The events discussed, took place during the Great British Empire (GBE), which some say started in the 1490’s & others in the early 1600’s. The end of the empire came after the WW2.

The British colonisation of Africa, coincided with an era of “scientific racism” (1/2)

(2/2).. Scientific Racism, was an ideology presented in the famous theory of “Social Darwinism” by Charles Darwin . This is the belief in the “survival of the fittest” - the idea that some people in society are more powerful, because they are innately better than others.

This belief that some people are “just better than others”, was the platform the British built their colonial empire on. And so I called this thread, and the article to go with it “inside Britain’s colonial mind” because their actions are not a shock; it’s their thought process.

So Britain had a very large empire in Africa. They believed they had superior weaponry and were more technologically advanced than Africans, so they colonised these countries and pretended to promote civilisation. Here is a diagram of it broken down:

RUMOURS

I read something which sparked me to write this blog post + article in the first place. Apparently, former US President George Bush had a bust of Winston Churchill in the White House; which Barack Obama returned to & swapped for a bust of MLK right after election..

The reason why this section in the article and thread is called “rumours” is because there are several rumours out there to explain WHY Barack Obama returned Winston Churchill’s bust to Britain. Some say the ex US president had an inherent disdain for Britain (historically) (1/2)

(2/2) this was not something Obama HIMSELF came out & openly said during his time as president btw. One of the *rumours* is that Barack’s grandfather Hussein Onyango Obama was imprisoned without trial & tortured under Churchill’s watch, after being captured by troops in Kenya

In the article linked at the end of the thread, I go into more detail about this accusation. Although Barack never confirmed it, many wonder WHY he returned Winston Churchill’s bust. Did he really dislike Britain for their history? There’s no smoke without fire, so let’s explore

TACTICAL COLONIALISM

I’ve written about many colonial empires, the German, Belgian, French & Portuguese. But there is actually none like the British. It’s the sheer ruthlessness that the showed in ensuring Africans understood hierarchy. To do this they had a few methods (1/3)

(2/3).. this is what I call “tactical colonialism”. Among their colonies, the British tended to give power to different groups or institutions over others, to exert control. It’s easier to corrupt one small group of people rather than a whole population.

(3/3).. the main methods used were called ‘Indirect Rule’ & ‘Company Rule’.

The British showed preference to groups who had a hierarchical and dictatorial system like their own - they did this in all their colonies. The preferred group, were usually a conservative minority.

Company Rule

Early in the GBE, private companies in Africa were granted territories to manage & control. This sounds odd already.. how can a PLC govern citizens? The companies were: United African Company, Imperial British East Africa Company & British South Africa Company (1/2)

(2/2) Said companies were headed by business persons who were only interested in plundering of natural resources. Imo, this was a structural disaster. “company administration was the source from which all commands originated” (Madimu, 2017).

Not a model for African development.

See the article for details of how long these companies colonised Kenya, Nyasaland (Malawi), Northern Rhodesia (Zambia) Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) FOR Britain

This suggests that one powerful ally benefitted Britain; a free workforce & the ability to control people’s livelihood

Indirect Rule

Britain took this a step further. Nigeria is the best example to explain how ‘indirect rule’ by Frederick Lugard, was used to control African colonies. The British gave power to certain ethnic groups in African countries. With it was the Fulani group (1/2)

Frederick Lugard was a British soldier, a mercenary & colonial officer. He found great use in African traditional rulers to work on behalf of the British and control their fellow Africans. Although these africans were technically “ruling”, main decisions fell to the officers

Lugard first experimented with indirect rule in Northern Nigeria, where the Fulani group *already* had established the Sokoto Caliphate and emirship. The Sokoto Caliphate existed before the British came about and was the centre of politics & economics in the region before the GBE

The British did not mask their attitudes towards their colonial subjects. They weren’t interested in being like the French colonialists; paternalistic. They did not want Africans to identity with British people. They did not want to make “English people out of Africans” (1/2)

(2/2)...Lugard claimed: the use of the indirect rule system was to “preserve their colonies indigenous cultures”, so that it does not get lost in the colonial empire.... FALSE.

Putting one group in control minimises the cost of running a colony, but still allows exploitation.

As the system seemed to work in Northern , Lugard believed that all African societies should be monarchies. And if they were not, he would turn them into one

So he set to export the indirect rule system to Igbo areas of Eastern . He did this, by establishing ‘chiefdoms’

The British created new leaders (chiefs) who were more likely corrupt individuals than not; who didn’t always have the interest of their fellow Africans & were consequently not respected by the people they were put in place to govern

So the system failed in the Igbo areas of

The result of indirect rule in Nigeria were horrible ethnic tensions. Non-Fulani & Non-Muslim Nigerians were protesting against unfair treatment on them...

What’s important is not to lose focus, this was all fuelled by the British!! Many genocides took place during the GBE in

Ethnic rivalries between the major groups (the Yoruba, Igbo & Hausa-Fulani who make up about 65% of the Nigerian population) were ignited. This was much to the pleasure of Great Britain, as political parties started to form in Nigeria that were driven by ethnic affiliations (1/2)

(2/2) the NCNC was founded by Herbert Macaulay & championed by Nnamdi Azikiwe, centered in the Igbo dominated east. The Action Group was led by Obafemi Awolowo based in traditional Yoruba west, & Northern People’s Congress led by Ahmadu Bello & Abubakar Balewa based in the north.

It was in the interest of the British to promote ethnic tensions in their colonies; a nation where people are not seeing eye to eye benefits their oppressors in the end. The British exacerbated these tensions, so that their plundering went unnoticed.

Nigeria was not the only country where the British practiced indirect rule. Lugard took it to the East of Africa too but it also failed miserably there.

But this is how the British used “tactical colonialism” to govern the empire [a lot more detail is given in my blog post].

RULING BY EMPEROR - THE BRITISH WAY

Moving on a bit, to what I like to call “the last role of Britain’s colonial dice”; Winston Churchill. As leader of Britain for 8 years, and the victor of WW2 - Churchill’s disdain for black Africans is worth talking about

At Harrow School, a young Winston Churchill would be told stories such as: the superior white man was conquering the primitive, dark skinned natives and bringing them the benefits of civilisation” (Hari, 2010).

As soon as Churchill was old enough, he too wanted to play his part.

Churchill visited Africa 3 times. In his book The River War (1899), he described his participation in the conquering of Sudan - where he bragged about shooting “at least 3 savages” himself.

He also described the natives as “strong, virile, simple minded savages”.

Churchill is also implicated in one of the nastiest chapters of imperial history. The Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya, which at the time was known as British East Africa

The built a railroad through the Kenya and imported labour from India, as well as native Kiyuku people (1/2)

British farmers became wealthy over the production of tea and coffee by their adapting labourers. During working in the British empire- native Kenyans were put into camps, where they were subject to malnutrition, torture and beatings (2/2)

These wrongdoings done to some 1.5 million Kenyan people, started The ‘Mau Mau Uprising’, where natives were forced to fight back. The events were exposed in British writer Caroline Elkins in the study named “Britain’s Gulag”. She faced much backlash & was labelled a crusader

Some argued that Caroline Elkins used overstated findings and dubious oral testimonies in her exposure of Britain’s Gulag, whereas others commended her for breaking the silence (Parry, 2016)

5 elderly Mau Mau citizens also launched a £200m damages claim against the U.K. in 2009

I think there’s a reason why we don’t hear about this even while living and studying in the UK. I think it’s the colonial guilt

Imagine the conscious & civilised was such a dark pillar in the history of Africa.

Might do a part 2

Thats the end! Thank you for reading this extremely long thread! I have written a detailed article, with sources throughout which I couldn’t fit in this thread! I hope you enjoyed it & learned something new

please check out my full blog post here: https://www.ssozinha.com/post/inside-britain-s-colonial-mind

Don’t forget to subscribe to my blog here: http://ssozinha.com/subscribe  for more pan-African / African history content