No description available.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1958. / Typescript. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 135-137).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1963. / Typescript. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1964. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Bibliographical note: leaves 243-245.

No description available.

M.A. (History) / The purpose of this thesis Is to determine the role the British Government played In the events which led to the dismantling of the Central Africa Federation in 1963. After the dismantling, historians and other Interest-groups debated the question why the Central Africa Federation had failed. The whites In Rhodesia were convinced that the British government were responsible for the break-up. Britain was accused of yielding to black radical demands. These demands led to the Independence of both Nyasaland and Northern Rhodesia, and they were allowed to secede from the Federation. Britain was also accused of having deliberately broken Its promises to the federal government. The federal government ultimately expected dominium Status for the Federation. Britain's policy of decolonlsatlon was also criticized by the whites and the colonial government was accused of deliberately following a policy of dismantlement. There were however other factors involved in the break-up of the Federation. The climate of decolonlsation and the growing number of Independent Africa states Influenced events In the Federation. The rise of African nationalism, liberation movements and pressure by black militant parties and leaders, brought about 8 withdrawal of colonial powers from Africa. Independent black states became a reality. Blacks In the Central African Federation soon followed this pattern. The partnership polley, on which the Federation was based, failed and blacks became Increasingly unsatisfied. Blacks did not have equal political rights and most of the blacks were excluded from the political structures. The Federation and partnership policy were seen as synonymous with racial discrimination and black national leaders started pressurislng Britain Into dissolving the Federation. The rise of black nationalism In the Federation resulted In fear for black domination on the part of the whites. A Federation where two out of three areas were dominated by blacks, was unacceptable to them. Therefore also white pressure for the dismantling of the Federation started to emerge. Britain's colonial policy in the crucial years, 1960-1963, Is examined as well as its strategies in dealing with a complex issue. Pressure by blacks as well as whites are taken into account In this study, to determine its influence on British actions that ultimately led to the break-up of the Federation.

Were the effects of First World War truly similar globally? A comparison of how the conflict was perceived by two extremely different groups of rural people - southern Americans of the Jackson Purchase region of far western Kentucky and Africans in the small British Protectorate of Nyasaland in south central Africa - makes their microhistories significant rather than trivial by placing them a global context. In the early twentieth century, both groups were not only rural, but removed, decidedly disconnected from each other. Yet, drawing on documentary evidence, especially interviews with the last generation of First World War survivors in both regions, offers a significant perspective on how similar their experiences actually became in the crucible of a global war. The call to arms, their recruitment and resistance to service, combat adversities and cultural experiences, post-war disillusionments and triumphs, and especially the economic consequences of their war provide penetrating insights into the wide-ranging ordeals and opportunities that this first truly global event offered peoples worldwide.

Were the effects of First World War truly similar globally? A comparison of how the conflict was perceived by two extremely different groups of rural people - southern Americans of the Jackson Purchase region of far western Kentucky and Africans in the small British Protectorate of Nyasaland in south central Africa - makes their microhistories significant rather than trivial by placing them a global context. In the early twentieth century, both groups were not only rural, but removed, decidedly disconnected from each other. Yet, drawing on documentary evidence, especially interviews with the last generation of First World War survivors in both regions, offers a significant perspective on how similar their experiences actually became in the crucible of a global war. The call to arms, their recruitment and resistance to service, combat adversities and cultural experiences, post-war disillusionments and triumphs, and especially the economic consequences of their war provide penetrating insights into the wide-ranging ordeals and opportunities that this first truly global event offered peoples worldwide.

This thesis traces British colonial governance and the workings of the late colonial state from 1938 until the end of empire in the early 1960s in Cyprus, Kenya and Nyasaland. It proposes that colonial governance operated in place and time back and forth across a spectrum, typified by polarities of (i) 'soft' management and regulation of colonial populations in the 1940s, and (ii) 'hard' control exemplified by the use of harsh physical coercion in the 1950s, although both 'soft' and 'hard' approaches - and hybrid variants somewhere in between - were always, in truth, sides of the same coin. British colonial governance is examined through the filter of three approximate, although not rigidly linear, 'phases': (1) a 'soft' phase of development and welfare from 1938-45, during which the rhetoric of governance was distinguished by the language of benevolence, in the attempt to re-legitimise empire, (2) the post-war period from 1945-1950, when Britain played a leading role in establishing supranational institutions promoting universal human rights and also, and however reluctantly, extended a modified human rights regime to its colonies, and (3) the swing to 'hard' governance during emergency periods in Cyprus (1955-59), Kenya (1952-60) and Nyasaland (1959-60), during which Britain strove to resolve the dichotomy between competing domestic and international demands of (a) maintenance of empire, often through the use of coercive physical measures, and (b) promotion of universal human rights on the world stage. This was all played out, at least in part, as an albeit muted ideological confrontation between opposing post-war visions of global order - the very survival of the old imperial system pitched against the implicitly decolonising thrust of the universal human rights movement as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and the European Convention on Human Rights (1950). This thesis argues that by 1959 and in part as a consequence of the cumulative political impact of allegations of human rights and other abuses during emergency periods, Britain could no longer reconcile these competing visions of colonial governance and world order, nor sustain its empire and colonial rule by force.

No description available.