Colonial Policies of the British and French in Africa

A Comparison and Contrast

Jonna Windon
The British and the French had very different colonial policies with the latter being more equal, if you can say such a thing about a country taking over another nation. The British practiced association which promised the blacks independence eventually, and the French practiced assimilation which treated the blacks as equals (French Blacks).

In means of colonial enforced education, the British were exclusive and the French were inclusive. The British only allowed African chiefs' children to obtain an education in their colonies. The French allowed all Africans in their colonies to obtain an education.

These niceties are of course not expected to be taken with the best intentions. Each country ruled their colonies in a way that would ensure a peaceful living without danger of uprisings.

In ways of government, the British let the African chiefs in their colonies continue to rule with Brits placed as figureheads of government. This was of course another way to try to appease the Africans who had been colonized. The French set up new governments and placed both Africans and Frenchmen in power since they claimed they were equal. I am sure that the positions Africans were placed in contained less power than the French positions, but on the surface this looks like an equal gesture.

In the area of Africans' way of life, the British condemned everything about them. They tried to convert as many Africans to Christianity as possible, gave them English names and didn't allow the teaching of African history and culture in their schools. The French regarded the Africans as "equals" so did not do this specific kind of damage but I doubt they pushed for the teaching of African history and culture in their schools.

As you can see, education, way of life, and government are just three of the areas that were greatly affected by the French and English colonial policies. The effect of colonization on the African continent was most definitely negative with few positive effects. In the end it didn't matter if the French said the Africans were "equal" with them or the British let the chiefs rule over their tribes, because it was all a farce, a nicety, a fake gesture to subdue the people they had taken over for natural resources, economic, and political gain.

Published by Jonna Windon

I'm a soldier's wife. I have a Bachelors Degree in Political Science, and am a certified paralegal. I don't think I will ever get tired of reading and learning and thinking :)  View profile

  • The British practiced association while the French practiced assimiliation colonial practices.
The British let the Africans keep their own chiefs as head of their tribes while the French appointed Africans in new positions of power.

1 Comments

Post a Comment
  • traviesa3/18/2009

    okey what ... means if u dont know what to write dont write nothing :p

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.