World, 1400-1680, John Thornton argues that whatever their dreams or fantasies, "whether it was encircling and isolating the Moslems or reaching the spices of Asia or the gold of West Africa," the European interest in the progress of Atlantic exploration ultimately depended on financial considerations (27). Such financial considerations, he contends, ultimately force us to agree with historians on the prevalence of short-range, unromantic, step-by-step exploration as the principal methods of European expansion (Thornton 27). Kwame Anthony Appiah takes the analysis further. He argues for the broad truth of the statement that the French colonial policy was one of assimilation--of turning "savage" Africans into "evolved" black Frenchmen and women--while British colonial policy was far less interested in "making black Anglo-Saxons" (3-4).
Appiah begins his discussion with an analysis of the philosophy of Alexander Crummell. Crummell was an Episcopalian priest who was African-American by birth but "Liberian by adoption" (Appiah 3). Appiah states that Crummell is widely regarded as one of the fathers of African nationalism despite his continued belief that the language of the colonizers, English, was a language superior to the various tongues and dialects of the indigenous African populations (Appiah 3). Crummell's insistence on such a superiority hints at one of the problems faced by those people who are interested today in determining the proper route to African liberation. How can a people or peoples who have been systematically subjugated argue for their liberation in the voice of their oppressors? Nonetheless, as Appiah's discussion demonstrates, the persistence of English may not be as endemic as believed. And even where it is, is it not the African's right and privilege to argue for his freedom in the language of those who would deny his ability to appreciate such freedom? Is not the Anglicized-African also an African?
...