Running head: ANTI-IMPERIALISTS AND PRO-BOERS 1

Anti-Imperialists and Pro-Boers

Institutional Affiliation

Date
ANTI-IMPERIALISTS AND PRO-BOERS 2

ANTI-IMPERIALISTS AND PRO-BOERS

Question 1

The author presents conflicts that are in the two war scenarios. The conflicts evident are that

there one is seen as a support for the oppressed (the Pro-Boers) while in the other case, the

conflict is against oppression (Anti-Imperialists). The comparison of the two conflicting situation

by the author brings out clearly the reactions for the society in different times of war (Steven,

1996). This gives a presentation of how the society will offer different opinions to similar

situations though in different ways as there is a movement that is in support of the oppressed to

fight for what is right for them and the other is against actions that will lead to oppression.

Question 2

Besides occurring roughly at the same time, the two wars shared key similarities that offer

insight into the interaction of war and society at the dawn of the twentieth century. Enough

similarities exist that even the differences are revealing. Both wars pitted large industrial powers

against small, emerging, agrarian societies.

This is the main idea that the author majors on expounding in the entire article by offering a

detailed analysis of the atrocities as they happened in the two war scenarios.

Question 3

Protests by the Pro-Boers and the Anti-Imperialist are seen as the main act of treason because

these protests were seen to encourage the enemies to fight which led to long wars and costly too.

The author does not see this as a reason because he offers the images associated to the protest

movements and in this case, he states that a country if free to have debates on the decisions to
ANTI-IMPERIALISTS AND PRO-BOERS 3

wage war all which were bought out clearly by the protest movements. In my own opinion, this

is not treason but a matter of getting justifications from the government on the legal aspects of

going to war by the protestors (Steven, 1996). Also, the protestors’ acts are justifiable as because

they are fighting for the protection of the basic human rights and values.

Question 4

I agree with the actions of Atkinson & Gookin, for they were expressing their views as it is

granted by the constitution and at the same time keeping those in war informed of the war issues

and happenings.

Question 5

The anti-imperialists had a feeling of threat for the many Americans traditions that were

cherished which included avoidance of foreign entanglements, limitations in military structures

and most importantly, liberty availability for all citizens (Steven, 1996).

Question 6

Treason is one atrocity that was committed. This, as the British and American government, saw

it, was brought by protestors in the Pro-Boer and Anti-Imperialists movements and this helped

the “enemies” to fight as the government referred to it.

ANTI-IMPERIALISTS AND PRO-BOERS 4

Reference

Steven C. Call, (1996). Protesting against modern war: A comparison of issues raised by anti-

imperialists and pro-Boers. War in history, 3(1), 66-84.

Article Annotation

In the article, the author deeply explores the more similarities in two wars that happened almost

the same time and brought uproar in the citizens of the governments that are seen as initiators of

the war; Americans and British. The two situations leading to war gave birth and rise to groups

of protestors who saw the war as a violation of human rights and values, the Pro-Boers in the

case of British Boer war and the anti-imperialists in the case of the American-Philippines war.

Both situations led to yet serious atrocities ranging from treason, freedom of speech, the

definition of citizenship as well as racism all of which are presently evident in the two wars even

though they happened in different parts and the players were different too.

The aspect of treason stemmed from the fact that these two government opposing movements,

the Pro Boers for the British and the Anti-imperialists for the Americans, were seen to support

the “enemies” of the government. The charges of treason in both cases led to other causes as the

protestors were termed to be morally supporting the enemy to fight more for the hope of

attaining peace. Even though no one was actually tried for treason, the citizen supporters of both

wars as well as government officials termed the opposing movements as illegal and as acts of

treason and being traitors as well. There were also questions that were rising due to the freedom

of communication and speech as it was seen to be one of the main reasons as to why the wars

were being opposed in the two scenarios. The use of pamphlets and meetings as ways of airing
ANTI-IMPERIALISTS AND PRO-BOERS 5

views about the wars was similar among the Pro-Boers as well as the Anti-Imperialists. For the

Pro-Boers and the Anti- Imperialists, the speech was seen important rights that they were

practicing but instead was branded to be traitors. The issues concerning freedom of speech in

some the government was keen on keeping protestors’ information that would be “embarrassing”

form reaching the general population. Still, on how to express views, there was the issue of

citizenship for both wars because the governments were of the ideas of protecting citizens which

were viewed differently by the protestors in the Pro-Boers and Anti-Imperialists war. In the case

of Britain, there were questions arising from the application of the martial law in the war that the

government claimed for the protection of majority while in reality, this was viewed to the act of

oppression by the Pro-Boers movement. For the Americans, the government stated that it was its

aim to bring civilization and grant citizenship to the union which was seen to be not the case by

the Anti-Imperialists because there was the use of force and subjection of the Filipinos and that

didn’t add up to the true citizenship. Issues that were in connection to racism were also evident in

the two wars. For the case of the South African war, issues on Jewish being involved in funding

the “enemies” arose while for the Americans, the Filipinos were to be as an equivalent of the

blacks and how badly the blacks were being treated led to a direct translation of the existence of

racism in the war. All these atrocities proved to be major problems in the two countries because

there was no clear identification of the right as well as citizenship to those who were subjected to

war, thus creating uproar to the societies for there were supporters and those who opposed the

two situations.