Carvell's Response Paper

By no means has Hobson placed the ideal of Imperialism on a pedestal. Rather, he astutely states that “self-seeking interests” and their “animal struggle for existence” characterized Imperialism. And while he does not necessarily bring up a new view, he does entice discussion. Much of the reason to colonize was for the personal benefit of the explorer, and this opportunity created excitement in others to follow him. And because of this intense excitement the colonizer (or more likely group of colonizers) would have the entire military, political, and financial resources of the nation at his command. Therefore Imperialism served as such a powerful force that national resources were used for private gain, creating a paradox between “nation” and “private”. It seems that Imperialism is unfair not only to the territory that it is conquering, but to the mother nation herself. This supports Hobson’s argument that Imperialism washes away the roots of the nation, taking away the very ideals that were fought for. Because the nation of so spread apart, oligarchies are created, and democracy is replaced. If left uncontrolled, the nation becomes weak and lacks the strong core it once had. While Imperialism seemed to reap the benefits of new territory and resources, in reality it hurt the nation because it became so spread apart.