# data[].attributes.body
John Locke was born on August, 19th, 1632 in Wrington, United Kingdom. John Locke was an English philosopher his work was at the foundation of modern philosophical empiricism and political liberalism. He was an enlightenment to both Europe and the American Constitution. John Locke help with "Two Treatises of Government", "Two Treatises" was a response to the political situation in England. John Locke's political philosophy was strongly held by his religious commitment. John Locke died on October 28, 1704, High Laver, 72 years old, he died of old age.

links for information:

https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Locke/Two-Treatises-of-Government

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
The Haitian revolution and Europe's industrial revolution

# data[].attributes.body
The Haitian revolution was a huge impact on History, because it was the first successful slave revolution led by only slaves. The Haitian revolution started on August 21, 1791, and ended on January 1, 1804. The revolution ended when Jean-Jacques Dessalines. How enlightenment goals inspired the Haitian revolution is by inspiring slaves to fight for freedom and oppress slavery. The industrial Revolution was an economic reform in Europe 1750-1900, the impact it had was giving people jobs, money, and factories made producing things easier. But the working conditions were horrible, they had long world hours and you started working as early as 7 years old. People worked in coal mines and factories

Haitian revolution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_Revolution#:~:text=The%20revolt%20began%20on%2022,with%20the%20former%20colony's%20independence.

Europe's industrial revolution:

https://www.britannica.com/event/Industrial-Revolution

# data[].attributes.body
Britain modernized farming, the processing of raw materials and manufactured goods. Economic progress rapidly increased urbanization and social problems. The huge demand of raw materials of raw materials led to the colonization of Africa and Asia for these resources. The Europeans when colonizing Africa split it into places of influence, colonies and segments. A huge amount of Africans belong to groups split by colonial partitions. The Europeans made maps that were super inaccurate due to the lack of knowledge of the land.

https://www.sahistory.org.za/article/imperialism-and-socialism-context-africa

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/colonial-borders-in-africa-improper-design-and-its-impact-on-african-borderland-communities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Please note: This topic's content was written in 2003 and is part of the old curriculum content, we have modified it slightly to fit the new curriculum but we will be further updating the content in the coming months.

Many countries in the world experienced imperialism when they were taken over and ruled by a more powerful country. The main motive for imperialism was to obtain and control a supply of raw materials for industries. This meant that a weaker country with abundant natural resources would be colonised. Imperialists were often brutal in the way they treated the indigenous population. Sometimes they chose a less aggressive approach, obtaining the co-operation of the local people and working with their traditional rulers and social and political structures and practices.

This section is quite long so we have broken it into two pages: Defining Imperialism

In the late 18th century, life in Europe and America changed dramatically. Revolutions in America and France ushered in a new political order. The Industrial Revolution in Britain modernised farming, the processing of raw materials and manufacturing of goods. Later industrialisation spread to Europe and to the USA. Economic progress came at the cost of rapid urbanisation and social problems. Industrialisation also influenced political change. Britain developed into a democracy as a result. Industrialisation created a huge demand for raw materials and led to the colonisation of Africa and Asia for these resources. Industrialisation and technological progress boosted European and American confidence, and national pride. They became convinced that they were superior. Their lust for power climaxed in the two World Wars of the 20th century.

The word imperialism comes from the term empire. Imperialism refers to the practice of domination of one country by another in order to expand territory, power and influence. It usually carries with it the idea of cultural superiority on the part of the imperialist, judging the way of life, traditions and beliefs of those colonised as inferior and worthy of replacement:

"Imperialism, as distinct from colonialism, refers to political/cultural/economic rule over indigenous people transforming their ideas, institutions, and material culture (i.e., goods)." - Source: www.bu.edu

Imperialism takes the form of political control and creating economic dependence. In Europe, the period of imperialism coincided with growing nationalism and unification when previously divided political units were united under a single monarchy. Unification allowed for empire building because people were gathered under a monarchy that claimed the right to rule them. Examples are German and Italian unification. Towards the end of the 19th century, imperialism became a policy of colonial expansion pursued by different European powers. The Prime Minister of France, Jules Ferry in his justification of this policy told his parliament that:

"I repeat that the superior races [European] have a right because they have a duty. They have the duty to civilize the inferior races [non Europeans]...." Source: www.fordham.edu

France and Britain saw imperialism as a way of carrying out their responsibility to civilise non-European societies. Other imperialists believed imperialism was necessary for their country's economic growth. They argued that Europe's high import tariffs (government fees allowing foreign traders to bring in goods for sale) made it difficult to access customers and markets there. They had no choice but to look for other markets outside Europe. Lord Lugard of Britain said that:

"It is sufficient to reiterate here that, as long as our policy is one of free trade, we are compelled to seek new markets; for old ones are being closed to us by hostile tariffs, and our great dependencies, which formerly were the consumers of our goods, are now becoming our commercial rivals." Source: www.fordham.edu

Lugard further justified the policy of colonial expansion by saying that the benefits were not limited to Britain. Colonies would gain access to superior European goods and influence. The Scramble for Africa in the 1880s to 1900 was motivated by these ideas.

Imperialist ambitions in Africa were boosted by the expansion of competitive trade in Europe. The main aim was to secure commercial and trade links with African societies and protect those links from other European competitors. Europe established trade relations with African rulers and encouraged them to trade with them exclusively. European traders were at first not interested in expanding into the interior of Africa. As long as African rulers assured them of a supply of slaves from the interior, they felt no need to expand into the interior. The rapid expansion of industries made European countries look to African for a supply of cheap raw materials and (slave) labour. West Africa was particularly important for the development of industries in Europe. The production of African palm oil used as industrial oil was in high demand for European industries. Greed for ever-greater profits meant intensifying and expanding industrial production. European countries realised that by taking control of African territories they could secure a very cheap supply of raw materials that would ensure industrial success and overall economic prosperity. Colonial governments organised agricultural production in the colonies to match the demand for raw materials in Europe.

Imperial expansion of Europe into the African interior saw many African farmers forced off their land and turned into farm labourers on white-owned plantations, where they were usually subject to cruel exploitative practices. European governments encouraged their citizens to become permanent settlers in their African colonies, providing them with farming land. The loss of land caused much resentment among African people. Those who remained on their land and plantations found themselves forced to farm cash crops such as cotton, tobacco, coffee and sugar that were important for European industries instead of their traditional staple foods in order to survive. The price they were paid for these harvests was also very low especially when compared with the selling price of it after processing in Europe. It is not surprising then that early resistance to colonial rule in Africa revolved around the use of land and its restoration to its traditional owners.

Not all European countries had imperial ambitions for Africa. It was only the major powers in Europe that competed for the control of Africa. These were Britain, France, and Germany and the weaker powers of Spain, Portugal and Italy who had very small possessions in Africa. Britain and France were at the forefront of imperialism in Africa. These two countries were in competition with each other to dominate European politics and economics. They each aimed to beat the other through vying for greater control of Africa and thus her natural resources and labour supply. They also claimed exclusive trading rights with their colonies. These practices guaranteed them markets outside Europe for the sales of surplus goods and led to the practice of dumping. Dumping refers to the practice of offloading goods at very low prices to crush local competition for customers. African producers could not match these prices especially in the absence of similar government support and so they were unable to withstand European competition. This undermined the development of African industries and wealth and locked the continent into an unfair economic relationship with Europe in which African producers were barely able to survive by supplying cheap cash crops and primary goods. Moreover, African countries became dependent on European aid and loans, a state of affairs that remains today. Many African countries have been crippled by the burden of repayment of these loans.

The map shows how major imperialists, England and France used Africa to extend their competition for dominance in Europe. As the map shows, England came to be a dominant power in southern Africa, with only two Portuguese and French colonies in the region. France took control of most parts of West Africa.
Colonial Rule
Colonial rule was the result of competition among European countries for control of African resources. In the beginning, control was limited to colonial authorities securing the loyalty of African chiefs and kings. This meant that African chiefs would trade only with their colonial government. Towards the end of the 19th century colonial governments began to play a more active role in the affairs of African societies. Different colonial governments adopted different methods of rule.

Towards the end of the 19th Century and during the early 20th Century most African countries were under colonial rule except for Liberia and Ethiopia. Colonial rule refers to the conquest and capture of foreign territories in order to expand power. Colonisation of African countries by European powers, like Britain and France was used to protect their trade ambitions and led to exploitation of Africa. European countries used colonies to supply their industries with raw materials. Britain charged other European countries taxes for trading in their colonies as part of its economic competition. Colonial rule also ensured that European manufactured goods would have a ready market in Africa. Countries that had colonies in Africa were:

In terms of governing their colonies, these countries developed different systems of rule. The British government was famous for its indirect rule system that it introduced in many of its colonies. The French and other European governments like Portugal and Belgium practised direct colonial rule. The two systems were very different and as a result had different effects on African societies.
British Colonial Rule
The British system of indirect rule simply meant that power over colonies would be exercised through indigenous political structures. These structures which is related to a customary law were preserved and allowed to continue. In the early years of colonial rule, local rulers were still powerful and they were able to maintain the integrity of their political structures and system of government. To a large extent ordinary people did not suffer or feel the impact of colonial rule, and for many there was a little change.

This did not mean that African rulers were free to behave as if nothing had changed with colonisation. The British government introduced policies to limit local rulers power to govern their societies. For example, chiefs lost their authority to sentence anyone to death. Crimes requiring a death penalty were given to the magistrate who applied British law to judge the merits of the case. Chiefs were also forced to give up their support by a military unit made up of volunteers.

Chiefs were only allowed to rule in accordance with customary laws. However, in some cases the British government introduced new laws and forced chiefs to pass them as customary laws. For example, they introduced a Hut Tax to increase revenues to colonial governments. This tax was charged on every one who owned a hut, poor or rich. The tax was not a customary law, but it was portrayed as a customary practice by the British colonial governments.
French Colonial Rule
French and Portuguese colonies were ruled differently. Unlike the British system, the French and Portuguese gave a role to local African leaders preferring to adopt a system of direct rule. Colonies were treated as if they were extensions of the two European states. For example, French colonies were treated as French departments. The French government did not include any African rulers. They were stripped of all their powers and the people were ruled directly by French colonial officers often with a military background. These colonial officers replaced African rulers because most areas were divided into districts and departments. The division of French colonies into districts and departments did not take into consideration existing boundaries of different ethnic groups.

Whereas the British policy was based on the separation of races and preserving the culture or identities of African societies, the French policy was based on inclusion. Their policy was to encourage Africans to become French in every sense of the word. This policy was part of expanding French civilization to African people. However, this policy did not mean that African people in French colonies were treated with equality. Their inclusion into French societies was based on inequality between the French people and colonised Africans.
Portuguese Colonial Rule
The Portuguese introduced the prazo system. The prazo is a Portuguese system of land grants that was introduced in the colonies. It was a mixture of local political structures and a Portuguese political system. It was not an indirect rule system because land was taken from African rulers and given to Portuguese settlers. The control of land gave Portuguese the power to control African people. Because Portuguese rule was very weak, Portuguese holders of these land grants (prazo) legitimised their control of land by marrying into African royal families. These Portuguese rulers called themselves chiefs (like African chiefs) and ruled like African chiefs.

The prazo system was adopted largely because the Portuguese government was a weak colonial power as compared to other colonial powers. The Portuguese did not have the wealth required to administer their colonies. As a result, Portuguese colonies were the least developed colonies in Africa. They had to adapt their colonial rule to the African context.
Belgian Colonial Rule
In Rwanda, the Belgians used an indirect rule system. Instead of accommodating all traditional authorities within their colonial system, they favoured one group, the Tutsis. They used the Tutsis to control other groups in Rwanda. The Congo was ruled as the personal property of King Leopold II. Belgian colonial rule was characterised by the most cruel and exploitative treatment of the local people. People were forced to work and those who refused to carry out their duties had their hands chopped off.
German Colonial Rule
German colonial rule was also based on direct rule. However, there was no attempt to turn Africans into Germans. German colonial rule lasted for a brief period as Germany lost her colonial possessions after the First World War. Her colonies were mandated to British and French colonies.
Italian Colonial Rule
Italy was the latecomer in the colonisation of Africa, becoming involved only after the Italian unification of 1870. By this time other European countries had already claimed most parts of Africa. The Italian government developed a centralised administration with the aim of sending Italians to live in the colonies. The other reason for Italian colonialism was to show old European countries that Italy was also a strong nation. In an attempt to prove this, Italy attempted to colonise Ethiopia. The Ethiopians defeated and humiliated the Italians in the Battle of Adowa.
Spanish Colonial Rule
Spain had only two colonies in Africa, Equatorial Guinea and Western Sahara. These colonies were underdeveloped as compared to those of the European powers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Imperialism and socialism in the context of Africa

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Please note: This topic's content was written in 2003 and is part of the old curriculum content, we have modified it slightly to fit the new curriculum but we will be further updating the content in the coming months. Many countries in the world experienced imperialism when they were taken over and ruled by a more powerful country.

# data[].attributes.body
In Qing China western industrialization wasn't widely accepted at first due to wanting to keep their heritage alive. They Also didn't want anything to do with the outside world. The reform Asia made was called the "self strengthening movement" happened mainly due to many defeats by the Western powers. They realized that they were weak and needed to industrialize and modernize.

# data[].attributes.body
A huge reform that happened in the mid 1800's was the abolition reform that abolished slavery, and gave equal rights for women and other men. Also limiting alcohol consumption. The movement was great except the limiting of alcohol, people rebelled against the law to limit alcohol. The government eventually removed the law.

How European imperialism affected the middle east is Britain and France taking control of the Middle East. They took control of it by the pretext of the organization called the "mandate system". The Arab people rose up and gave birth to a nationalist fervor, they did this die to frustration of the Western Powers. The French noticed the growing in Arab pressure and the French swept across decolonization.

reformation movements: https://www.studentsofhistory.com/reform-movements

impacts: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41858004?seq=2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A summary of the 1800s reform movements in US History, including abolition, prisons, education, factories, women’s rights, and the temperance movement.

# data[].attributes.body
Rhine-Ruhr is at the heart of Germany, it has 10 million people in there. It's also in the top 10 biggest economic region. It was headquarters of steel, mining, and automobile industries in Germany. How all this affected the social structure is by the creation of the working class and made up a huge portion of the population. They filled factories and gave people jobs.

One huge political reform that happened is the making of Laissez-faire, this made a new industrial middle class and a huge working class. It also introduced new political ideologies like socialism.

Rhine Ruhr: https://www.wri.org/update/germany-ruhr-regions-pivot-coal-mining-hub-green-industry-and-expertise

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Highlights

In the 1950s, the Ruhr region in western Germany had a bustling economy driven by coal mining and heavy industries. Over the following decades, however, production employment dropped sharply, but extensive efforts to revitalize the region have helped it gradually reshape its economy. For a long time, there was strong opposition to the coal phase-out, leading to lock-in and increased costs, but support has grown since the 1990s thanks to the government's more decentralized, inclusive engagement strategy and partnership with trade unions, which eased the transition for workers and reduced economic hardship. The Ruhr's last mine closed in 2018.

Context

The Ruhr region in western Germany is one of Europe's most densely populated regions and largest industrial centers. In the 19th century, it developed an economy centered on coal mining, coal power generation and coal-reliant heavy industries, most notably steel. In the late 1950s, the Ruhr's hard coal production began a rapid decline due to international competition. In 1955, at the peak of the industry, there were nearly 480,000 workers, by 1980, there were roughly 143,000, and the last two closed in 2018, only 3,371 remained. (See Table 1)

Table 1. Coal Mining Workforce in Ruhr Region, by year
Source: Kohlenstatistik
Mining job losses in earlier decades had been offset by robust employment in the iron and steel industries and other manufacturing, but from 1960 to 2001, the number of steel jobs fell by 80%. Economic restructuring was crucial to the region's survival. Indeed, while 839,000 production jobs were lost in that period, 801,000 service jobs were gained, and those trends continued into the 21st century.

Policies, Actions and Results

The Ruhr Development Program was adopted in 1968 to support infrastructure development. The Future Initiative for Coal and Steel Regions, launched in 1987, took a technology-led approach to increasing the competitiveness of the coal and steel industries, and supported the expansion of road networks, public transport and higher education institutions.

Though Germany has a strong history of organized labor and social dialogue, those first phases of the Ruhr region's transition from coal were characterized by top-down structural policies and limited consultation with local actors. During that period, despite the government's support for economic diversification, the Ruhr's large industries were reluctant to recognize the decline of coal mining and kept investing in the industry. Similarly, trade unions were asking the government to maintain coal subsidies. This resistance delayed the transition and led to lock-in that hampered the growth of new industries. In this period, most former miners found new work nearby in the metal industry. Others were offered early retirement and retraining by specialized agencies.

In the late 1980s and 1990s, a more bottom-up approach (referred to as regionalized structural policy) empowered local actors to implement projects designed in cooperation with national and state authorities. For example, the IBA Emscher Park, along the Emscher River, included local initiatives within a larger framework of programs, and combined public and private sources.

For the most part, trade unions accepted the coal phase-out. Though initially driven by market forces, it also dovetailed with EU and German goals to reduce carbon emissions. This led the federal government to accelerate the phase-out by announcing in 2007 that subsidies for hard coal production would end in 2018, which would force the closure of the Ruhr's remaining mines. In 2007, there were approximately 24,000 coal workers in the Ruhr, representing three-quarters of Germany's mining workforce.

In 2007, after the announcement of the end of coal subsidies, a tripartite agreement was signed between coal companies, the representative trade unions and the federal and state governments to manage the last phase of the coal phase-out. This agreement aimed to achieve a just transition through a slow, gradual phase-out of subsidized coal, socially acceptable staff reduction and a comprehensive package for affected miners. This set of measures included:

Voluntary renunciation of wage increases and redistribution of work shifts to avoid layoffs.

Early retirement for miners who had worked for at least 20 years and have reached the age of 49, consisting of a monthly stipend until they qualified for a pension, and a more generous scheme for underground miners.

Relocation of about 10,600 workers within coal-producing activities.

Employer commitments to transfer workers to other energy jobs within the company, with re-training and decent pay.

Opportunities to join trainings and earn on-the-job certification.

Support for workers transitioning into the service sector.

Germany's last hard coal (also known as black coal) mine, Prosper-Haniel, closed in late 2018. Overall, the region's transition efforts were successful due to the synergy of these worker-focused policies with decades of region-wide, forward-looking structural policies and massive public investments supporting economic diversification. Many initiatives built on the region's heritage and existing industrial assets, focusing on environmental technology, engineering, commodity transport and large-scale prestigious sociocultural projects, which helped preserve regional identity.

Some of the most successful conversions include the Zollverein, a former coal mining complex in Essen that has become a UNESCO World Heritage Site with diverse cultural offerings, and the International Building Exhibition (IBA) Emscher Park, which led to the creation of 5,000 jobs as well as 7,500 new homes. Universities and higher education institutions played a significant role in this transition. By 2014, Ruhr had 2 2 universities with more than 250,000 students. This helped boost the profile of the region as a knowledge-based economy, attract employers, stem out-migration and develop a skilled workforce.

Together, these initiatives and institutions transformed the Ruhr from a coal-driven industrial region to a knowledge- and tourism-based economy. Unemployment rates stayed relatively low over the following decades, avoiding economic decline and mass out-migration, and by the mid-2000s 100,000 workers were employed in research and development of environmental technologies. The Ruhr's average annual economic growth between 1957 and 2000 was a modest but positive 1.3%.

However, these efforts were unable to achieve full equity among companies and districts. Government support has long focused on large mining companies and overlooked their refusal to free up land for other industries, which has prevented areas from being converted to other uses. Longer-serving workers benefitted more than those with shorter tenure or less consistent employment. Some job losses in the coal and steel sectors were balanced by an increase in service sector jobs, but these tended to pay lower wages. The northern Ruhr area is relatively underserved and experiences above-average unemployment rates, lower levels of income and education and high rates of child poverty. As of 2019, this division in the Ruhr region is growing, and poorer districts would benefit from more targeted action.

Strengths

A strong social partner model: Germany's history of strong union culture, social dialogue and collective agreements, vocational training and relatively supportive social systems laid the groundwork for a just transition.

A holistic approach to a just transition: Unemployment levels remained relatively low in the Ruhr region because of public support for regional revitalization and diversification, going beyond a focus on job substitution and retraining.

Large-scale investments from all levels of government: The region's economic diversification was achieved with massive investments from European, federal, state and municipal budgets, supporting infrastructure, education, tourism, culture and the service sector. While transition management authority was devolved to state governments, they were able to succeed thanks to strong federal support.

Leveraging existing regional assets: The growth of new sectors built on the assets and workforce skills that the Ruhr had developed as a mining hub. The region also acquired robust environmental service industries and technology research in rehabilitating coal mines and protecting the natural environment.

Challenges and Gaps

Economic, institutional and cultural lock-in that slowed structural change:The Ruhr's strong specialization in coal initially led local businesses, politicians and trade unions to try to maintain the coal industry, rather than acknowledge the coal crisis and move towards alternative futures, which ultimately increased the cost of the transition.

A narrow focus on large mining companies: The Ruhr's model has been criticized for overlooking middle-size companies that were also indirectly dependent on the coal industry and needed support to transition towards other sectors or business models.

Further Reading

Dahlbeck, E., and S. Gärtner. 2019. Just Transition for Regions and Generations: Experiences from Structural Change in the Ruhr Area. Berlin: WWF.

Galgóczi, B. 2014. The long and winding road from black to green: Decades of structural change in the Ruhr region. International Journal of Labour Research, 6(2166).

Pao-Yu, O., H. Brauers, and P. Herpich. 2019. Lessons from Germany's hard coal mining phase-out: policies and transition from 1950 to 2018. Climate Policy, 20(8), 963-979.

Sheldon, P., Junankar, R. and De Rosa Pontello, A. 2018. The Ruhr or Appalachia? Deciding the future of Australia's coal power workers and communities IRRC Report for CFMMEU Mining and Energy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Germany: The Ruhr Region's Pivot from Coal Mining to a Hub of Green Industry and Expertise

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the 1950s, the Ruhr region in western Germany had a bustling economy driven by coal mining and heavy industries. Over the following decades, however, production employment dropped sharply, but extensive efforts to revitalize the region have helped it gradually reshape its economy.

# data[].attributes.body
Western Europe had a big demographic change, death rate declined drastically due to a population surge because, of improved working areas. And due to better sanitation to fight off disease of bacteria, so people aren't sick all the time. Also because of better nutrition people were eating well and not dying due to not enough food or nutrition, which increased life expectancy. People also made huge improvements in medical knowledge, now people can make better treatments and diagnose people with stuff more accurately. Birth rates also remained high, so the population would increase and people were being born faster than people were dying.

https://historiana.eu/narratives/the-european-experience-demographic-changes-1/read