Nineteenth-century European imperialism often worked through debt rather than direct rule

Evidence

During the colonial era, local producers were forced to trade under exclusive arrangements, which favoured the colonialist. Colonies were forced to take on debt at punitive rates and default led to disastrous compensations being enforced by the bankers. — Fanny Pigeaud_ Ndongo Samba Sylla, Africa’s Last Colonial Currency, 21 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

WHAT IMPERIALISTS actually wanted was expansion of political power without the foundation of a body politic. Imperialist expansion had been touched off by a curious kind of economic crisis, the overproduction of capital and the emergence of “superfluous” money, the result of oversaving, which could no longer find productive investment within the national borders. For the first time, investment of power did not pave the way for investment of money, but export of power followed meekly in the train of exported money, since uncontrollable investments in distant countries threatened to transform large strata of society into gamblers, to change the whole capitalist economy from a system of production into a system of financial speculation, and to replace the profits of production with profits in commissions. — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 366 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Imperialism as policy emerged from nineteenth-century European capital stagnation; European powers could not effectively colonize vast domains until the mid-nineteenth century — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism: A Critique of…, 53; Imperial capitalism governed by dispersing local power under distant authority (+4 more)

Broader Connections