Account for the Failure of Nationalist Movements in Southeast Asia in the Period 1900-1941.
Account for the general failure of nationalist movements in Southeast Asia in the period 1900-1941.
The failure to achieve political independence of pre-war nationalism in Southeast Asia was mainly due to the interplay of nationalist factors, impact of colonial response and inherent society composition. Nationalist disunity watered down mass support which was key to success, while colonial rule hindered the development of nationalism and the nature Southeast Asian society made unification hard to achieve. Different causes had different level of significance in different countries.
Firstly, the ideological disunity among nationalist manifested through the existence of a myriad of different movements with diverging aims and methods, causing the dilution of mass support necessary for the attainment of political independence. For example, in Burma, the coexistence of the traditional-religious, radical movements led by the pongyis and moderate political movements led by the Western-educated politicians created a factious nationalism scene and this disunity was reflected in the diarchy elections in 1922 when only 6.9% of voters turned out due to pongyis boycott. Such internal divisions prevented the Burmese nationalists from exploiting British benevolence to achieve political independence. Similarly in Vietnam, as early as the 1900s two starkly contrasting approaches to the French were presented by Phan Boi Chau and Phan Chu Trinh. The former believed in radicalization and retaining the monarchy as a unifying symbol of the country whereas the latter was a moderate who sought to remove the monarchy.The coexistence of contrasting movements caused an incoherent and confused nationalist front, leading to insufficient support from the masses and the eventual failure of movements.
Secondly, the inter-party disunity manifested through the narrow appeal of movements to specific groups with sectarian interests, thinning down broad-based support. This was evident in
The failure to achieve political independence of pre-war nationalism in Southeast Asia was mainly due to the interplay of nationalist factors, impact of colonial response and inherent society composition. Nationalist disunity watered down mass support which was key to success, while colonial rule hindered the development of nationalism and the nature Southeast Asian society made unification hard to achieve. Different causes had different level of significance in different countries.
Firstly, the ideological disunity among nationalist manifested through the existence of a myriad of different movements with diverging aims and methods, causing the dilution of mass support necessary for the attainment of political independence. For example, in Burma, the coexistence of the traditional-religious, radical movements led by the pongyis and moderate political movements led by the Western-educated politicians created a factious nationalism scene and this disunity was reflected in the diarchy elections in 1922 when only 6.9% of voters turned out due to pongyis boycott. Such internal divisions prevented the Burmese nationalists from exploiting British benevolence to achieve political independence. Similarly in Vietnam, as early as the 1900s two starkly contrasting approaches to the French were presented by Phan Boi Chau and Phan Chu Trinh. The former believed in radicalization and retaining the monarchy as a unifying symbol of the country whereas the latter was a moderate who sought to remove the monarchy.The coexistence of contrasting movements caused an incoherent and confused nationalist front, leading to insufficient support from the masses and the eventual failure of movements.
Secondly, the inter-party disunity manifested through the narrow appeal of movements to specific groups with sectarian interests, thinning down broad-based support. This was evident in