ntroduction
India and Africa can be considered as secondary victims of European imperialism. The two are victims because they received blunt, cruel, and inhuman treatment as a consequence of European imperialism. However, they can only be considered as secondary victims because when compared to primary victims such as the USA, both Africa and India had it relatively better. At the advent, Europeans came as friends and set up trading companies. They would later turn into conquerors and subjugate both India and Africa. S econdly, both Africa and India would rise against their European masters but initially be crushed (Barnhart, 2016; Hutchins, 2015) . The main difference is that European imperialism divided Africa while the end of European imperialism divided India. Therefore, the comparison between Africa and India reveals more similarities than differences.
The Friend Turned Foe Comparison
The Europeans came to Africa as friends but later became foes who caused great damage and suffering to the local populace. The similarity of friendship, however, differs in that in Africa, the friendship was based on religion and learning while in India, it was based on trade (Hutchins, 2015: Freund, 2016) . The initial friendship made the European a welcome guest in both Africa and India with trade, religious conversion, and education being generally welcome. Soon after, however, the Europeans tried to rule over both the Indians and Africans whom they considered as inferior human beings (Freund, 2016) . Some analysts consider Europeans to only have been doing what they thought was right for India and Africa. Modern historiography has, however, revealed that the Europeans were selfish in their intentions (Hutchins, 2015) .
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Rebellion and Reaction to It
Both the Indians and Africans at one point could no longer trust the Europeans and their intention and they started to rebel. In this regard, a major similarity appears not just in the fact that there were rebellions but also in the European reaction to the rebellions. Generally, the Europeans used their superior weaponry and fighting skills to crush any rebellions by the local Indians and Africans. In Africa, most of the rebellion was divided into the several small fiefdoms as the Europeans had always employed the divide and rule approach (Freund, 2016) . In India, the rebellion was more united as merchants and not local rulers spearheaded it (Hutchins, 2015). In both cases, there was massive bloodshed and the rebellions always led to the defeat of the locals. It is, however, worthy of notice that in spite of the acrimony, imperialism was not all bad. Better transport and communication, schools, and healthcare were among the positive elements in both India and Africa.
Differences in Division
Before the advent of European imperialism, India had been divided into several major kingdoms led by powerful native leaders. Initially, different European powers took different segments of the subcontinent. Eventually, however, Britain was able to subjugate most of India thus, combining it into one massive colony (Hutchins, 2015) . A unified India differs sharply from the divided Africa, split between several European powers mainly Britain, England, France, Italy, Belgium, and Portugal (Barnhart, 2016) . Many strange tribes were either brought together or divided by the new boundaries created when these powers shared out Africa. The boundaries would lead to chaos and ethnic cleansing when the Europeans eventually left Africa. On the other hand, when the Europeans left India, it fell apart, resulting in new boundaries and more chaos (Hutchins, 2015) .
Conclusion
There appears to be many similarities in the way the Europeans treated Africa and India during the period of European imperialism. Both were not as badly off as the Americas, but they still suffered under European imperialism. However, it was not all suffering as both got some positive contributions out of European imperialism. The positive contributions they got fade when compared to the suffering meted upon them when they rebelled against their European masters. An interesting difference, however, lies in the fact that imperialism divided Africa as it fell in the hands of many European masters while it united India under British rule. Both changes were to have adverse consequences when the respective rulers left both India and Africa.
References
Barnhart, J. (2016). Status competition and territorial aggression: Evidence from the scramble for Africa. Security Studies, 25(3), 385-419
Freund, B. (2016). The making of contemporary Africa: The development of African society since 1800 . New York: Palgrave Macmillan
Hutchins, F. G. (2015). The illusion of permanence: British imperialism in India . Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press
