Introduction
For the conquering authority, the purpose of colonialism was always the same: to gain financial advantages. However, the colonial control of France and the British was essentially different. On the other hand, France aimed to turn the white and African populations it ruled into French citizens. At the same time, England was focused on exploiting resources and creating a suitable environment for her settlements. Different approaches to colonial rule and postcolonial interactions fundamentally changed the nature of colonial rule and postcolonial relations. Many parallels may be drawn between the colonial policies of the two superpowers. They imposed direct and indirect rule on the colonial peoples, restricting their rights. Exports of raw materials and imports of finished commodities were the mainstays of the colonial economy. Race, gender, and class were crucial aspects that influenced British and French colonizers in different nations. However, there were differences between race, class, and gender in the empires, which portrays differences and similarities between the French and British empires. The analysis of race, class, and gender and their comparison in British and French colonies are described in the essay.
Race and Gender in French Empire
France’s colonial empire in the early twentieth century was able to maintain French rule partly by removing traditional political leaders and families from the colonial administrators’ authority. [1]The colonial system of racial discrimination benefited whites and established a system of class distinctions. [2]White hegemony was built on racial violence against non-whites, and white identity was fortified with physical barriers and fortifications in the city layout.
The legislation allowed the administration to control and regulate their cultural traditions, living conditions, and even sexuality for whites. For the first time in history, white men in the colonies were given leadership roles, followed by colonized men deemed the most French-speaking. [3]Social and political interactions were shaped by this system, which severely reduced the power of other colonized males and women. With their public and private lives seemingly emasculated, colonized men’s interactions and expectations toward women transformed.
Race and Gender in British Empire
With the help of the local population, Britain could maintain its position of dominance. [4]The opposition to it was divided along racial, religious, and other lines. There were many victims, not only those of colour. On six continents, the British Empire was the only one to maintain white supremacy over people of colour. Contiguous territorial annexation and more minor phenotypic differences were the foundations of the previous British Empire. [5]Using enslaved Africans to create the Caribbean and American plantation colonies from the 17th to the early 19th century was a fundamental basis of the Empire’s ongoing link between ‘race and position’.
Everyday life in the Empire was affected by racial discrimination, which was often graded according to one’s race or skin tone. This included employment, the law, health care, education, and democracy. [6]The British smuggled a total of 3 million Africans over the Atlantic in 1807. It took them and their descendants less than half a century to annihilate the Native Americans and Aboriginal Australians, enlist the Xhosa in eight wars for colonial expansion, take advantage of the Mughal collapse to conquer much of India, and fight three wars against the Maori. However, under Britain’s anti-colonial ethos, persons of colour were often treated as second-class citizens by the White colonists who ruled the land. Corporal punishment was customary in many colonies, and even the poorest White ladies had access to Black servants.
Imperialism’s “no place for a white lady” ideology was one of its most widely held beliefs in British empire. Since the beginning of European imperialism, all social and political institutions of colonialism have always had a “masculine” character that emphasizes authority and rule and structures of unequal power. . However, women played a significant role in the empire’s success. [7]Mothers, housewives, and spirituality were woven into the tapestry of imperialist ideology by British women, who were the guardians of moral and spiritual ideals for the families in the colonies. For example, in 1875, over 1,000 women arrived, and in 1895, over 1,600 did so due to the growing impetus of the imperial mission to China. Back home, people grew increasingly intrigued by their colonial experiences, which helped reshape British women’s public and private lives.
Comparison of Race and Gender in the French and British Empires
Despite the obvious physical distinctions between races, proving that non-white imperial subjects were intellectually inferior to their white counterparts was challenging. A society’s level of “civilization” was once regarded as a reliable indicator of its mental capacity. Women’s positions illustrated lesser levels of civilization and mental capacity in conquered societies. Men of a given non-white culture would have validated French and British conceptions of racial hierarchy if they collectively lacked traits like truthfulness, boldness, and independence. [8]Men stretched their power and influence over the globe, enticed by fresh business opportunities, speculative value, or a simple desire for territorial expansion. The fact that non-white countries were commonly judged on their level of “civilization” proved that race was a subordinate idea to gender in the imperialist’s thinking. [9]However, non-white ethnicities were generally regarded as inferior to British and French. However, males in the British had a wide range of job options because the British government saw them as an essential part of the country’s worldwide prominence and strength.
For both men and women in the British and French empires, the imperial nation they wanted entry into permitted them to pursue male and feminist goals. Suffragettes not only sought to be recognized as citizens of the political nation, but they also sought to be recognized as citizens of the political empire. They had more freedom to move about, assert their independence, take charge of their own lives, and be more active than they had been during the early years of the British Empire.
Race and Class in French Empire
Racially mixed children were born to European men and native women in every European dominion. The colonizers’ swagger and authority depended on the fixed categories of racial and legal difference, which these persons of mixed race were perceived as transcending, disputed the subjective criteria by which “whiteness” was defined in recent interdisciplinary literature. Since the beginning of modern French history, colonial hierarchies based on race and gender have been continually established or re-established.
French’s colony in Indochina appeared to be very different from the rest of France between the two World Wars at first glance. [10]Only in exile could French Polish nationalists freely express themselves. Women in mainland France had greater freedoms before, during, and after World War I, even if they could not vote. They had more freedom in the workplace and public spaces, and through the different groups they formed to fight for various rights. Similarly, Black Africans in France enjoyed more freedoms than their counterparts in French West Africa.
Race and Class in British Empire
An increasing number of children whose moms were natives but who were raised by foreigners of all social groups are maturing into a dangerous element out of the dunghill of neglect. Bitter satire against the governing class’s existence in The China Punch was the focus of the satire. [11]Those British ‘gentlemen,’ embarrassed just by being around Eurasian infants in public, were the target of this scathing indictment. Eurasians were mapped onto Hong Kong’s governing class and critics of British colonialism by reform-minded representatives of the governing elite and British colonialists. The non-British individuals in the British Empire has received less consideration in British empire studies, with most of the focus being on the Anglo-Indian population. [12]Even though they have never had their children, generations of “white” people who have lived in India are included in this description. Comparatively, British scholarship has mainly overlooked its transgressors, those who are what we may label “Eurasian” in some sense.
Comparison of Race and Class in the French and British Empires
France’s subsidies encouraged white French women to marry white males, which was not welcomed in the British Empire. Like how black males in France built their societies to determine their autonomy and stature, masculinity regulated this process. [13]Although the causes of revolts against imperial power varied, religious intolerance and oligarchies based on class or ethnicity were commonplace. In the interwar period, working-class black men in France and Britain used the inclusion and exclusion of black and white women in the black social circle as one means to resist a metropolis that saw all migrants, colonial or not, as intrusions into the society ruled by white French men. [14]Exclusionary strategies based on race, class, and gender were established by European colonial communities in response to the existence of “mixed bloods.”
After World War II, both African males and white men realized that when women were enfranchised, they formed a significant voting group that could have an impact on policy. [15]Sexual partnerships between European men and indigenous women generated racially mixed offspring in all of Europe’s empires. Recent interdisciplinary scholarship has shown how these persons of mixed race, seen as transgressing the interior frontiers of supposedly fixed categories of racial and juridical difference upon which colonizers’ prestige and authority rested, posed a challenge to the elaborate but fragile sets of subjective criteria by which “whiteness” was defined. While European men opposed women’s suffrage, French West African men worked to incorporate African women as a symbol of equality for newly empowered European women.
Class and Gender in French Empire
The affluent have revealed how the reactionaries’ admiration for medieval brutality led to the development of slothful indolence as its logical counterpart. It was the first to demonstrate the positive effects of human activity. Even the most incredible Egyptian pyramid, Roman aqueduct or Gothic church cannot compare to what it has accomplished; it has also carried out more successful expeditions than any previous national or religious crusades. Bohemians cannot function unless they continuously change the means of production, forcing them to alter the dynamics of production, which affects everything else in social life.
All previous industrial courses were predicated on the preservation of old methods of production in their original form. The bourgeois age is distinct from all others because of the constant revolutionizing of production, the disruption of all social conditions, and the persistence of uncertainty and agitation. [16]All long-held prejudices and beliefs are dispelled, and any new ones that arise are rendered obsolete before they can solidify. A man’s life and connections with others are ultimately brought to a head when everything solid disintegrates into vapour and everything precious is desecrated.
Comparison of Class and Gender in the French and British Empires
Labour value became highly significant in British as a criterion of human worth. ‘Wealth in persons,’ however, referred to the practice of recruiting ostensible ‘outsiders,’ such as refugees or migrants, to replenish populations decimated by wars, disease, or plunder, rather than the concept of acquiring ‘outsiders,’ who can contribute to wealth accumulation for an individual or a community. Regarding slavery, legal or otherwise, the workers were quite literally commoditized and could be sold on the market in ways that differed significantly from wage slavery. Thus, selecting who would be denied full or even partial recompense for their labour power was critical to building capital.
With the concept of absorption, France carried the vision of a unified French Empire a step further. [17]The French Republic, reeling from the ideals of equality for rich people embodied in the 1848 revolution, offered political rights and citizenship to men and women. There was unprecedented political representation for Blacks under its dominance in West Africa. Until the final years of colonial rule, the English government did not offer this level of political rights to the colonial subjects.
Conclusion
Autonomy, personality, group solidarity, and strategic mobilization are all explored in this special issue’s focus on gendered and sexualized components. Gendered histories of work and dress, material culture, play, movement and activism in the French and British empires can benefit significantly from the findings of these studies both individually and collectively. British and French colonial administrations altered societal practices by creating a system of rewards. The Third Republican concept of colour blindness was reinterpreted by colonial players and colonized people battling the system to legitimize the manipulation of class, gender, and race. Many black anti-imperialists in France utilized a language of manhood to describe their zeal for political battle against the imperial nation-state. This language included praise, pride, honour, shame, and, in some cases, even emasculation.
Bibliography
Breuilly, John. “Nationalism and national unification in 19th century Europe.” (2013): 149-175.
Boittin, J.A., Firpo, C. and Church, E.M., 2011. Hierarchies of race and gender in the French colonial empire, 1914-1946. Historical Reflections/Réflexions Historiques, 37(1), pp.60-90.
Faflak, Joel, and Julia M. Wright, eds. A handbook of romanticism studies. Vol. 1. John Wiley & Sons, 2012: 1-17.
Fogarty, Richard S. “Race and sex, fear and loathing in France during the Great War.” In Brutality and Desire, pp. 59-90. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2009.
Hobson, John Atkinson. “The scientific basis of imperialism.” Political Science Quarterly 17, no. 3 (1902): 460-489.
Marx, Karl, Friedrich Engels, Rick Kuhn, Samuel Moore, and Hal Draper. “Manifesto of the Communist Party, 1848.” (2012). 1:16.
Pomfret, David M. “Raising Eurasia: Race, class, and age in French and British colonies.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 51, no. 2 (2009): 314-343.
Wright, Julia M. “Nationalist Discourses in the British Isles, 1780–1850.” In Reading the Nation in English Literature. (2009) pp. 176-186.
[1] Boittin, J.A., Firpo, C. and Church, E.M., 2011. Hierarchies of race and gender in the French colonial empire, 1914-1946. Historical Reflections 37(1), pp. 62
[2] Boittin, J.A., Firpo, C. and Church, E.M., 2011. Hierarchies of race and gender in the French colonial empire, 1914-1946. Historical Reflections, 37(1), pp. 61
[3] Hobson, John Atkinson. “The scientific basis of imperialism.” Political Science Quarterly 17, no. 3 (1902): 464.
[4] Faflak, Joel, and Julia M. Wright, eds. A handbook of romanticism studies. Vol. 1. John Wiley & Sons, 2012: 3
[5] Boittin, J.A., Firpo, C. and Church, E.M., 2011. Hierarchies of race and gender in the French colonial empire, 1914-1946. Historical Reflections/Réflexions Historiques, 37(1), pp. 61
[6] Marx, Karl, Friedrich Engels, Rick Kuhn, Samuel Moore, and Hal Draper. “Manifesto of the Communist Party, 1848.” (2012): 4
[7] Marx, Karl, Friedrich Engels, Rick Kuhn, Samuel Moore, and Hal Draper. “Manifesto of the Communist Party, 1848.” (2012): 4
[8] Hobson, John Atkinson. “The scientific basis of imperialism.” Political Science Quarterly 17, no. 3 (1 Hobson, John Atkinson. “The scientific basis of imperialism.” Political Science Quarterly 17, no. 3 (1902): 465902): 466
[10] Breuilly, John. “Nationalism and national unification in 19th century Europe.” (2013): 152
[11]Boittin, J.A., Firpo, C. and Church, E.M., 2011. Hierarchies of race and gender in the French colonial empire, 1914-1946. Historical Reflections, 37(1), pp.63.
[12] Boittin, J.A., Firpo, C. and Church, E.M., 2011. Hierarchies of race and gender in the French colonial empire, 1914-1946. Historical Reflections, 37(1), pp.64.
[13] Wright, Julia M. “Nationalist Discourses in the British Isles, 1780–1850.” In Reading the Nation in English Literature. (2009) pp. 179.
[14] Pomfret, David M. “Raising Eurasia: Race, class, and age in French and British colonies.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 51, no. 2 (2009):314.
[15] Pomfret, David M. “Raising Eurasia: Race, class, and age in French and British colonies.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 51, no. 2 (2009):314.
[16] Fogarty, Richard S. “Race and sex, fear and loathing in France during the Great War.” In Brutality and Desire, pp. 59-90. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2009.
[17] Fogarty, Richard S. “Race and sex, fear and loathing in France during the Great War.” In Brutality and Desire, pp. 62.
write