Question: Which is more costly, formal, or informal imperialism?

Answer: informal

The definition of imperialism has not been finalized for centuries and was confusedly seen to represent the policies of major powers, or simply, general-purpose aggressiveness. Further on, some writers[who?] used the term imperialism, in slightly more discriminating fashion, to mean all kinds of domination or control by a group of people over another. <hl> To clear out this confusion about the definition of imperialism one could speak of "formal" and " informal " imperialism, the first meaning physical control or "full-fledged colonial rule" while the second implied less direct rule though still containing perceivable kinds of dominance. <hl> Informal rule is generally less costly than taking over territories formally. This is because, with informal rule, the control is spread more subtly through technological superiority, enforcing land officials into large debts that cannot be repaid, ownership of private industries thus expanding the controlled area, or having countries agree to uneven trade agreements forcefully.

The definition of imperialism has not been finalized for centuries and was confusedly seen to represent the policies of major powers, or simply, general-purpose aggressiveness. Further on, some writers[who?] used the term imperialism, in slightly more discriminating fashion, to mean all kinds of domination or control by a group of people over another. To clear out this confusion about the definition of imperialism one could speak of "formal" and "<hl> informal <hl>" imperialism, the first meaning physical control or "full-fledged colonial rule" while the second implied less direct rule though still containing perceivable kinds of dominance. Informal rule is generally less costly than taking over territories formally. This is because, with informal rule, the control is spread more subtly through technological superiority, enforcing land officials into large debts that cannot be repaid, ownership of private industries thus expanding the controlled area, or having countries agree to uneven trade agreements forcefully.

To clear out this confusion about the definition of imperialism one could speak of "formal" and " <hl> informal <hl> " imperialism, the first meaning physical control or "full-fledged colonial rule" while the second implied less direct rule though still containing perceivable kinds of dominance.


Question: The amount of land a country controls is its greatest what?

"The word ‘empire’ comes from the Latin word imperium; for which the closest modern English equivalent would perhaps be ‘sovereignty’, or simply ‘rule’". The greatest distinction of an empire is through the amount of land that a nation has conquered and expanded. Political power grew from conquering land, however cultural and economic aspects flourished through sea and trade routes. A distinction about empires is "that although political empires were built mostly by expansion overland, economic and cultural influences spread at least as much by sea". Some of the main aspects of trade that went overseas consisted of animals and plant products. European empires in Asia and Africa "have come to be seen as the classic forms of imperialism: and indeed most books on the subject confine themselves to the European seaborne empires". European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through the world systems theory. The two main regions are the core and the periphery. The core consists of high areas of income and profit; the periphery is on the opposing side of the spectrum consisting of areas of low income and profit. These critical theories of Geo-politics have led to increased discussion of the meaning and impact of imperialism on the modern post-colonial world. The Russian leader Lenin suggested that "imperialism was the highest form of capitalism, claiming that imperialism developed after colonialism, and was distinguished from colonialism by monopoly capitalism". This idea from Lenin stresses how important new political world order has become in our modern era. Geopolitics now focuses on states becoming major economic players in the market; some states today are viewed as empires due to their political and economic authority over other nations.

Answer: distinction

"The word ‘empire’ comes from the Latin word imperium; for which the closest modern English equivalent would perhaps be ‘sovereignty’, or simply ‘rule’". <hl> The greatest distinction of an empire is through the amount of land that a nation has conquered and expanded. <hl> Political power grew from conquering land, however cultural and economic aspects flourished through sea and trade routes. A distinction about empires is "that although political empires were built mostly by expansion overland, economic and cultural influences spread at least as much by sea". Some of the main aspects of trade that went overseas consisted of animals and plant products. European empires in Asia and Africa "have come to be seen as the classic forms of imperialism: and indeed most books on the subject confine themselves to the European seaborne empires". European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through the world systems theory. The two main regions are the core and the periphery. The core consists of high areas of income and profit; the periphery is on the opposing side of the spectrum consisting of areas of low income and profit. These critical theories of Geo-politics have led to increased discussion of the meaning and impact of imperialism on the modern post-colonial world. The Russian leader Lenin suggested that "imperialism was the highest form of capitalism, claiming that imperialism developed after colonialism, and was distinguished from colonialism by monopoly capitalism". This idea from Lenin stresses how important new political world order has become in our modern era. Geopolitics now focuses on states becoming major economic players in the market; some states today are viewed as empires due to their political and economic authority over other nations.

"The word ‘empire’ comes from the Latin word imperium; for which the closest modern English equivalent would perhaps be ‘sovereignty’, or simply ‘rule’". The greatest <hl> distinction <hl> of an empire is through the amount of land that a nation has conquered and expanded. Political power grew from conquering land, however cultural and economic aspects flourished through sea and trade routes. A distinction about empires is "that although political empires were built mostly by expansion overland, economic and cultural influences spread at least as much by sea". Some of the main aspects of trade that went overseas consisted of animals and plant products. European empires in Asia and Africa "have come to be seen as the classic forms of imperialism: and indeed most books on the subject confine themselves to the European seaborne empires". European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through the world systems theory. The two main regions are the core and the periphery. The core consists of high areas of income and profit; the periphery is on the opposing side of the spectrum consisting of areas of low income and profit. These critical theories of Geo-politics have led to increased discussion of the meaning and impact of imperialism on the modern post-colonial world. The Russian leader Lenin suggested that "imperialism was the highest form of capitalism, claiming that imperialism developed after colonialism, and was distinguished from colonialism by monopoly capitalism". This idea from Lenin stresses how important new political world order has become in our modern era. Geopolitics now focuses on states becoming major economic players in the market; some states today are viewed as empires due to their political and economic authority over other nations.


Question: Western Imperialism divided the globe according to which theory?

Answer: the world systems theory

"The word ‘empire’ comes from the Latin word imperium; for which the closest modern English equivalent would perhaps be ‘sovereignty’, or simply ‘rule’". The greatest distinction of an empire is through the amount of land that a nation has conquered and expanded. Political power grew from conquering land, however cultural and economic aspects flourished through sea and trade routes. A distinction about empires is "that although political empires were built mostly by expansion overland, economic and cultural influences spread at least as much by sea". Some of the main aspects of trade that went overseas consisted of animals and plant products. European empires in Asia and Africa "have come to be seen as the classic forms of imperialism: and indeed most books on the subject confine themselves to the European seaborne empires". <hl> European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through the world systems theory . <hl> The two main regions are the core and the periphery. The core consists of high areas of income and profit; the periphery is on the opposing side of the spectrum consisting of areas of low income and profit. These critical theories of Geo-politics have led to increased discussion of the meaning and impact of imperialism on the modern post-colonial world. The Russian leader Lenin suggested that "imperialism was the highest form of capitalism, claiming that imperialism developed after colonialism, and was distinguished from colonialism by monopoly capitalism". This idea from Lenin stresses how important new political world order has become in our modern era. Geopolitics now focuses on states becoming major economic players in the market; some states today are viewed as empires due to their political and economic authority over other nations.

"The word ‘empire’ comes from the Latin word imperium; for which the closest modern English equivalent would perhaps be ‘sovereignty’, or simply ‘rule’". The greatest distinction of an empire is through the amount of land that a nation has conquered and expanded. Political power grew from conquering land, however cultural and economic aspects flourished through sea and trade routes. A distinction about empires is "that although political empires were built mostly by expansion overland, economic and cultural influences spread at least as much by sea". Some of the main aspects of trade that went overseas consisted of animals and plant products. European empires in Asia and Africa "have come to be seen as the classic forms of imperialism: and indeed most books on the subject confine themselves to the European seaborne empires". European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through <hl> the world systems theory <hl>. The two main regions are the core and the periphery. The core consists of high areas of income and profit; the periphery is on the opposing side of the spectrum consisting of areas of low income and profit. These critical theories of Geo-politics have led to increased discussion of the meaning and impact of imperialism on the modern post-colonial world. The Russian leader Lenin suggested that "imperialism was the highest form of capitalism, claiming that imperialism developed after colonialism, and was distinguished from colonialism by monopoly capitalism". This idea from Lenin stresses how important new political world order has become in our modern era. Geopolitics now focuses on states becoming major economic players in the market; some states today are viewed as empires due to their political and economic authority over other nations.

European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through <hl> the world systems theory <hl> .


Question: Who suggested that imperialism was the "highest" form of capitalism?

Answer: Lenin

"The word ‘empire’ comes from the Latin word imperium; for which the closest modern English equivalent would perhaps be ‘sovereignty’, or simply ‘rule’". The greatest distinction of an empire is through the amount of land that a nation has conquered and expanded. Political power grew from conquering land, however cultural and economic aspects flourished through sea and trade routes. A distinction about empires is "that although political empires were built mostly by expansion overland, economic and cultural influences spread at least as much by sea". Some of the main aspects of trade that went overseas consisted of animals and plant products. European empires in Asia and Africa "have come to be seen as the classic forms of imperialism: and indeed most books on the subject confine themselves to the European seaborne empires". European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through the world systems theory. The two main regions are the core and the periphery. The core consists of high areas of income and profit; the periphery is on the opposing side of the spectrum consisting of areas of low income and profit. These critical theories of Geo-politics have led to increased discussion of the meaning and impact of imperialism on the modern post-colonial world. <hl> The Russian leader Lenin suggested that "imperialism was the highest form of capitalism, claiming that imperialism developed after colonialism, and was distinguished from colonialism by monopoly capitalism". <hl> This idea from Lenin stresses how important new political world order has become in our modern era. Geopolitics now focuses on states becoming major economic players in the market; some states today are viewed as empires due to their political and economic authority over other nations.

"The word ‘empire’ comes from the Latin word imperium; for which the closest modern English equivalent would perhaps be ‘sovereignty’, or simply ‘rule’". The greatest distinction of an empire is through the amount of land that a nation has conquered and expanded. Political power grew from conquering land, however cultural and economic aspects flourished through sea and trade routes. A distinction about empires is "that although political empires were built mostly by expansion overland, economic and cultural influences spread at least as much by sea". Some of the main aspects of trade that went overseas consisted of animals and plant products. European empires in Asia and Africa "have come to be seen as the classic forms of imperialism: and indeed most books on the subject confine themselves to the European seaborne empires". European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through the world systems theory. The two main regions are the core and the periphery. The core consists of high areas of income and profit; the periphery is on the opposing side of the spectrum consisting of areas of low income and profit. These critical theories of Geo-politics have led to increased discussion of the meaning and impact of imperialism on the modern post-colonial world. The Russian leader <hl> Lenin <hl> suggested that "imperialism was the highest form of capitalism, claiming that imperialism developed after colonialism, and was distinguished from colonialism by monopoly capitalism". This idea from Lenin stresses how important new political world order has become in our modern era. Geopolitics now focuses on states becoming major economic players in the market; some states today are viewed as empires due to their political and economic authority over other nations.


Question: One country's authority over a number of others would constitute the original country as what?

Answer: empires

"The word ‘empire’ comes from the Latin word imperium; for which the closest modern English equivalent would perhaps be ‘sovereignty’, or simply ‘rule’". The greatest distinction of an empire is through the amount of land that a nation has conquered and expanded. Political power grew from conquering land, however cultural and economic aspects flourished through sea and trade routes. <hl> A distinction about empires is "that although political empires were built mostly by expansion overland, economic and cultural influences spread at least as much by sea". <hl> Some of the main aspects of trade that went overseas consisted of animals and plant products. European empires in Asia and Africa "have come to be seen as the classic forms of imperialism: and indeed most books on the subject confine themselves to the European seaborne empires". European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through the world systems theory. The two main regions are the core and the periphery. The core consists of high areas of income and profit; the periphery is on the opposing side of the spectrum consisting of areas of low income and profit. These critical theories of Geo-politics have led to increased discussion of the meaning and impact of imperialism on the modern post-colonial world. The Russian leader Lenin suggested that "imperialism was the highest form of capitalism, claiming that imperialism developed after colonialism, and was distinguished from colonialism by monopoly capitalism". This idea from Lenin stresses how important new political world order has become in our modern era. Geopolitics now focuses on states becoming major economic players in the market; some states today are viewed as empires due to their political and economic authority over other nations.

"The word ‘empire’ comes from the Latin word imperium; for which the closest modern English equivalent would perhaps be ‘sovereignty’, or simply ‘rule’". The greatest distinction of an empire is through the amount of land that a nation has conquered and expanded. Political power grew from conquering land, however cultural and economic aspects flourished through sea and trade routes. A distinction about <hl> empires <hl> is "that although political empires were built mostly by expansion overland, economic and cultural influences spread at least as much by sea". Some of the main aspects of trade that went overseas consisted of animals and plant products. European empires in Asia and Africa "have come to be seen as the classic forms of imperialism: and indeed most books on the subject confine themselves to the European seaborne empires". European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through the world systems theory. The two main regions are the core and the periphery. The core consists of high areas of income and profit; the periphery is on the opposing side of the spectrum consisting of areas of low income and profit. These critical theories of Geo-politics have led to increased discussion of the meaning and impact of imperialism on the modern post-colonial world. The Russian leader Lenin suggested that "imperialism was the highest form of capitalism, claiming that imperialism developed after colonialism, and was distinguished from colonialism by monopoly capitalism". This idea from Lenin stresses how important new political world order has become in our modern era. Geopolitics now focuses on states becoming major economic players in the market; some states today are viewed as empires due to their political and economic authority over other nations.


Question: Most imperialism was carried out using which method of transport?

Answer: seaborne

"The word ‘empire’ comes from the Latin word imperium; for which the closest modern English equivalent would perhaps be ‘sovereignty’, or simply ‘rule’". The greatest distinction of an empire is through the amount of land that a nation has conquered and expanded. Political power grew from conquering land, however cultural and economic aspects flourished through sea and trade routes. A distinction about empires is "that although political empires were built mostly by expansion overland, economic and cultural influences spread at least as much by sea". Some of the main aspects of trade that went overseas consisted of animals and plant products. <hl> European empires in Asia and Africa "have come to be seen as the classic forms of imperialism: and indeed most books on the subject confine themselves to the European seaborne empires". <hl> European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through the world systems theory. The two main regions are the core and the periphery. The core consists of high areas of income and profit; the periphery is on the opposing side of the spectrum consisting of areas of low income and profit. These critical theories of Geo-politics have led to increased discussion of the meaning and impact of imperialism on the modern post-colonial world. The Russian leader Lenin suggested that "imperialism was the highest form of capitalism, claiming that imperialism developed after colonialism, and was distinguished from colonialism by monopoly capitalism". This idea from Lenin stresses how important new political world order has become in our modern era. Geopolitics now focuses on states becoming major economic players in the market; some states today are viewed as empires due to their political and economic authority over other nations.

"The word ‘empire’ comes from the Latin word imperium; for which the closest modern English equivalent would perhaps be ‘sovereignty’, or simply ‘rule’". The greatest distinction of an empire is through the amount of land that a nation has conquered and expanded. Political power grew from conquering land, however cultural and economic aspects flourished through sea and trade routes. A distinction about empires is "that although political empires were built mostly by expansion overland, economic and cultural influences spread at least as much by sea". Some of the main aspects of trade that went overseas consisted of animals and plant products. European empires in Asia and Africa "have come to be seen as the classic forms of imperialism: and indeed most books on the subject confine themselves to the European <hl> seaborne <hl> empires". European expansion caused the world to be divided by how developed and developing nation are portrayed through the world systems theory. The two main regions are the core and the periphery. The core consists of high areas of income and profit; the periphery is on the opposing side of the spectrum consisting of areas of low income and profit. These critical theories of Geo-politics have led to increased discussion of the meaning and impact of imperialism on the modern post-colonial world. The Russian leader Lenin suggested that "imperialism was the highest form of capitalism, claiming that imperialism developed after colonialism, and was distinguished from colonialism by monopoly capitalism". This idea from Lenin stresses how important new political world order has become in our modern era. Geopolitics now focuses on states becoming major economic players in the market; some states today are viewed as empires due to their political and economic authority over other nations.


Question: Imperialism is confused with what other term?

The term "imperialism" is often conflated with "colonialism", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition. Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a person or group of people. Robert Young writes that while imperialism operates from the center, is a state policy and is developed for ideological as well as financial reasons, colonialism is simply the development for settlement or commercial intentions. Colonialism in modern usage also tends to imply a degree of geographic separation between the colony and the imperial power. Particularly, Edward Said distinguishes the difference between imperialism and colonialism by stating; "imperialism involved 'the practice, the theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory', while colonialism refers to the 'implanting of settlements on a distant territory.' Contiguous land empires such as the Russian or Ottoman are generally excluded from discussions of colonialism.:116 Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a political focus.[further explanation needed]

Answer: colonialism

<hl> The term "imperialism" is often conflated with " colonialism ", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition. <hl> Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a person or group of people. Robert Young writes that while imperialism operates from the center, is a state policy and is developed for ideological as well as financial reasons, colonialism is simply the development for settlement or commercial intentions. Colonialism in modern usage also tends to imply a degree of geographic separation between the colony and the imperial power. Particularly, Edward Said distinguishes the difference between imperialism and colonialism by stating; "imperialism involved 'the practice, the theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory', while colonialism refers to the 'implanting of settlements on a distant territory.' Contiguous land empires such as the Russian or Ottoman are generally excluded from discussions of colonialism.:116 Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a political focus.[further explanation needed]

The term "imperialism" is often conflated with "<hl> colonialism <hl>", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition. Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a person or group of people. Robert Young writes that while imperialism operates from the center, is a state policy and is developed for ideological as well as financial reasons, colonialism is simply the development for settlement or commercial intentions. Colonialism in modern usage also tends to imply a degree of geographic separation between the colony and the imperial power. Particularly, Edward Said distinguishes the difference between imperialism and colonialism by stating; "imperialism involved 'the practice, the theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory', while colonialism refers to the 'implanting of settlements on a distant territory.' Contiguous land empires such as the Russian or Ottoman are generally excluded from discussions of colonialism.:116 Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a political focus.[further explanation needed]

The term "imperialism" is often conflated with " <hl> colonialism <hl> ", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition.


Question: What does colonialism lack that imperialism has?

Answer: political focus

The term "imperialism" is often conflated with "colonialism", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition. Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a person or group of people. Robert Young writes that while imperialism operates from the center, is a state policy and is developed for ideological as well as financial reasons, colonialism is simply the development for settlement or commercial intentions. Colonialism in modern usage also tends to imply a degree of geographic separation between the colony and the imperial power. Particularly, Edward Said distinguishes the difference between imperialism and colonialism by stating; "imperialism involved 'the practice, the theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory', while colonialism refers to the 'implanting of settlements on a distant territory.' Contiguous land empires such as the Russian or Ottoman are generally excluded from discussions of colonialism.:116 <hl> Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a political focus .[further explanation needed] <hl>

The term "imperialism" is often conflated with "colonialism", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition. Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a person or group of people. Robert Young writes that while imperialism operates from the center, is a state policy and is developed for ideological as well as financial reasons, colonialism is simply the development for settlement or commercial intentions. Colonialism in modern usage also tends to imply a degree of geographic separation between the colony and the imperial power. Particularly, Edward Said distinguishes the difference between imperialism and colonialism by stating; "imperialism involved 'the practice, the theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory', while colonialism refers to the 'implanting of settlements on a distant territory.' Contiguous land empires such as the Russian or Ottoman are generally excluded from discussions of colonialism.:116 Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a <hl> political focus <hl>.[further explanation needed]

Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a <hl> political focus <hl> .[further explanation needed]


Question: Colonialism as a policy is caused by financial and what other reasons?

Answer: ideological

The term "imperialism" is often conflated with "colonialism", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition. Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a person or group of people. <hl> Robert Young writes that while imperialism operates from the center, is a state policy and is developed for ideological as well as financial reasons, colonialism is simply the development for settlement or commercial intentions. <hl> Colonialism in modern usage also tends to imply a degree of geographic separation between the colony and the imperial power. Particularly, Edward Said distinguishes the difference between imperialism and colonialism by stating; "imperialism involved 'the practice, the theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory', while colonialism refers to the 'implanting of settlements on a distant territory.' Contiguous land empires such as the Russian or Ottoman are generally excluded from discussions of colonialism.:116 Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a political focus.[further explanation needed]

The term "imperialism" is often conflated with "colonialism", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition. Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a person or group of people. Robert Young writes that while imperialism operates from the center, is a state policy and is developed for <hl> ideological <hl> as well as financial reasons, colonialism is simply the development for settlement or commercial intentions. Colonialism in modern usage also tends to imply a degree of geographic separation between the colony and the imperial power. Particularly, Edward Said distinguishes the difference between imperialism and colonialism by stating; "imperialism involved 'the practice, the theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory', while colonialism refers to the 'implanting of settlements on a distant territory.' Contiguous land empires such as the Russian or Ottoman are generally excluded from discussions of colonialism.:116 Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a political focus.[further explanation needed]


Question: Who besides the Russians are often left out of the colonialism debat?

Answer: Ottoman

The term "imperialism" is often conflated with "colonialism", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition. Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a person or group of people. Robert Young writes that while imperialism operates from the center, is a state policy and is developed for ideological as well as financial reasons, colonialism is simply the development for settlement or commercial intentions. Colonialism in modern usage also tends to imply a degree of geographic separation between the colony and the imperial power. Particularly, Edward Said distinguishes the difference between imperialism and colonialism by stating; "imperialism involved 'the practice, the theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory', while colonialism refers to the 'implanting of settlements on a distant territory.' <hl> Contiguous land empires such as the Russian or Ottoman are generally excluded from discussions of colonialism.:116 <hl> Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a political focus.[further explanation needed]

The term "imperialism" is often conflated with "colonialism", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition. Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a person or group of people. Robert Young writes that while imperialism operates from the center, is a state policy and is developed for ideological as well as financial reasons, colonialism is simply the development for settlement or commercial intentions. Colonialism in modern usage also tends to imply a degree of geographic separation between the colony and the imperial power. Particularly, Edward Said distinguishes the difference between imperialism and colonialism by stating; "imperialism involved 'the practice, the theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory', while colonialism refers to the 'implanting of settlements on a distant territory.' Contiguous land empires such as the Russian or <hl> Ottoman <hl> are generally excluded from discussions of colonialism.:116 Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a political focus.[further explanation needed]


Question: Imperialism and colonialism both assert a states dominance over what?

Answer: person or group of people

The term "imperialism" is often conflated with "colonialism", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition. <hl> Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a person or group of people . <hl> Robert Young writes that while imperialism operates from the center, is a state policy and is developed for ideological as well as financial reasons, colonialism is simply the development for settlement or commercial intentions. Colonialism in modern usage also tends to imply a degree of geographic separation between the colony and the imperial power. Particularly, Edward Said distinguishes the difference between imperialism and colonialism by stating; "imperialism involved 'the practice, the theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory', while colonialism refers to the 'implanting of settlements on a distant territory.' Contiguous land empires such as the Russian or Ottoman are generally excluded from discussions of colonialism.:116 Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a political focus.[further explanation needed]

The term "imperialism" is often conflated with "colonialism", however many scholars have argued that each have their own distinct definition. Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a <hl> person or group of people <hl>. Robert Young writes that while imperialism operates from the center, is a state policy and is developed for ideological as well as financial reasons, colonialism is simply the development for settlement or commercial intentions. Colonialism in modern usage also tends to imply a degree of geographic separation between the colony and the imperial power. Particularly, Edward Said distinguishes the difference between imperialism and colonialism by stating; "imperialism involved 'the practice, the theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory', while colonialism refers to the 'implanting of settlements on a distant territory.' Contiguous land empires such as the Russian or Ottoman are generally excluded from discussions of colonialism.:116 Thus it can be said that imperialism includes some form of colonialism, but colonialism itself does not automatically imply imperialism, as it lacks a political focus.[further explanation needed]

Imperialism and colonialism have been used in order to describe one's superiority, domination and influence upon a <hl> person or group of people <hl> .


Question: Political advantage is an attribute of which state policies?

Imperialism and colonialism both dictate the political and economic advantage over a land and the indigenous populations they control, yet scholars sometimes find it difficult to illustrate the difference between the two. Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country taking physical control of another, imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally. Colonialism is seen to be the architect deciding how to start dominating areas and then imperialism can be seen as creating the idea behind conquest cooperating with colonialism. Colonialism is when the imperial nation begins a conquest over an area and then eventually is able to rule over the areas the previous nation had controlled. Colonialism's core meaning is the exploitation of the valuable assets and supplies of the nation that was conquered and the conquering nation then gaining the benefits from the spoils of the war. The meaning of imperialism is to create an empire, by conquering the other state's lands and therefore increasing its own dominance. Colonialism is the builder and preserver of the colonial possessions in an area by a population coming from a foreign region. Colonialism can completely change the existing social structure, physical structure and economics of an area; it is not unusual that the characteristics of the conquering peoples are inherited by the conquered indigenous populations.

Answer: Imperialism and colonialism

<hl> Imperialism and colonialism both dictate the political and economic advantage over a land and the indigenous populations they control, yet scholars sometimes find it difficult to illustrate the difference between the two. <hl> Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country taking physical control of another, imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally. Colonialism is seen to be the architect deciding how to start dominating areas and then imperialism can be seen as creating the idea behind conquest cooperating with colonialism. Colonialism is when the imperial nation begins a conquest over an area and then eventually is able to rule over the areas the previous nation had controlled. Colonialism's core meaning is the exploitation of the valuable assets and supplies of the nation that was conquered and the conquering nation then gaining the benefits from the spoils of the war. The meaning of imperialism is to create an empire, by conquering the other state's lands and therefore increasing its own dominance. Colonialism is the builder and preserver of the colonial possessions in an area by a population coming from a foreign region. Colonialism can completely change the existing social structure, physical structure and economics of an area; it is not unusual that the characteristics of the conquering peoples are inherited by the conquered indigenous populations.

<hl> Imperialism and colonialism <hl> both dictate the political and economic advantage over a land and the indigenous populations they control, yet scholars sometimes find it difficult to illustrate the difference between the two. Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country taking physical control of another, imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally. Colonialism is seen to be the architect deciding how to start dominating areas and then imperialism can be seen as creating the idea behind conquest cooperating with colonialism. Colonialism is when the imperial nation begins a conquest over an area and then eventually is able to rule over the areas the previous nation had controlled. Colonialism's core meaning is the exploitation of the valuable assets and supplies of the nation that was conquered and the conquering nation then gaining the benefits from the spoils of the war. The meaning of imperialism is to create an empire, by conquering the other state's lands and therefore increasing its own dominance. Colonialism is the builder and preserver of the colonial possessions in an area by a population coming from a foreign region. Colonialism can completely change the existing social structure, physical structure and economics of an area; it is not unusual that the characteristics of the conquering peoples are inherited by the conquered indigenous populations.


Question: Colonialism often means a country doing what?

Answer: taking physical control of another

Imperialism and colonialism both dictate the political and economic advantage over a land and the indigenous populations they control, yet scholars sometimes find it difficult to illustrate the difference between the two. <hl> Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country taking physical control of another , imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally. <hl> Colonialism is seen to be the architect deciding how to start dominating areas and then imperialism can be seen as creating the idea behind conquest cooperating with colonialism. Colonialism is when the imperial nation begins a conquest over an area and then eventually is able to rule over the areas the previous nation had controlled. Colonialism's core meaning is the exploitation of the valuable assets and supplies of the nation that was conquered and the conquering nation then gaining the benefits from the spoils of the war. The meaning of imperialism is to create an empire, by conquering the other state's lands and therefore increasing its own dominance. Colonialism is the builder and preserver of the colonial possessions in an area by a population coming from a foreign region. Colonialism can completely change the existing social structure, physical structure and economics of an area; it is not unusual that the characteristics of the conquering peoples are inherited by the conquered indigenous populations.

Imperialism and colonialism both dictate the political and economic advantage over a land and the indigenous populations they control, yet scholars sometimes find it difficult to illustrate the difference between the two. Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country <hl> taking physical control of another <hl>, imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally. Colonialism is seen to be the architect deciding how to start dominating areas and then imperialism can be seen as creating the idea behind conquest cooperating with colonialism. Colonialism is when the imperial nation begins a conquest over an area and then eventually is able to rule over the areas the previous nation had controlled. Colonialism's core meaning is the exploitation of the valuable assets and supplies of the nation that was conquered and the conquering nation then gaining the benefits from the spoils of the war. The meaning of imperialism is to create an empire, by conquering the other state's lands and therefore increasing its own dominance. Colonialism is the builder and preserver of the colonial possessions in an area by a population coming from a foreign region. Colonialism can completely change the existing social structure, physical structure and economics of an area; it is not unusual that the characteristics of the conquering peoples are inherited by the conquered indigenous populations.

Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country <hl> taking physical control of another <hl> , imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally.


Question: How would one create an empire by means of Imperialism?

Answer: conquering the other state's lands

Imperialism and colonialism both dictate the political and economic advantage over a land and the indigenous populations they control, yet scholars sometimes find it difficult to illustrate the difference between the two. Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country taking physical control of another, imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally. Colonialism is seen to be the architect deciding how to start dominating areas and then imperialism can be seen as creating the idea behind conquest cooperating with colonialism. Colonialism is when the imperial nation begins a conquest over an area and then eventually is able to rule over the areas the previous nation had controlled. Colonialism's core meaning is the exploitation of the valuable assets and supplies of the nation that was conquered and the conquering nation then gaining the benefits from the spoils of the war. <hl> The meaning of imperialism is to create an empire, by conquering the other state's lands and therefore increasing its own dominance. <hl> Colonialism is the builder and preserver of the colonial possessions in an area by a population coming from a foreign region. Colonialism can completely change the existing social structure, physical structure and economics of an area; it is not unusual that the characteristics of the conquering peoples are inherited by the conquered indigenous populations.

Imperialism and colonialism both dictate the political and economic advantage over a land and the indigenous populations they control, yet scholars sometimes find it difficult to illustrate the difference between the two. Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country taking physical control of another, imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally. Colonialism is seen to be the architect deciding how to start dominating areas and then imperialism can be seen as creating the idea behind conquest cooperating with colonialism. Colonialism is when the imperial nation begins a conquest over an area and then eventually is able to rule over the areas the previous nation had controlled. Colonialism's core meaning is the exploitation of the valuable assets and supplies of the nation that was conquered and the conquering nation then gaining the benefits from the spoils of the war. The meaning of imperialism is to create an empire, by <hl> conquering the other state's lands <hl> and therefore increasing its own dominance. Colonialism is the builder and preserver of the colonial possessions in an area by a population coming from a foreign region. Colonialism can completely change the existing social structure, physical structure and economics of an area; it is not unusual that the characteristics of the conquering peoples are inherited by the conquered indigenous populations.


Question: What is colonialism's core meaning?

Answer: exploitation

Imperialism and colonialism both dictate the political and economic advantage over a land and the indigenous populations they control, yet scholars sometimes find it difficult to illustrate the difference between the two. Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country taking physical control of another, imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally. Colonialism is seen to be the architect deciding how to start dominating areas and then imperialism can be seen as creating the idea behind conquest cooperating with colonialism. Colonialism is when the imperial nation begins a conquest over an area and then eventually is able to rule over the areas the previous nation had controlled. <hl> Colonialism's core meaning is the exploitation of the valuable assets and supplies of the nation that was conquered and the conquering nation then gaining the benefits from the spoils of the war. <hl> The meaning of imperialism is to create an empire, by conquering the other state's lands and therefore increasing its own dominance. Colonialism is the builder and preserver of the colonial possessions in an area by a population coming from a foreign region. Colonialism can completely change the existing social structure, physical structure and economics of an area; it is not unusual that the characteristics of the conquering peoples are inherited by the conquered indigenous populations.

Imperialism and colonialism both dictate the political and economic advantage over a land and the indigenous populations they control, yet scholars sometimes find it difficult to illustrate the difference between the two. Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country taking physical control of another, imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally. Colonialism is seen to be the architect deciding how to start dominating areas and then imperialism can be seen as creating the idea behind conquest cooperating with colonialism. Colonialism is when the imperial nation begins a conquest over an area and then eventually is able to rule over the areas the previous nation had controlled. Colonialism's core meaning is the <hl> exploitation <hl> of the valuable assets and supplies of the nation that was conquered and the conquering nation then gaining the benefits from the spoils of the war. The meaning of imperialism is to create an empire, by conquering the other state's lands and therefore increasing its own dominance. Colonialism is the builder and preserver of the colonial possessions in an area by a population coming from a foreign region. Colonialism can completely change the existing social structure, physical structure and economics of an area; it is not unusual that the characteristics of the conquering peoples are inherited by the conquered indigenous populations.


Question: what do conquering people pass down to native populations?

Answer: characteristics

Imperialism and colonialism both dictate the political and economic advantage over a land and the indigenous populations they control, yet scholars sometimes find it difficult to illustrate the difference between the two. Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country taking physical control of another, imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally. Colonialism is seen to be the architect deciding how to start dominating areas and then imperialism can be seen as creating the idea behind conquest cooperating with colonialism. Colonialism is when the imperial nation begins a conquest over an area and then eventually is able to rule over the areas the previous nation had controlled. Colonialism's core meaning is the exploitation of the valuable assets and supplies of the nation that was conquered and the conquering nation then gaining the benefits from the spoils of the war. The meaning of imperialism is to create an empire, by conquering the other state's lands and therefore increasing its own dominance. Colonialism is the builder and preserver of the colonial possessions in an area by a population coming from a foreign region. <hl> Colonialism can completely change the existing social structure, physical structure and economics of an area; it is not unusual that the characteristics of the conquering peoples are inherited by the conquered indigenous populations. <hl>

Imperialism and colonialism both dictate the political and economic advantage over a land and the indigenous populations they control, yet scholars sometimes find it difficult to illustrate the difference between the two. Although imperialism and colonialism focus on the suppression of an other, if colonialism refers to the process of a country taking physical control of another, imperialism refers to the political and monetary dominance, either formally or informally. Colonialism is seen to be the architect deciding how to start dominating areas and then imperialism can be seen as creating the idea behind conquest cooperating with colonialism. Colonialism is when the imperial nation begins a conquest over an area and then eventually is able to rule over the areas the previous nation had controlled. Colonialism's core meaning is the exploitation of the valuable assets and supplies of the nation that was conquered and the conquering nation then gaining the benefits from the spoils of the war. The meaning of imperialism is to create an empire, by conquering the other state's lands and therefore increasing its own dominance. Colonialism is the builder and preserver of the colonial possessions in an area by a population coming from a foreign region. Colonialism can completely change the existing social structure, physical structure and economics of an area; it is not unusual that the <hl> characteristics <hl> of the conquering peoples are inherited by the conquered indigenous populations.


Question: what is the most controversial aspect of imperialism?

A controversial aspect of imperialism is the defense and justification of empire-building based on seemingly rational grounds. J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'". Many others argued that imperialism is justified for several different reasons. Friedrich Ratzel believed that in order for a state to survive, imperialism was needed. Halford Mackinder felt that Great Britain needed to be one of the greatest imperialists and therefore justified imperialism. The purportedly scientific nature of "Social Darwinism" and a theory of races formed a supposedly rational justification for imperialism. The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America "whiteness" is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common.

Answer: empire-building

<hl> A controversial aspect of imperialism is the defense and justification of empire-building based on seemingly rational grounds. <hl> J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'". Many others argued that imperialism is justified for several different reasons. Friedrich Ratzel believed that in order for a state to survive, imperialism was needed. Halford Mackinder felt that Great Britain needed to be one of the greatest imperialists and therefore justified imperialism. The purportedly scientific nature of "Social Darwinism" and a theory of races formed a supposedly rational justification for imperialism. The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America "whiteness" is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common.

A controversial aspect of imperialism is the defense and justification of <hl> empire-building <hl> based on seemingly rational grounds. J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'". Many others argued that imperialism is justified for several different reasons. Friedrich Ratzel believed that in order for a state to survive, imperialism was needed. Halford Mackinder felt that Great Britain needed to be one of the greatest imperialists and therefore justified imperialism. The purportedly scientific nature of "Social Darwinism" and a theory of races formed a supposedly rational justification for imperialism. The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America "whiteness" is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common.


Question: Friedrich Ratzel thought what was needed for a state to survive?

Answer: imperialism

<hl> A controversial aspect of imperialism is the defense and justification of empire-building based on seemingly rational grounds. <hl> J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'". Many others argued that imperialism is justified for several different reasons. Friedrich Ratzel believed that in order for a state to survive, imperialism was needed. Halford Mackinder felt that Great Britain needed to be one of the greatest imperialists and therefore justified imperialism. The purportedly scientific nature of "Social Darwinism" and a theory of races formed a supposedly rational justification for imperialism. The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America "whiteness" is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common.

A controversial aspect of <hl> imperialism <hl> is the defense and justification of empire-building based on seemingly rational grounds. J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'". Many others argued that imperialism is justified for several different reasons. Friedrich Ratzel believed that in order for a state to survive, imperialism was needed. Halford Mackinder felt that Great Britain needed to be one of the greatest imperialists and therefore justified imperialism. The purportedly scientific nature of "Social Darwinism" and a theory of races formed a supposedly rational justification for imperialism. The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America "whiteness" is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common.


Question: J. A. Hobson wanted which races to develop the world?

Answer: highest 'social efficiency'

A controversial aspect of imperialism is the defense and justification of empire-building based on seemingly rational grounds. <hl> J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency' ". <hl> Many others argued that imperialism is justified for several different reasons. Friedrich Ratzel believed that in order for a state to survive, imperialism was needed. Halford Mackinder felt that Great Britain needed to be one of the greatest imperialists and therefore justified imperialism. The purportedly scientific nature of "Social Darwinism" and a theory of races formed a supposedly rational justification for imperialism. The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America "whiteness" is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common.

A controversial aspect of imperialism is the defense and justification of empire-building based on seemingly rational grounds. J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of <hl> highest 'social efficiency' <hl>". Many others argued that imperialism is justified for several different reasons. Friedrich Ratzel believed that in order for a state to survive, imperialism was needed. Halford Mackinder felt that Great Britain needed to be one of the greatest imperialists and therefore justified imperialism. The purportedly scientific nature of "Social Darwinism" and a theory of races formed a supposedly rational justification for imperialism. The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America "whiteness" is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common.

J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of <hl> highest 'social efficiency' <hl> ".


Question: Which theory justifies imperialism in part?

Answer: theory of races

A controversial aspect of imperialism is the defense and justification of empire-building based on seemingly rational grounds. J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'". Many others argued that imperialism is justified for several different reasons. Friedrich Ratzel believed that in order for a state to survive, imperialism was needed. Halford Mackinder felt that Great Britain needed to be one of the greatest imperialists and therefore justified imperialism. <hl> The purportedly scientific nature of "Social Darwinism" and a theory of races formed a supposedly rational justification for imperialism. <hl> The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America "whiteness" is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common.

A controversial aspect of imperialism is the defense and justification of empire-building based on seemingly rational grounds. J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'". Many others argued that imperialism is justified for several different reasons. Friedrich Ratzel believed that in order for a state to survive, imperialism was needed. Halford Mackinder felt that Great Britain needed to be one of the greatest imperialists and therefore justified imperialism. The purportedly scientific nature of "Social Darwinism" and a <hl> theory of races <hl> formed a supposedly rational justification for imperialism. The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America "whiteness" is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common.


Question: In Latin America what is the most revered skin color?

Answer: whiteness

A controversial aspect of imperialism is the defense and justification of empire-building based on seemingly rational grounds. J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'". Many others argued that imperialism is justified for several different reasons. Friedrich Ratzel believed that in order for a state to survive, imperialism was needed. Halford Mackinder felt that Great Britain needed to be one of the greatest imperialists and therefore justified imperialism. The purportedly scientific nature of "Social Darwinism" and a theory of races formed a supposedly rational justification for imperialism. <hl> The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America " whiteness " is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common. <hl>

A controversial aspect of imperialism is the defense and justification of empire-building based on seemingly rational grounds. J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'". Many others argued that imperialism is justified for several different reasons. Friedrich Ratzel believed that in order for a state to survive, imperialism was needed. Halford Mackinder felt that Great Britain needed to be one of the greatest imperialists and therefore justified imperialism. The purportedly scientific nature of "Social Darwinism" and a theory of races formed a supposedly rational justification for imperialism. The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America "<hl> whiteness <hl>" is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common.

The rhetoric of colonizers being racially superior appears to have achieved its purpose, for example throughout Latin America " <hl> whiteness <hl> " is still prized today and various forms of blanqueamiento (whitening) are common.


Question: Where was Friedrich Ratzel born?

The Royal Geographical Society of London and other geographical societies in Europe had great influence and were able to fund travelers who would come back with tales of their discoveries. These societies also served as a space for travellers to share these stories.Political geographers such as Friedrich Ratzel of Germany and Halford Mackinder of Britain also supported imperialism. Ratzel believed expansion was necessary for a state’s survival while Mackinder supported Britain’s imperial expansion; these two arguments dominated the discipline for decades.

Answer: Germany

The Royal Geographical Society of London and other geographical societies in Europe had great influence and were able to fund travelers who would come back with tales of their discoveries. These societies also served as a space for travellers to share these stories. <hl> Political geographers such as Friedrich Ratzel of Germany and Halford Mackinder of Britain also supported imperialism. <hl> Ratzel believed expansion was necessary for a state’s survival while Mackinder supported Britain’s imperial expansion; these two arguments dominated the discipline for decades.

The Royal Geographical Society of London and other geographical societies in Europe had great influence and were able to fund travelers who would come back with tales of their discoveries. These societies also served as a space for travellers to share these stories.Political geographers such as Friedrich Ratzel of <hl> Germany <hl> and Halford Mackinder of Britain also supported imperialism. Ratzel believed expansion was necessary for a state’s survival while Mackinder supported Britain’s imperial expansion; these two arguments dominated the discipline for decades.


Question: Where was Halford Mackinder born?

Answer: Britain

The Royal Geographical Society of London and other geographical societies in Europe had great influence and were able to fund travelers who would come back with tales of their discoveries. These societies also served as a space for travellers to share these stories. <hl> Political geographers such as Friedrich Ratzel of Germany and Halford Mackinder of Britain also supported imperialism. <hl> Ratzel believed expansion was necessary for a state’s survival while Mackinder supported Britain’s imperial expansion; these two arguments dominated the discipline for decades.

The Royal Geographical Society of London and other geographical societies in Europe had great influence and were able to fund travelers who would come back with tales of their discoveries. These societies also served as a space for travellers to share these stories.Political geographers such as Friedrich Ratzel of Germany and Halford Mackinder of <hl> Britain <hl> also supported imperialism. Ratzel believed expansion was necessary for a state’s survival while Mackinder supported Britain’s imperial expansion; these two arguments dominated the discipline for decades.


Question: Halford Mackinder and Friedrich Ratzel where what kind of geographers?

Answer: Political

The Royal Geographical Society of London and other geographical societies in Europe had great influence and were able to fund travelers who would come back with tales of their discoveries. These societies also served as a space for travellers to share these stories. <hl> Political geographers such as Friedrich Ratzel of Germany and Halford Mackinder of Britain also supported imperialism. <hl> Ratzel believed expansion was necessary for a state’s survival while Mackinder supported Britain’s imperial expansion; these two arguments dominated the discipline for decades.

The Royal Geographical Society of London and other geographical societies in Europe had great influence and were able to fund travelers who would come back with tales of their discoveries. These societies also served as a space for travellers to share these stories.<hl> Political <hl> geographers such as Friedrich Ratzel of Germany and Halford Mackinder of Britain also supported imperialism. Ratzel believed expansion was necessary for a state’s survival while Mackinder supported Britain’s imperial expansion; these two arguments dominated the discipline for decades.


Question: Friedrich Ratzel thought imperialism was what for the country?

Answer: geographical societies in Europe

<hl> The Royal Geographical Society of London and other geographical societies in Europe had great influence and were able to fund travelers who would come back with tales of their discoveries. <hl> These societies also served as a space for travellers to share these stories. Political geographers such as Friedrich Ratzel of Germany and Halford Mackinder of Britain also supported imperialism. Ratzel believed expansion was necessary for a state’s survival while Mackinder supported Britain’s imperial expansion; these two arguments dominated the discipline for decades.

The Royal Geographical Society of London and other <hl> geographical societies in Europe <hl> had great influence and were able to fund travelers who would come back with tales of their discoveries. These societies also served as a space for travellers to share these stories.Political geographers such as Friedrich Ratzel of Germany and Halford Mackinder of Britain also supported imperialism. Ratzel believed expansion was necessary for a state’s survival while Mackinder supported Britain’s imperial expansion; these two arguments dominated the discipline for decades.


Question: How would the geographical societies in Europe support certain travelers?

Answer: fund

<hl> The Royal Geographical Society of London and other geographical societies in Europe had great influence and were able to fund travelers who would come back with tales of their discoveries. <hl> These societies also served as a space for travellers to share these stories. Political geographers such as Friedrich Ratzel of Germany and Halford Mackinder of Britain also supported imperialism. Ratzel believed expansion was necessary for a state’s survival while Mackinder supported Britain’s imperial expansion; these two arguments dominated the discipline for decades.

The Royal Geographical Society of London and other geographical societies in Europe had great influence and were able to <hl> fund <hl> travelers who would come back with tales of their discoveries. These societies also served as a space for travellers to share these stories.Political geographers such as Friedrich Ratzel of Germany and Halford Mackinder of Britain also supported imperialism. Ratzel believed expansion was necessary for a state’s survival while Mackinder supported Britain’s imperial expansion; these two arguments dominated the discipline for decades.


Question: Which theory suggested people in the tropics were uncivilized?

Geographical theories such as environmental determinism also suggested that tropical environments created uncivilized people in need of European guidance. For instance, American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple argued that even though human beings originated in the tropics they were only able to become fully human in the temperate zone. Tropicality can be paralleled with Edward Said’s Orientalism as the west’s construction of the east as the “other”. According to Siad, orientalism allowed Europe to establish itself as the superior and the norm, which justified its dominance over the essentialized Orient.

Answer: environmental determinism

<hl> Geographical theories such as environmental determinism also suggested that tropical environments created uncivilized people in need of European guidance. <hl> For instance, American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple argued that even though human beings originated in the tropics they were only able to become fully human in the temperate zone. Tropicality can be paralleled with Edward Said’s Orientalism as the west’s construction of the east as the “other”. According to Siad, orientalism allowed Europe to establish itself as the superior and the norm, which justified its dominance over the essentialized Orient.

Geographical theories such as <hl> environmental determinism <hl> also suggested that tropical environments created uncivilized people in need of European guidance. For instance, American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple argued that even though human beings originated in the tropics they were only able to become fully human in the temperate zone. Tropicality can be paralleled with Edward Said’s Orientalism as the west’s construction of the east as the “other”. According to Siad, orientalism allowed Europe to establish itself as the superior and the norm, which justified its dominance over the essentialized Orient.


Question: According to Ellen Churchill Semple what type of climate was necessary for humans to become fully human?

Answer: temperate

Geographical theories such as environmental determinism also suggested that tropical environments created uncivilized people in need of European guidance. <hl> For instance, American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple argued that even though human beings originated in the tropics they were only able to become fully human in the temperate zone. <hl> Tropicality can be paralleled with Edward Said’s Orientalism as the west’s construction of the east as the “other”. According to Siad, orientalism allowed Europe to establish itself as the superior and the norm, which justified its dominance over the essentialized Orient.

Geographical theories such as environmental determinism also suggested that tropical environments created uncivilized people in need of European guidance. For instance, American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple argued that even though human beings originated in the tropics they were only able to become fully human in the <hl> temperate <hl> zone. Tropicality can be paralleled with Edward Said’s Orientalism as the west’s construction of the east as the “other”. According to Siad, orientalism allowed Europe to establish itself as the superior and the norm, which justified its dominance over the essentialized Orient.


Question: Which book by Edward Said portrayed the east as being the "others?"

Answer: Orientalism

Geographical theories such as environmental determinism also suggested that tropical environments created uncivilized people in need of European guidance. For instance, American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple argued that even though human beings originated in the tropics they were only able to become fully human in the temperate zone. <hl> Tropicality can be paralleled with Edward Said’s Orientalism as the west’s construction of the east as the “other”. <hl> According to Siad, orientalism allowed Europe to establish itself as the superior and the norm, which justified its dominance over the essentialized Orient.

Geographical theories such as environmental determinism also suggested that tropical environments created uncivilized people in need of European guidance. For instance, American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple argued that even though human beings originated in the tropics they were only able to become fully human in the temperate zone. Tropicality can be paralleled with Edward Said’s <hl> Orientalism <hl> as the west’s construction of the east as the “other”. According to Siad, orientalism allowed Europe to establish itself as the superior and the norm, which justified its dominance over the essentialized Orient.


Question: According to certain Geographical theories what type of human does a tropical climate produce?

Answer: uncivilized

<hl> Geographical theories such as environmental determinism also suggested that tropical environments created uncivilized people in need of European guidance. <hl> For instance, American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple argued that even though human beings originated in the tropics they were only able to become fully human in the temperate zone. Tropicality can be paralleled with Edward Said’s Orientalism as the west’s construction of the east as the “other”. According to Siad, orientalism allowed Europe to establish itself as the superior and the norm, which justified its dominance over the essentialized Orient.

Geographical theories such as environmental determinism also suggested that tropical environments created <hl> uncivilized <hl> people in need of European guidance. For instance, American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple argued that even though human beings originated in the tropics they were only able to become fully human in the temperate zone. Tropicality can be paralleled with Edward Said’s Orientalism as the west’s construction of the east as the “other”. According to Siad, orientalism allowed Europe to establish itself as the superior and the norm, which justified its dominance over the essentialized Orient.


Question: By justification certain racial and geographical theories, Europe thought of itself as what?

Answer: superior

Geographical theories such as environmental determinism also suggested that tropical environments created uncivilized people in need of European guidance. For instance, American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple argued that even though human beings originated in the tropics they were only able to become fully human in the temperate zone. Tropicality can be paralleled with Edward Said’s Orientalism as the west’s construction of the east as the “other”. <hl> According to Siad, orientalism allowed Europe to establish itself as the superior and the norm, which justified its dominance over the essentialized Orient. <hl>

Geographical theories such as environmental determinism also suggested that tropical environments created uncivilized people in need of European guidance. For instance, American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple argued that even though human beings originated in the tropics they were only able to become fully human in the temperate zone. Tropicality can be paralleled with Edward Said’s Orientalism as the west’s construction of the east as the “other”. According to Siad, orientalism allowed Europe to establish itself as the <hl> superior <hl> and the norm, which justified its dominance over the essentialized Orient.


Question: What law justified British imperialism?

The principles of imperialism are often generalizable to the policies and practices of the British Empire "during the last generation, and proceeds rather by diagnosis than by historical description". British imperialism often used the concept of Terra nullius (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning 'empty land'). The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in the eighteenth century, as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse Aboriginal inhabitants.

Answer: Terra nullius

The principles of imperialism are often generalizable to the policies and practices of the British Empire "during the last generation, and proceeds rather by diagnosis than by historical description". <hl> British imperialism often used the concept of Terra nullius (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning 'empty land'). <hl> The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in the eighteenth century, as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse Aboriginal inhabitants.

The principles of imperialism are often generalizable to the policies and practices of the British Empire "during the last generation, and proceeds rather by diagnosis than by historical description". British imperialism often used the concept of <hl> Terra nullius <hl> (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning 'empty land'). The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in the eighteenth century, as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse Aboriginal inhabitants.


Question: When did Great Britain colonize Australia?

Answer: the eighteenth century

The principles of imperialism are often generalizable to the policies and practices of the British Empire "during the last generation, and proceeds rather by diagnosis than by historical description". British imperialism often used the concept of Terra nullius (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning 'empty land'). <hl> The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in the eighteenth century , as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse Aboriginal inhabitants. <hl>

The principles of imperialism are often generalizable to the policies and practices of the British Empire "during the last generation, and proceeds rather by diagnosis than by historical description". British imperialism often used the concept of Terra nullius (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning 'empty land'). The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in <hl> the eighteenth century <hl>, as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse Aboriginal inhabitants.

The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in <hl> the eighteenth century <hl> , as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse Aboriginal inhabitants.


Question: Imperialism is most often associated with which sovereignty?

Answer: the British Empire

<hl> The principles of imperialism are often generalizable to the policies and practices of the British Empire "during the last generation, and proceeds rather by diagnosis than by historical description". <hl> British imperialism often used the concept of Terra nullius (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning 'empty land'). The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in the eighteenth century, as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse Aboriginal inhabitants.

The principles of imperialism are often generalizable to the policies and practices of <hl> the British Empire <hl> "during the last generation, and proceeds rather by diagnosis than by historical description". British imperialism often used the concept of Terra nullius (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning 'empty land'). The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in the eighteenth century, as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse Aboriginal inhabitants.


Question: What were the native inhabitants of Australia called?

Answer: Aboriginal

The principles of imperialism are often generalizable to the policies and practices of the British Empire "during the last generation, and proceeds rather by diagnosis than by historical description". British imperialism often used the concept of Terra nullius (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning 'empty land'). <hl> The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in the eighteenth century, as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse Aboriginal inhabitants. <hl>

The principles of imperialism are often generalizable to the policies and practices of the British Empire "during the last generation, and proceeds rather by diagnosis than by historical description". British imperialism often used the concept of Terra nullius (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning 'empty land'). The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in the eighteenth century, as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse <hl> Aboriginal <hl> inhabitants.


Question: Terra Nullius is a Latin expression meaning what in English?

Answer: empty land

The principles of imperialism are often generalizable to the policies and practices of the British Empire "during the last generation, and proceeds rather by diagnosis than by historical description". <hl> British imperialism often used the concept of Terra nullius (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning ' empty land '). <hl> The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in the eighteenth century, as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse Aboriginal inhabitants.

The principles of imperialism are often generalizable to the policies and practices of the British Empire "during the last generation, and proceeds rather by diagnosis than by historical description". British imperialism often used the concept of Terra nullius (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning '<hl> empty land <hl>'). The country of Australia serves as a case study in relation to British settlement and colonial rule of the continent in the eighteenth century, as it was premised on terra nullius, and its settlers considered it unused by its sparse Aboriginal inhabitants.

British imperialism often used the concept of Terra nullius (Latin expression which stems from Roman law meaning ' <hl> empty land <hl> ').


Question: Orientalism refers to how the West developed a what of the East?

Orientalism, as theorized by Edward Said, refers to how the West developed an imaginative geography of the East. This imaginative geography relies on an essentializing discourse that represents neither the diversity nor the social reality of the East. Rather, by essentializing the East, this discourse uses the idea of place-based identities to create difference and distance between "we" the West and "them" the East, or "here" in the West and "there" in the East. This difference was particularly apparent in textual and visual works of early European studies of the Orient that positioned the East as irrational and backward in opposition to the rational and progressive West. Defining the East as a negative vision of itself, as its inferior, not only increased the West’s sense of self, but also was a way of ordering the East and making it known to the West so that it could be dominated and controlled. The discourse of Orientalism therefore served as an ideological justification of early Western imperialism, as it formed a body of knowledge and ideas that rationalized social, cultural, political, and economic control of other territories.

Answer: an imaginative geography

<hl> Orientalism, as theorized by Edward Said, refers to how the West developed an imaginative geography of the East. <hl> This imaginative geography relies on an essentializing discourse that represents neither the diversity nor the social reality of the East. Rather, by essentializing the East, this discourse uses the idea of place-based identities to create difference and distance between "we" the West and "them" the East, or "here" in the West and "there" in the East. This difference was particularly apparent in textual and visual works of early European studies of the Orient that positioned the East as irrational and backward in opposition to the rational and progressive West. Defining the East as a negative vision of itself, as its inferior, not only increased the West’s sense of self, but also was a way of ordering the East and making it known to the West so that it could be dominated and controlled. The discourse of Orientalism therefore served as an ideological justification of early Western imperialism, as it formed a body of knowledge and ideas that rationalized social, cultural, political, and economic control of other territories.

Orientalism, as theorized by Edward Said, refers to how the West developed <hl> an imaginative geography <hl> of the East. This imaginative geography relies on an essentializing discourse that represents neither the diversity nor the social reality of the East. Rather, by essentializing the East, this discourse uses the idea of place-based identities to create difference and distance between "we" the West and "them" the East, or "here" in the West and "there" in the East. This difference was particularly apparent in textual and visual works of early European studies of the Orient that positioned the East as irrational and backward in opposition to the rational and progressive West. Defining the East as a negative vision of itself, as its inferior, not only increased the West’s sense of self, but also was a way of ordering the East and making it known to the West so that it could be dominated and controlled. The discourse of Orientalism therefore served as an ideological justification of early Western imperialism, as it formed a body of knowledge and ideas that rationalized social, cultural, political, and economic control of other territories.


Question: Early Western texts referencing the East describe the people as being what?

Answer: irrational and backward

Orientalism, as theorized by Edward Said, refers to how the West developed an imaginative geography of the East. This imaginative geography relies on an essentializing discourse that represents neither the diversity nor the social reality of the East. Rather, by essentializing the East, this discourse uses the idea of place-based identities to create difference and distance between "we" the West and "them" the East, or "here" in the West and "there" in the East. <hl> This difference was particularly apparent in textual and visual works of early European studies of the Orient that positioned the East as irrational and backward in opposition to the rational and progressive West. <hl> Defining the East as a negative vision of itself, as its inferior, not only increased the West’s sense of self, but also was a way of ordering the East and making it known to the West so that it could be dominated and controlled. The discourse of Orientalism therefore served as an ideological justification of early Western imperialism, as it formed a body of knowledge and ideas that rationalized social, cultural, political, and economic control of other territories.

Orientalism, as theorized by Edward Said, refers to how the West developed an imaginative geography of the East. This imaginative geography relies on an essentializing discourse that represents neither the diversity nor the social reality of the East. Rather, by essentializing the East, this discourse uses the idea of place-based identities to create difference and distance between "we" the West and "them" the East, or "here" in the West and "there" in the East. This difference was particularly apparent in textual and visual works of early European studies of the Orient that positioned the East as <hl> irrational and backward <hl> in opposition to the rational and progressive West. Defining the East as a negative vision of itself, as its inferior, not only increased the West’s sense of self, but also was a way of ordering the East and making it known to the West so that it could be dominated and controlled. The discourse of Orientalism therefore served as an ideological justification of early Western imperialism, as it formed a body of knowledge and ideas that rationalized social, cultural, political, and economic control of other territories.


Question: The West saw the East as what?

Answer: inferior

Orientalism, as theorized by Edward Said, refers to how the West developed an imaginative geography of the East. This imaginative geography relies on an essentializing discourse that represents neither the diversity nor the social reality of the East. Rather, by essentializing the East, this discourse uses the idea of place-based identities to create difference and distance between "we" the West and "them" the East, or "here" in the West and "there" in the East. This difference was particularly apparent in textual and visual works of early European studies of the Orient that positioned the East as irrational and backward in opposition to the rational and progressive West. <hl> Defining the East as a negative vision of itself, as its inferior , not only increased the West’s sense of self, but also was a way of ordering the East and making it known to the West so that it could be dominated and controlled. <hl> The discourse of Orientalism therefore served as an ideological justification of early Western imperialism, as it formed a body of knowledge and ideas that rationalized social, cultural, political, and economic control of other territories.

Orientalism, as theorized by Edward Said, refers to how the West developed an imaginative geography of the East. This imaginative geography relies on an essentializing discourse that represents neither the diversity nor the social reality of the East. Rather, by essentializing the East, this discourse uses the idea of place-based identities to create difference and distance between "we" the West and "them" the East, or "here" in the West and "there" in the East. This difference was particularly apparent in textual and visual works of early European studies of the Orient that positioned the East as irrational and backward in opposition to the rational and progressive West. Defining the East as a negative vision of itself, as its <hl> inferior <hl>, not only increased the West’s sense of self, but also was a way of ordering the East and making it known to the West so that it could be dominated and controlled. The discourse of Orientalism therefore served as an ideological justification of early Western imperialism, as it formed a body of knowledge and ideas that rationalized social, cultural, political, and economic control of other territories.

Defining the East as a negative vision of itself, as its <hl> inferior <hl> , not only increased the West’s sense of self, but also was a way of ordering the East and making it known to the West so that it could be dominated and controlled.