Hi all,

I am preparing to write an essay on the topic of the extent at which imperialism positively influenced certain regions in Asia. Is it morally permissible to argue that imperialism positively influenced powers that imperialised other colonies because of the fact that they got more goods and wealth? I am not trying to defend their unjust taking of land and people but rather trying to get a high mark.



Why would it be impermissible to simply state the facts? They robbed the colonies, so they got richer as a result, simple as that…


I don’t think it is up to us to do your homework for you.


Are you talking about Qin in the Warring States period?


To make this work, you’re going to need to define what you mean by ‘positive influence,’ There may be an argument that in some sense it was positive. But you’re going to have a wave of negative influences to deal with.


I don’t see how making an interpretation for a class paper can be moral or immoral. As an academic myself, though, I think you’ve got an uphill battle with what you’ve said so far. I would take the horrors of imperialism as more than enough to counter any wealth gain that the regions might have gotten.


How did imperialism make people better off? The English tried it, the French tried it, China is trying it, the USA has and is at it, ISHIS is making a run for a foothold in it. Only the top percentage really benefit from it. You need to do a lot of research on this because there many down sides to this for the countries and people on the bottom tier.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit