Sie sind auf Seite 1von 1

Karl Pearson’s “scientific” argument for imperialism gained traction because of a

lot of the wording he uses. First of all he was clearly a well spoken man and being well
spoken is a sign of intelligence. He also uses words like “inferior” and phrases like
“contributing practically nothing to the work and thought of the world” when referring
to other races. He speaks very highly of Europeans with the sole purpose of making
them out to be far more advanced in society than any other people group. He calls
Europeans “civilized man” and says that Europe is a great nation, that does many great
things to further the advancement of the world. That isn’t necessarily false, as we have
seen all throughout history; Europe has been at the forefront of many international
advancements, but his motive behind saying these things is purely to belittle other races.
He specifically targets the Native Americans, calling them the “red man”. That was a
common term used for Native Americans in that time which fortunately is considered
extremely offensive and outdated in our time. But why did Pearson choose to write
about the Native Americans? In the passage there is a phrase “the struggle for existence
between white and red man”. I believe he specifically targeted Native Americans and
calls them “red” because he wanted a strong contrast to white people. Often times when
people think of the colour red they think of things like fire, evil, and even the devil. None
of the things are descriptors of the Native American people, but I believe Pearson
wanted to bring those types of images to the minds of the people reading this. Because
many people in Europe were Christians, they don’t want to associate with the devil or
anything that makes them think of the devil, similar to any Christian now. There’s
nothing inherently wrong with that, but when you are associating people who aren’t evil
with evil things with the motive of wanting others to turn against them that is when
problems arise. Pearson also uses his mathematical and scientific background as
grounds for his argument right at the beginning, saying that imperialism is the only
“healthy” alternative to living alongside another race. There is nothing healthy about
massacring millions of people because you think they are “inferior”. Pearson was clearly
a smart man, but he used that to come up with an argument that twists the truth in
many ways just to get an end to his means. That is why many European people believed
what he said, and his belief along with the beliefs of many others got a foothold on the
people of Europe. Of course not everyone in Europe was all for imperialism, as many
people did fight for the rights of other races. But the bottom line is; if you can distort the
truth enough so that it sounds legitimate, you can get countless people to do your will.
And that is a problem that we have seen throughout all history that unfortunately still
continues to this day.