New Zealand-style?
13. ‘A Living Thing’: The Whakakotahitanga Flagstaff and Its Place in New Zealand History

Endnotes
List of Abbreviations
Bibliography
Index

In 1907 and 1908, the governments of four provinces – Manitoba, Ontario, New Brunswick, and British Columbia – introduced policies to encourage the display of flags on public school buildings and grounds. In British Columbia, the question of flag-flying provoked a heated debate, pitting the provincial minister of education, a proponent of the Union Jack, against city school boards that favoured the Canadian Red Ensign. On one level, school flag policies were part of a well-documented patriotic curriculum and suggested the influence of American patriotic practices. The debate in British Columbia underlined the division in Canadian imperialist sentiment between those who favoured a centralized imperial federation and those who saw Canada as an autonomous state within the British Empire. On the other hand, based on a comparative reading of the four provincial policies and the public responses to them, this article contends that the flag-flying controversy, particularly in British Columbia, reflected a process of jurisdictional negotiation as much as a contestation of identity. Drawing upon Alfred Gell's anthropological theory of art, the article suggests that flags draw their power not only from their status as figurative emblems but also from their employment as physical expressions of political agency.

This article aims to understand the far-stretching imperial claims—"from the Hellespont to India"—made by Cleopatra VII at the "Donations of Alexandria" ceremony in 34 BCE, and her title Queen of Kings. It is argued that as the rightful, matrilineal heir to the vanished Seleucid dynasty, Cleopatra VII and her son Caesarion possessed the necessary prestige to claim overlordship over the entire Middle East to give coherence to the Roman system of client states and rival the Parthian ruler’s claim to be the rightful King of Kings. Through Caesar’s and Mark Antony’s paternity of Cleopatra’s children, Hellenistic monarchy could thus be brought into the (republican) Roman orbit.

Abstract
Russian expansion into Central Asia in the nineteenth century is usually seen either as the product of lobbying by big capitalist interests in Moscow or as a wholly unplanned process driven by “men on the spot” who slipped beyond St. Petersburg’s control. This article is a microstudy of one of the campaigns that immediately preceded the fall of Tashkent in 1865, during which Russian forces under General M. G. Cherniaev united the Orenburg and Siberian “lines” of fortification to create what was meant to be a permanent new frontier on the steppe. It demonstrates that neither of these explanations is satisfactory – economic calculations played a minor role in Russian decision making, while there was an authorized plan for expansion in the region. However this plan rested on the premise that the Russians could identify a “natural” frontier in the region, marked by a river, watershed, or mountain range. The instructions given to Cherniaev and other “men on the spot” reflected this, but a lack of detailed geographical knowledge meant that these orders were often contradictory or impossible to fulfill. It was this that allowed Cherniaev to determine the timetable (though not the direction) of Russian expansion, and that would see the fall of Tashkent in June 1865.

This article provides an introduction to one of the lesser-known examples of European settler colonialism, the settlement of European (mainly Russian and Ukrainian) peasants in Southern Central Asia (Turkestan) in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It establishes the legal background and demographic impact of peasant settlement, and the role played by the state in organising and encouraging it. It explores official attitudes towards the settlers (which were often very negative), and their relations with the local Kazakh and Kyrgyz population. The article adopts a comparative framework, looking at Turkestan alongside Algeria and Southern Africa, and seeking to establish whether paradigms developed in the study of other settler societies (such as the ‘poor white’) are of any relevance in understanding Slavic peasant settlement in Turkestan. It concludes that there are many close parallels with European settlement in other regions with large indigenous populations, but that racial ideology played a much less important role in the Russian case compared to religious divisions and fears of cultural backsliding. This did not prevent relations between settlers and the ‘native’ population deteriorating markedly in the years before the First World War, resulting in large-scale rebellion in 1916.