In the nineteenth century, the popular European view of sub-Saharan Africa was that the area had been uncivilized and was only beginning to become a civilized continent after Europeans had "discovered" the region and brought civilization to these "backward" people. Do you agree with this popular nineteenth century view? Write a minimum 500-word essay in which you defend your position.

I do not agree.

Explanation:

The arrival of the British in sub-Saharan Africa is part of European Colonialism, widespread in various parts of the world, with the aim of exploring and dominating a region and all the resources available in it.

It is common to hear that colonization was a blessing for the life of the colonies because it took culture, religion and modenity to a region considered "wild" and "inadequate". However, we can say that colonization was not a blessing anywhere, since in these regions the adoption of European culture and religion was imposed in very violent and authoritarian ways.

All colonies, including sub-Saharan Africa, already had a population established and organized according to their customs and religion. This population was different from what Europeans considered "civilized", but we cannot deny, that the natives had their own type of civilization that functioned efficiently between their citizens and their territory.

However, Europeans considered themselves the owners of the truth, and the only ones endowed with knowledge and education. They totally ignored native civilizations and their cultures, considering them wild and impure, which needed European society to put them in what was right. They used this concept to justify all the violent exploitation and acculturation that the natives went through, because they believed that God had given them the mission to "fix" the peoples and end the civilization that was established in the place, without any consideration.