Revise Independence movements (1800–2000) for IB History (2.8)

No independence movement emerges from a vacuum. They are rooted in a combination of long-term grievances and short-term triggers. Long-term causes often include economic exploitation, where the colony's resources benefit the metropole; political repression, with the denial of basic rights and self-governance; and social and cultural factors, such as the imposition of foreign values and the rise of an educated native elite who absorbed and then repurposed Western ideas of 'liberty' and 'nationhood'.

The path to independence was rarely straightforward and methods varied dramatically depending on the context. Broadly, these can be categorised into non-violent and violent approaches. Non-violent resistance, famously championed by Gandhi in India, focused on civil disobedience, boycotts, and mass protests to create moral pressure and make the colony ungovernable. In contrast, armed struggle or guerrilla warfare was deemed necessary in other contexts, particularly in settler colonies like Algeria or where the colonial power was intransigent, as in Vietnam. The choice of method was often determined by the nature of the colonial regime, the geography of the country, and the philosophy of the movement's leadership.

Achieving independence was often just the first step in a long and arduous journey. New states faced a daunting array of challenges that threatened their very existence. Political instability was common, with a lack of experienced administrators, internal power struggles, and the difficulty of forging a national identity among diverse ethnic or religious groups, often lumped together by arbitrary colonial borders. Economically, these nations were frequently trapped in a state of neo-colonialism, dependent on exporting raw materials to their former rulers and lacking the infrastructure for independent development.