6 Chapter 6: Responses to Imperialism
The expansion of European imperialism during the nineteenth century impacted Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. European powers justified imperial expansion through claims of economic development, racial superiority, Christianity, and a supposed responsibility to “civilize” non-European peoples. Yet imperialism was never simply a process of European expansion met by passive acceptance. From the earliest encounters with European merchants, missionaries, and armies, people throughout the world developed diverse responses to foreign influence and political domination. Some sought to negotiate with European powers, adopt selected technologies or institutions, and use European rivalries to their own advantage. Others resisted through diplomacy, political organization, religious movements, and armed rebellion.
As European imperialism expanded and reached its height in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, resistance and opposition increasingly developed into broader movements for national sovereignty and independence. Leaders and intellectuals challenged European claims of racial and cultural superiority while drawing upon both indigenous traditions and ideas such as nationalism and self-determination. The responses examined in this chapter demonstrate that colonized peoples were active participants in the history of imperialism, shaping its course through cooperation, adaptation, negotiation, and resistance. By examining responses from the early stages of European expansion through the eventual decline of imperial rule, we can better understand imperialism not as a one-sided process of European domination, but as a complex encounter in which people throughout the world continually contested, adapted to, and ultimately challenged European power.
Below we are going to examine the responses to imperialism in four different regions. The first two sources are focused on the Māori of New Zealand. Use these two sources together to trace the development of British imperialism in the region. These are the only sources in this chapter that were produced by the imperialist country, the last three come from the perspective of local peoples. The third source shifts to Japan. Here we examine a much different interaction with western imperialism. The fourth source moves to southern Africa and we find yet again a different type of response. We finally end in Vietnam towards the end of the era of western imperialism. As you read each of these sources keep in mind not just what each society is doing in response to imperialism, but how those actions are expressed.
6.1 Māori Declaration of Independence at Waitangi (1835)
The Declaration of Independence of New Zealand, known in Māori as He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni, emerged from a period of rapidly increasing European contact with Māori communities. During the early nineteenth century, European missionaries, traders, whalers, and settlers established increasingly extensive relationships with Māori, particularly in the Bay of Islands. Māori rangatira (chiefs) were actively managing these relationships, engaging in trade and diplomacy while seeking to protect their authority over their lands and communities. In 1833, the British government appointed James Busby as British Resident in New Zealand, partly in response to concerns about growing European settlement, disputes over land, and the possibility that another European power might attempt to establish control over New Zealand.
This threat manifested in 1835, when the Frenchman Charles Philippe de Thierry announced plans to establish an independent state in the Hokianga. Although his plans ultimately amounted to little, they heightened concerns about foreign intervention and provided Busby with an opportunity to encourage northern rangatira to formalize their political authority. On 28 October 1835, thirty-four northern chiefs gathered at Busby’s residence at Waitangi and signed He Whakaputanga. The declaration asserted that sovereign authority remained with Māori rangatira, established the Te Whakaminenga (Confederation of United Tribes), and proposed annual meetings at Waitangi to make laws and regulate justice, peace, and trade. The chiefs also sought the protection of King William IV, while affirming their willingness to protect British subjects living and trading in New Zealand. Busby viewed it partly as a way to establish a form of organized government that could regulate European activity and potentially strengthen British influence, while the Māori signatories were primarily concerned with protecting their rangatiratanga—their authority and independence—and managing the challenges created by increasing European contact. The declaration was subsequently signed by additional rangatira, reaching 52 signatures by 1839, and the British government formally acknowledged it. Its significance would become even greater when Britain moved toward formal annexation and the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840, making He Whakaputanga an important precursor to the later constitutional relationship between Māori and the British Crown.
The following is replicated in its entirety from the Internet Modern History Sourcebook.DECLARATION of the INDEPEDENCE of NEW ZEALAND
1. We, the hereditary chiefs and heads of the tribes of the Northern parts of New Zealand, being assembled at Waitangi in the Bay of Islands on this 28th day of October, 1835, declare the Independence of our country, which is hereby constituted and declared to be an Independent State, under the designation of the United Tribes of New Zealand.
2. All sovereign power and authority within the territories of the United Tribes of New Zealand is hereby declared to reside entirely and exclusively in the hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes in their collective capacity, who also declare that they will not permit any legislative authority separate from themselves in their collective capacity to exist, nor any function of government to be exercised within the said territories, unless by persons appointed by them, and acting under the authority of laws regularly enacted by them in Congress assembled.
3. The hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes agree to meet in Congress at Waitangi in the autumn of each year, for the purpose of framing laws for the dispensation of justice, the preservation of peace and good order, and the regulation of trade; and they cordially invite the Southern tribes to lay aside their private animosities and to consult the safety and welfare of our common country, by joining the Confederation of the United Tribes.
4. They also agree to send a copy of this Declaration to His Majesty the King of England, to thank him for his acknowledgement of their flag; and in return for the friendship and protection they have shown, and are prepared to show, to such of his subjects as have settled in their country, or resorted to its shores for the purposes of trade, they entreat that he will continue to be the parent of their infant State, and that he will become its Protector from all attempts upon its independence.
Agreed to unanimously on this 28th day of October, 1835, in the presence of His Brittanic Majesty’s Resident.
{Signatures or signs of 35 chiefs, from North Cape to the Hauraki Gulf}
Witnessed by: (Signed) Henry Williams, Missionary, C.M.S. George Clarke, C.M.S. James C. Clendon, Merchant Gilbert Mair, Merchant
I certify that the above is a correct copy of the Declaration of the Chiefs, according to the translation of Missionaries who have resided ten years and upwards in the country; and it is transmitted to His Most Gracious Majesty the King of England, at the unanimous request of the chiefs.
(Signed) JAMES BUSBY British Resident of New Zealand
This text is part of the Internet Modern History Sourcebook. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts for introductory level classes in modern European and World history. Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No permission is granted for commercial use. © Paul Halsall, July 1998
6.2 The Treaty of Waitangi (1840)
The Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi) emerged from rapidly changing conditions in New Zealand during the early nineteenth century. By the 1830s, increasing numbers of British missionaries, traders, settlers, and other Europeans were living in or visiting New Zealand. European activity brought new opportunities for trade but also increased disputes over land, between Māori and European settlers. Māori leaders remained politically independent and exercised authority over their own communities and territories. As we saw in the previous source, several northern rangatira had signed the Declaration of Independence in 1835, asserting Māori political authority. While Britain formally recognized the declaration, by the late 1830s it was reconsidering its position as European settlement expanded.
In 1839, the British government appointed Captain William Hobson to negotiate an agreement with Māori and establish a British colony with Māori consent. Hobson arrived in the Bay of Islands on 29 January 1840, and with the assistance of James Busby, a draft treaty was prepared. Missionary Henry Williams and his son Edward translated the document into Māori shortly before it was presented to Māori leaders. The treaty was debated at Waitangi on 5 February 1840, with roughly 500 Māori attending the gathering. The following day, 6 February, more than forty rangatira signed the Māori-language version. Copies were subsequently taken around New Zealand, and by the end of the year more than 500 Māori had signed, although some chiefs refused and others did not have an opportunity to sign. Importantly, the Māori and English versions did not convey precisely the same meanings, particularly concerning sovereignty and Māori authority. The Māori text referred to the Crown receiving kawanatanga (governorship), while Article Two affirmed Māori tino rangatiratanga over their lands, homes, and treasures. The English version, by contrast, described the Crown’s acquisition of sovereignty.
The following is replicated in its entirety from William Colenso, The Authentic and Genuine History of The Signing of The Treaty Of Waitangi, 1890
ENGLISH VERSION
Her Majesty Victoria, Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, regarding with Her Royal Favour the Native Chiefs and Tribes of New Zealand, and anxious to protect their just Rights and Property, and to secure to them the enjoyment of Peace and Good Order, has deemed it necessary, in consequence of the great number of Her Majesty’s Subjects who have already settled in New Zealand, and the rapid extension of Emigration both from Europe and Australia which is still in progress, to constitute and appoint a functionary properly authorised to treat with the Aborigines of New Zealand for the recognition of Her Majesty’s Sovereign authority over the whole or any part of those islands. Her Majesty, therefore, being desirous to establish a settled form of Civil Government with a view to avert the evil consequences which must result from the absence of the necessary Laws and Institutions alike to the Native population and to Her subjects, has been graciously pleased to empower and authorise me, William Hobson, a Captain in Her Majesty’s Royal Navy, Consul, and Lieutenant-Governor of such parts of New Zealand as may be, or hereafter shall be, ceded to Her Majesty, to invite the confederated and independent Chiefs of New Zealand to concur in the following Articles and Conditions.
Article the First.
The Chiefs of the Confederation of the United Tribes of New Zealand, and the separate and independent Chiefs who have not become members of the Confederation, cede to Her Majesty the Queen of England, absolutely and without reservation, all the rights and powers of Sovereignty which the said Confederation or Individual Chiefs respectively exercise or possess, or may be supposed to exercise or to possess, over their respective Territories as the sole Sovereigns thereof.
Article the Second.
Her Majesty the Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the Chiefs and Tribes of New Zealand, and to the respective families and individuals thereof, the full, exclusive, and undisturbed possession of their lands and Estates, Forests, Fisheries, and other properties which they may collectively or individually possess, so long as it is their wish and desire to retain the same in their possession; but the Chiefs of the United Tribes and the individual Chiefs yield to Her Majesty the exclusive right of Pre-emption over such lands as the Proprietors thereof may be disposed to alienate, at such prices as may be agreed upon between the respective Proprietors and persons appointed by Her Majesty to treat with them in that behalf.
Article the Third.
In consideration thereof, Her Majesty the Queen of England extends to the Natives of New Zealand Her Royal Protection and imparts to them all the Rights and Privileges of British subjects
W. HOBS0N,
Lieutenant-Governor.
Now, therefore, We, the Chiefs of the Confederation of the United Tribes of New Zealand, being assembled in Congress at Victoria, in Waitangi, and we, the Separate and Independent Chiefs of New Zealand, claiming authority over the Tribes and Territories which are specified after our respective names, having been made fully to understand the Provisions of the foregoing Treaty, accept and enter into the same in the full spirit and meaning thereof: in witness of which, we have attached our signatures or marks at the places and the dates respectively specified.
Done at Waitangi, this sixth day of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and forty.
Source: William Colenso, The Authentic and Genuine History of The Signing of The Treaty Of Waitangi, 1890.
The above is in the public domain.
6.3 Okuma Shigenobu: Fifty Years of New Japan (1907-08)
Okuma Shigenobu (1838–1922) was a Japanese statesman and educator who played an important role in Japan’s transformation during the Meiji era (1868–1912). A participant in the Meiji government’s early reforms, Okuma later became a leading advocate of constitutional government and modernization. He served twice as prime minister and founded Waseda University. His career spanned the transition from the Tokugawa shogunate to a modern Japanese nation-state.
In Fifty Years of New Japan, published in 1907–1908, Okuma reflected on the dramatic changes Japan had experienced since the Meiji Restoration of 1868 which had been spurred on by Western involvement in Japan. The work examines Japan’s adoption of Western political institutions, educational systems, military technology, industrial practices, and economic structures while emphasizing the ways Japanese society adapted these influences to its own circumstances. Written at a time when Japan had emerged as a major industrial and military power, the text provides insight into how Japanese leaders understood modernization, nationalism, and Japan’s changing position in the international system.
The following is adapted from Okuma, Fifty Years of New Japan (Kaikoku Gojunen Shi), 2d Ed., (London: Smith, Elder, 1910).
By comparing the Japan of fifty years ago with the Japan of today, it will be seen that she has gained considerably in the extent of her territory, as well as in her population, which now numbers nearly fifty million. Her government has become constitutional not only in name, but in fact, and her national education has attained to a high degree of excellence. In commerce and industry, the emblems of peace, she has also made rapid strides, until her import and export trades together amounted in 1907 to the enormous sum of 926,000,000 yen. Her general progress, during the short space of half a century, has been so sudden and swift that it presents a rare spectacle in the history of the world. This leap forward is the result of the stimulus which the country received on coming into contact with the civilization of Europe and America, and may well, in its broad sense, be regarded as a boon conferred by foreign intercourse. Foreign intercourse it was that animated the national consciousness of our people, who under the feudal system lived localized and disunited, and foreign intercourse it is that has enabled Japan to stand up as a world power. We possess today a powerful army and navy, but it was after Western models that we laid their foundations by establishing a system of conscription in pursuance of the principle “all our sons are soldiers,” by promoting military education, and by encouraging the manufacture of arms and the art of shipbuilding. We have reorganized the systems of central and local administration, and effected reforms in the educational system of the empire. All this is nothing but the result of adopting the superior features of Western institutions. That Japan has been enabled to do so is a boon conferred on her by foreign intercourse, and it may be said that the nation has succeeded in this grand metamorphosis through the promptings and the influence of foreign civilization.
For twenty centuries the nation has drunk freely of the civilizations of Korea, China, and India, being always open to the different influences impressed on her in succession. Yet we remain politically unaltered under one Imperial House and sovereign, that has descended in an unbroken line for a length of time absolutely unexampled in the world. We have welcomed Occidental civilization while preserving their old Oriental civilization. They have attached great importance to Bushido, and at the same time held in the highest respect the spirit of charity and humanity. They have ever made a point of choosing the middle course in everything, and have aimed at being always well-balanced. We are conservative simultaneously with being progressive; we are aristocratic and at the same time democratic; we are individualistic while also being socialistic. In these respects we may be said to somewhat resemble the Anglo-Saxon race.
Source: Okuma, Fifty Years of New Japan (Kaikoku Gojunen Shi), 2d Ed., (London: Smith, Elder, 1910), passim.
This text is part of the Internet Modern History Sourcebook. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts for introductory level classes in modern European and World history. Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No permission is granted for commercial use. © Paul Halsall, July 1998
6.4 Ndansi Kumalo: His Story (1936)
Ndansi Kumalo was of the Ndebele people from present-day Zimbabwe in southern Africa who provided a firsthand account of the impact of European colonial rule on African communities. His testimony offers a perspective rarely preserved in colonial records: that of an African describing the political, economic, and social consequences of colonialism from his own experience.
“His Story,” recorded in the early twentieth century, describes the grievances that contributed to the Matabele (Ndebele) uprising of 1896–1897, including the loss of land, cattle, and political independence. Kumalo’s account challenges colonial narratives that portrayed African resistance as irrational or rebellious and instead reveals the grievances and motivations behind resistance to European imperial rule.
The following is adapted from Ndansi Kumalo, The Story of Ndansi Kumalo in Margery Perham, ed. Ten Africans (Faber and Faber Ltd: London, 1936).
The Story of Ndansi Kumalo
I was a small boy of four or five at the time when Lobengula was made king. Nothing special happened during my childhood. My duty was to herd the stock; first, as a little boy, the goats, and later, the cattle. My father had a big herd, 200 head, close to the kraal. My father was very severe, we were often punished by being thrashed with switches, very hard, like this . . .
[After he had gotten older] At Shangani we spent two years and at Gwelo two years, still in charge of cattle. All this time we did not fight with men. Then the order came that we should go out on our first raiding expedition…We went right across the Zambezi and raided tribes beyond it. Unfortunately we were overtaken with an epidemic of smallpox and most of us were incapacitated by this. We did not get any cattle, only a few goats, but we took away quite a number of their womenfolk and a few men, but most of them ran away from us and deserted their womenfolk. On the return journey the epidemic got worse and worse and there were many deaths for two months we could not move through the smallpox. Before we reached Bulawayo we received a report that the pioneers had entered the country. We were very distressed to hear the news, all the more because we were not capable of rendering any assistance to our king. We had often seen white men, for they used to come to Bulawayo to see the king. When I first saw a white man I could not make it out and I ran away. When we got used to them we would go with goats and sheep and buy European clothing. Later people used to take cattle and barter for beads and blankets. We were terribly upset and very angry at the coming of the white men, for Lobengula had sent to the Queen in England and he was under her protection and it was quite unjustified that white men should come with force into our country. Our regiments were very distressed that we were not in a fit condition to fight for the king because of the smallpox. Lobengula had no war in his heart: he had always protected the white men and been good to them. If he had meant war, would he have sent our regiments far away to the north at this moment? As far as I know the trouble began in this way. Gandani, a chief who was sent out, reported that some of the Mashona had taken the king’s cattle; some regiments were detailed to follow and recover them. They followed the Mashona to Ziminto’s people [Victoria district]. Gandani had strict instructions not to molest the white people established in certain parts and to confine himself to the people who had taken the cattle. The commander was given a letter which he had to produce to the Europeans and tell them what the object of the party was. But the members of the party were restless and went without reporting to the white people and killed a lot of Mashonas. The pioneers were very angry and said, ‘You have trespassed into our part/ [This was in 1895.] They went with the letter, but only after they had killed some people, and the white men said, ‘You have done wrong, you should have brought the letter first and then we should have given you permission to follow the cattle.’ The commander received orders from the white people to get out, and up to a certain point which he could not possibly reach in the time allowed. A force followed them up and they defended themselves. When the pioneers turned out there was a fight at Shangani and at Bembezi.
…Only fourteen of our regiment went to try and recover the King’s cattle and on the way they heard that they were too late. The white men were there and had seized the cattle…The next news was that the white people had entered Bulawayo; the King’s kraal had been burnt down and the King had fled. Of the cattle very few were recovered most fell into the hands of the white people. Only a very small portion were found and brought to Shangani where the King was, and we went there to give him any assistance we could. I did not catch up with the King he had gone on ahead. Three of our leaders mounted their horses and followed up the King and he wanted to know where his cattle were; they said they had fallen into the hands of the whites, only a few were left. He said, ‘Go back and bring them along. But they did not go back again, the white forces had occupied Bulawayo and they went into the Matoppos. Then the white people came to where we were living and sent word round that all chiefs and warriors should go into Bulawayo and discuss peace, for the King had gone and they wanted to make peace. The first order we got was, ‘When you come in, come in with cattle so that we can see that you are sincere about it,’ The white people said, ‘Now that your King has deserted you, we occupy your country. Do you submit to us?’ What could we do? ‘If you are sincere, come back and bring in all your arms, guns and spears. We did so. I cannot say what happened to Lobengula, but the older people said, ‘The light has gone out. We can do no more.There is nothing left for us but to go back to our homes.’All that we could hear was that the King had disappeared alone, no one knew where he went. It could not be that his body, alive or dead, should pass into the hands of his enemies… So we surrendered to the white people and were told to go back to our homes and live our usual lives and attend to our crops. But the white men sent native police who did abominable things, they were cruel and assaulted a lot of our people and helped themselves to our cattle and goats. These policemen were not our own people; anybody was made a policeman. We were treated like slaves. They came and were overbearing and we were ordered to carry their clothes and bundles. They interfered with our wives and our daughters and molested them. In fact, the treatment we received was intolerable.
We thought it best to fight and die rather than bear it. How the rebellion started I do not know, there was no organization, it was like a fire that suddenly flames up. We had been flogged by native police and then they rubbed salt water in the wounds. There was much bitterness because so many of our cattle were branded and taken away from us, we had no property, nothing we could call our own. We said, ‘It is no good living under such conditions; death would be better let us fight.’ Our King gone, we had submitted to the white people and they ill-treated us until we became desperate and tried to make an end of it all. We knew that we had very little chance because their weapons were so much superior to ours. But we meant to fight to the last, feeling that even if we could not beat them we might at least kill a few of them and so have some sort of revenge. I fought in the rebellion. We used to look out for valleys where the white men were likely to approach. We took cover behind rocks and trees and tried to ambush them. We were forced by the nature of our weapons not to expose ourselves. I had a gun, a breech-loader. The white men fought us with big guns and Maxims and rifles. I remember a fight in the Matoppos when we charged the white men. There were some hundreds of us. The white men also were many. We charged them at close quarters: we thought we had a good chance to kill them but the Maxims were too much for us…We made many charges but each time we were beaten off, until at last the white men packed up and retreated. But for the Maxims, it would have been different…
We were still fighting when we heard that Mr. Rhodes was coming and wanted to make peace with us. It was best to come to terms he said, and not go shedding blood like this on both sides. The older people went to meet him. Mr. Rhodes came and they had a discussion and our leaders came back and discussed amongst themselves and the people. Then Mr. Rhodes came again and we agreed at last to terms of peace. So peace was made. Many of our people had been killed, and now we began to die of starvation, and then came the rinderpest and the cattle that were still left to us perished. We could not help thinking that all these dreadful things were brought by the white people. We struggled, and the Government helped us with grain; and by degrees we managed to get crops and pulled through. Our cattle were practically wiped out, but a few were left and from them we slowly bred up our herds again. We were offered work in the mines and farms to earn money and so were able to buy back some cattle. At first, of course, we were not used to going out to work, but advice was given that the chief should advise the young people to go out to work, and gradually they went. At first we received a good price for our cattle and sheep and goats. Then the tax came…Soon the Government said, ‘That is too little, you must contribute more…We did so. Then those who took more than one wife were taxed..We are also taxed for our dogs…Then we were told we were living on private land; the owners wanted rent in addition to the Government tax.
Would I like to have the old days back? Well, the whitemen have brought some good things. For a start, they brought us European implements ploughs; we can buy European clothes, which are an advance. The Government have arranged for education and through that, when our children grow up, they may rise in status. We want them to be educated and civilized and make better citizens. Even in our own time there were troubles, there was much fighting and many innocent people were killed. It is infinitely better to have peace instead of war, and our treatment generally by the officials is better than it was at first. But, under the white people, we still have our troubles. Economic conditions are telling on us very severely. We are on land where the rainfall is scanty, and things will not grow well. In our own time we could pick our own country, but now all the best land has been taken by the white people…We see no prosperous days ahead of us.
Source: Ndansi Kumalo, The Story of Ndansi Kumalo in Margery Perham, ed. Ten Africans (Faber and Faber Ltd: London, 1936).
This book is in the public domain.
6.5 Ho Chi Minh: Declaration of Independence of Vietnam (1945)
Ho Chi Minh (1890–1969) (born Nguyen Sinh Cung) was a Vietnamese revolutionary nationalist who devoted much of his life to ending foreign domination of Vietnam. He became the leading figure of the Viet Minh, the movement that fought Japanese occupation during World War II and later sought to end French colonial rule. Following Japan’s surrender in 1945, Ho Chi Minh declared Vietnamese independence and established the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.
On September 2, 1945, Ho Chi Minh delivered Vietnam’s Declaration of Independence in Hanoi. Drawing deliberately on the language of the American Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, he argued that all people possessed fundamental rights to liberty and equality and that the Vietnamese people therefore had the right to determine their own political future. At the same time, the declaration presented a powerful indictment of French colonial rule, accusing the colonial government of exploiting and oppressing the Vietnamese population.
The following is replicated in its entirety from Ho Chi Minh, Selected Works (Hanoi, 1960-1962), Vol. 3. Proofed by Janet Mullen at Marxists.org and can be found here
“All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” This immortal statement was made in the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America in 1776. In a broader sense, this means: All the peoples on the earth are equal from birth, all the peoples have a right to live, to be happy and free. The Declaration of the French Revolution made in 1791 on the Rights of Man and the Citizen also states: “All men are born free and with equal rights, and must always remain free and have equal rights.” Those are undeniable truths. Nevertheless, for more than eighty years, the French imperialists, abusing the standard of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity, have violated our Fatherland and oppressed our fellow-citizens. They have acted contrary to the ideals of humanity and justice. In the field of politics, they have deprived our people of every democratic liberty. They have enforced inhuman laws; they have set up three distinct political regimes in the North, the Center and the South of Vietnam in order to wreck our national unity and prevent our people from being united. They have built more prisons than schools. They have mercilessly slain our patriots- they have drowned our uprisings in rivers of blood. They have fettered public opinion; they have practised obscurantism against our people. To weaken our race they have forced us to use opium and alcohol. In the fields of economics, they have fleeced us to the backbone, impoverished our people, and devastated our land. They have robbed us of our rice fields, our mines, our forests, and our raw materials. They have monopolised the issuing of bank-notes and the export trade. They have invented numerous unjustifiable taxes and reduced our people, especially our peasantry, to a state of extreme poverty. They have hampered the prospering of our national bourgeoisie; they have mercilessly exploited our workers. In the autumn of 1940, when the Japanese Fascists violated Indochina’s territory to establish new bases in their fight against the Allies, the French imperialists went down on their bended knees and handed over our country to them. Thus, from that date, our people were subjected to the double yoke of the French and the Japanese. Their sufferings and miseries increased. The result was that from the end of last year to the beginning of this year, from Quang Tri province to the North of Vietnam, more than two million of our fellow-citizens died from starvation. On March 9, the French troops were disarmed by the Japanese. The French colonialists either fled or surrendered, showing that not only were they incapable of “protecting” us, but that, in the span of five years, they had twice sold our country to the Japanese. On several occasions before March 9, the Vietminh League urged the French to ally themselves with it against the Japanese. Instead of agreeing to this proposal, the French colonialists so intensified their terrorist activities against the Vietminh members that before fleeing they massacred a great number of our political prisoners detained at Yen Bay and Cao Bang. Not withstanding all this, our fellow-citizens have always manifested toward the French a tolerant and humane attitude. Even after the Japanese putsch of March 1945, the Vietminh League helped many Frenchmen to cross the frontier, rescued some of them from Japanese jails, and protected French lives and property. From the autumn of 1940, our country had in fact ceased to be a French colony and had become a Japanese possession. After the Japanese had surrendered to the Allies, our whole people rose to regain our national sovereignty and to found the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. The truth is that we have wrested our independence from the Japanese and not from the French. The French have fled, the Japanese have capitulated, Emperor Bao Dai has abdicated. Our people have broken the chains which for nearly a century have fettered them and have won independence for the Fatherland. Our people at the same time have overthrown the monarchic regime that has reigned supreme for dozens of centuries. In its place has been established the present Democratic Republic. For these reasons, we, members of the Provisional Government, representing the whole Vietnamese people, declare that from now on we break off all relations of a colonial character with France; we repeal all the international obligation that France has so far subscribed to on behalf of Vietnam and we abolish all the special rights the French have unlawfully acquired in our Fatherland. The whole Vietnamese people, animated by a common purpose, are determined to fight to the bitter end against any attempt by the French colonialists to reconquer their country. We are convinced that the Allied nations which at Tehran and San Francisco have acknowledged the principles of self-determination and equality of nations, will not refuse to acknowledge the independence of Vietnam. A people who have courageously opposed French domination for more than eighty years, a people who have fought side by side with the Allies against the Fascists during these last years, such a people must be free and independent. For these reasons, we, members of the Provisional Government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, solemnly declare to the world that Vietnam has the right to be a free and independent country and in fact it is so already. The entire Vietnamese people are determined to mobilise all their physical and mental strength, to sacrifice their lives and property in order to safeguard their independence and liberty.
Source: Vietnamese Declaration of Independence in Ho Chi Minh, Selected Works (Hanoi, 1960-1962), Vol. 3. Proofed by Janet Mullen at Marxists.org and can be found here
All material within the Marixst.org Archives, unless noted otherwise, is public domain. MIA-created material is protected by the Creative Commons License. To the best of our knowledge, unless otherwise stated, there are no limitations on the use of documents in the Marxists Internet Archive (MIA). If you do copy material from MIA please credit the Marxists Internet Archive as your source and include the URL to the work.
