Week 4 Readings

Mill: A Few Words on Non-Intervention

Author: John Stuart Mill, one of the most influential thinkers of the 19th century, known for works like On Liberty and The Subjection of Women.
Publication Date: First published in Fraser's Magazine in December 1859.
Type of Resource: Primary source (Mill himself wrote this essay, expressing his original thoughts on foreign policy and intervention during his lifetime).
Purpose: Mill wrote this essay to grapple with the big moral and practical questions surrounding whether or not one nation should interfere in the affairs of another. At its heart, it’s about the ethical boundaries of power and responsibility in international relations.

Principles of Non-Intervention:
- Mill argues that nations should avoid meddling in the internal affairs of others unless absolutely necessary. Intervening just for selfish gain? That’s a no-go in his eyes and "the meanest and worst" approach to foreign policy.
- He praises a policy of non-aggression but warns that non-intervention can’t just be about self-preservation—it needs to come from a place of principle.
The Ethics of Helping Others:
- Mill isn’t saying that nations should never intervene. If there’s a moral imperative or the potential to do real good, intervention might be the right move.
- He writes: "There is much to be said for the doctrine that a nation should be willing to assist its neighbors in throwing off oppression and gaining free institutions."
Civilization vs. "Barbarians" (A Complicated Argument):
- Mill makes a highly controversial distinction between "civilized" and "barbarous" nations. He claims that conquering "barbarous" nations can sometimes benefit them, as it helps them develop and progress.
- His words: "Nations which are still barbarous have not got beyond the period during which it is likely to be for their benefit that they should be conquered and held in subjection by foreigners."
- While this idea doesn’t sit well today, it reflects the mindset of Mill’s time and raises questions about how ethics were shaped by colonialist ideologies.

Britain's Reputation:
- Mill reflects on how Britain’s foreign policy often gets misunderstood as selfish, even when it acts for broader good, like in abolishing slavery.
- He critiques British politicians for their clumsy communication, which, he says, makes them look self-serving even when they’re not.
Case Study: The Suez Canal:
- Mill strongly criticizes Britain’s opposition to the canal, calling it a short-sighted decision based solely on self-interest. He asks: "Is a nation at liberty to adopt as a practical maxim, that what is good for the human race is bad for itself?"

Author: John S. Galbraith, a historian known for his work on British imperialism.
Publication Date: Published in Victorian Studies in June 1971.
Type of Resource: Secondary source analysis (Galbraith interprets and evaluates historical events and figures using primary sources like letters and reports, while also incorporating other historians’ research and his own perspective to construct an analysis of the Scramble for Africa).
Purpose: The article looks at the lives and motivations of three key players in the Scramble for Africa—Gordon, Mackinnon, and Leopold—and how their ambitions shaped the colonial expansion of Europe into Africa. Galbraith doesn’t shy away from showing their flaws, ambitions, and sometimes contradictory ideals.

Charles "Chinese" Gordon:
- Gordon is the classic example of the idealist—a man driven by principle and a deep sense of moral duty. He hated the slave trade and spent much of his life fighting against it.
- However, Galbraith points out Gordon’s complexities, calling him "dominated by unworldly drives" and prone to mysticism. He was deeply principled but also had a flair for dramatic martyrdom.
Leopold II of Belgium:
- Leopold comes across as the anti-Gordon—ruthless, cunning, and completely driven by self-interest. He’s infamous for exploiting the Congo under the guise of humanitarianism.
- Galbraith describes him as a master manipulator, writing: "The greater man becomes the lesser human being."
Sir William Mackinnon:
- Mackinnon is the pragmatic businessman of the trio. He believed in spreading "civilization" but also saw imperial ventures as a way to make money. Galbraith portrays him as a mix of practicality and idealism, with neither fully dominating his character.

The Congo Free State:
- Leopold’s ambitions to control Central Africa were immense. He used the language of philanthropy and progress to justify his exploitation of resources like ivory and rubber.
- Galbraith notes that Leopold "out-Rhodesed Rhodes" in his pursuit of power.
Gordon’s Struggles in Sudan:
- Gordon’s mission to suppress the slave trade in Sudan was noble but ultimately frustrating. He faced corruption at every level and became disillusioned with the entire system.
- His grand plans to open up Africa were often blocked by logistical and political realities.
Mackinnon’s Chartered Companies:
- Mackinnon saw private companies as the best way to expand British influence while also turning a profit. However, his ventures, like the Imperial British East Africa Company, often struggled and failed.

Gordon on his own struggles: "There is no doubt but that whosoever acts the true precepts of our Lord will be considered a madman."
On Leopold’s moral decline: "The pursuit of power tends not only to corrupt but to shrivel."

The Scramble for Africa wasn’t just about nations—it was driven by the personalities and egos of individuals. Gordon, Leopold, and Mackinnon all embodied different aspects of imperialism: idealism, greed, and pragmatism.
Galbraith shows how these figures’ ambitions often clashed with harsh realities, like Africa’s geography, resistance from local populations, and the limitations of 19th-century technology.