“The White Man’s Burden”: Kipling’s Hymn to U.S. Imperialism

George Mason University ^ | 02/01/1899 | Rudyard Kipling

[NMC EXP]

In February 1899, British novelist and poet Rudyard Kipling wrote a poem entitled “The White Man’s Burden: The United States and The Philippine Islands.” In this poem, Kipling urged the U.S. to take up the “burden” of empire, as had Britain and other European nations. Published in the February, 1899 issue of McClure’s Magazine, the poem coincided with the beginning of the Philippine-American War and U.S. Senate ratification of the treaty that placed Puerto Rico, Guam, Cuba, and the Philippines under American control.

Theodore Roosevelt, soon to become vice-president and then president, copied the poem and sent it to his friend, Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, commenting that it was “rather poor poetry, but good sense from the expansion point of view.” Not everyone was as favorably impressed as Roosevelt. The racialized notion of the “White Man’s burden” became a euphemism for imperialism, and many anti-imperialists couched their opposition in reaction to the phrase.

Take up the White Man’s burden—

Send forth the best ye breed—

Go send your sons to exile

To serve your captives' need

To wait in heavy harness

On fluttered folk and wild—

Your new-caught, sullen peoples,

Half devil and half child

Take up the White Man’s burden

In patience to abide

To veil the threat of terror

And check the show of pride;

By open speech and simple

An hundred times made plain

To seek another’s profit

And work another’s gain

Take up the White Man’s burden—

And reap his old reward:

The blame of those ye better

The hate of those ye guard—

The cry of hosts ye humour

(Ah slowly) to the light:

"Why brought ye us from bondage,

“Our loved Egyptian night?”

Take up the White Man’s burden-

Have done with childish days-

The lightly proffered laurel,

The easy, ungrudged praise.

Comes now, to search your manhood

Through all the thankless years,

Cold-edged with dear-bought wisdom,

The judgment of your peers!

Source: Rudyard Kipling, “The White Man’s Burden: The United States & The Philippine Islands, 1899.” Rudyard Kipling’s Verse: Definitive Edition (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1929).

[LexBaird]

The way you English are so spendthrift with "u"s and such, It's no wonder the poor Welsh in your country haven't any vowels left for their words.

[LexBaird]

I sincerely apologize. Lex BAIRD ( who should know better)

[Cronos]

Imagine enriching themselves!? :-)

Enrichign yourself by banning trade except in your own goods, by basically forcing people to buy at gunpoint or, in the case of the Opium wars, forcingt he chinese government to allow the Brits to sel drugs tot he Chinese people. I'd cal that disgusting. Or, would you think it ok if the drug cartels attacked a nation state and forced it to allow the cartels to sell drugs to tis people?

In what way were Britain reposnible for Pakistan or Kashmir? Pakistan was created after British rule and was nothing to do with the UK. Muslims wanted their own state.

Pakistan was created durignt eh BRitish rule. Read up on history. Agreed, it was not started by the Brits, but they were guilty of encouraging it -- by makign the Hindus and Muslims thinkt hat hte only option was to keep the brits in power -- the idea of Divide and rule, quite clever actually

As for Iraq, America wanted Britain to administer it as they didn't want Germany or Turkey to get their hands on it, plus most of the money was American. America also wanted constructed nations in wider Arabia. Who wanted a pan-arabic state from Morrocco to the borders of Persia. Now that would be bad.

you really don't know anything abotu history do you? Iraq was formed out of three separate Ottoman Turk provinces at the end of WW One -- so there was no question of Germany getting her hands on it -- it was too far away and Germany was defeated and the 3 rpovinces were part of Germany's ally, the Turk's empire. the Turks HAD those 3 provinces which they lost durignt he great war. Teh Brits took 3 separate, distinct proinces (with majorities Kurds, Sunni Arabs and Shia Arabs)a nd joined them because it wanted the oil-rich northern Kurd area and the oil rich soutehr Shia area and the Sunni area was just to join the two. So,t hey put 3 distinct groups together just to get the oil. This unnatural union has caused problems for a long time as we see in the recent Iraq elections.

Do note: iraq never existed before the great War.

Palestine - did the British force 5m Jews to go there. If anything we helped the Israelis and betrayed the Arabs. In fact we couldn't wait to go after the israelis started killing British soldiers in terrorist atta

The Brits let the ARabs from neighboruign states (the modern day Palis) into Israel to dilute Jewish influence as the Jews wanted independence -- the same old Brit idea of Divide and rule. you couldn't wait to go? You mean you had to go

As for Northern Ireland, that is a UK problem and was nothing really to do with empire.

northern Ireland is a problem left over from the Imperial days when Ireland was treated for all purposes like any other colony, and the Scottish protestants were imported in to try and break the backboen of the Catholic Irish.

[Cronos]

intelligence or superiority is racial or genetic.

Intelligence (not superiority as thats too much of a generalisation) IS genetic -- the children of doctors invariably turn out to be smart, for example. The Eastern European Jews are examples of this

[Cronos]

Theres a good argument that none of those cultures were "civilized" by current standards.

And by what standards are those? Having a codified set of laws? Well, the Babylonians had that in 1700 B.C. with Hammurabi's laws. Having a detailed town-planning system? Well the Harappans in the Indus valley and the Mesopotamians ahd that.

By what means would you then say they were not civilised???

Again, human sacrifice, slavery, misogyny are not aspects of civilization, as we know it today.
BBy those standards let's see -- the Mesopotamians, Chinese, Egyptians and Indians didn't really have human sacrifice as part of their standard, acceptable traditions -- you're getting mixed up with the Aztecs. Slavery -- by that standard Rome was not civilised, and all of Europe and the Americas were not civilised until the 1800s. Misogyny -- women only got hte right to vote int eh 20th century, so no country was civilised until then????

[Cronos]

Note: I'm not saying "white" men "borrowed" civilisation from other men, but it has to be realised that civilisation and its development has not been due to one group alone -- the caucasoid group from India to Europe have always been in contact for millenia and knowledge has flowed between them. China also came in contact with this Caucasian group and contributed a lot to our development (and i guess vice-versa, though I don't know too much about Chinese history), Bantu Africa was separated by the Sahara for a long time and the Americas too, developed along a divergent path.

The dominating forms of Civilisation are essentially Eurasian -- look at the largest religions in the world, they are all from Eurasia (actually speaking all are of Caucasian origin)

[Cronos]

oh, Kipling is a must read and his works are good. However, he woudl be classified as a guy who was born outside his native land (he was born in Bombay, India) and came to the strange land called England later. Naturally he needed something to prove himself. I woudl rather consider him among those greats in English literature born durignt he amalgamation of British and Indian experiences and thought

[Cronos]

European civilization is less advanced than American.

you've GOT to be kidding..... I would rate them both equally, each with tis own merits -- and I've lived in both places as well as in the Middle East.
Think of how London has treated Scots.

Historically, maybe, maybe in the 13th century, but not now!!! Don't forget that the english kings are descended from James of Scotland, a Scottish king invited to become king of england? And don't forget that Scotland today is bluidy rich (due to the North Sea oil) but most scots live in England and occupy prime positions) -- in fac the line is really pretty blurred, except maybe for the true highlanders

[Cronos]

Ah, now you guys get my point -- all civilisations have been enriched by others -- but modern day Islamic "civilisation" has degenerated and lost its greek-Indic-Persian trappigns that it took from those enslaved civilisations and shows itself as rootless and sans content

[LexBaird]

O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as others see us
It wad frae monie a blunder free us
An' foolish notion
What airs in dress an' gait wad lea'e us
An' ev'n Devotion

Oh, would some Power a gift give us
To see ourselves as others see us
It would from many a blunder free us
And foolish notion.
What airs in dress and gait would leave us
And even Devotion

[Cronos]

well, weighing in on the other side -- the English did stop slavery but they did import virtual slaves from southern India to work in Africa and Fiji and the Caribbean. However, I'm not very certain if they were forced in, or the Indians, sensing the business opportunity didn't go fo their own accord -- cyborg, with your vast knowledge, could you clarify please?)

[LexBaird]

Don't forget that the english kings are descended from James of Scotland, a Scottish king invited to become king of england?

Nope. The Stuarts were displaced by William of Orange, a German line. Saxe-Colburg IIRC. Thus the Rising to restore Bonny Prince Charlie (Stuart), which failed at Culloden.

[Cronos]

The right to speak freely without being subjected to "hate crimes" laws as well as my right to defend myself, to name two very fundamental things.

Weel, I'm lvign in England now and have a big bunch of pals who are black, white, Asian, Chinese, East European etc. and there's no PC stuff here -- everyone takes the p*** out of everyone else and there aren't any real ghettoes around here (except maybe BRixton!)

[Cronos]

When it comes to the crunch who do we send our brave soldiers to fight and die alongside? It isn't the Arabs, Russians or Chinese, but our american family.

REally. Then, why did BRitain fight with the Germans against the French (Napoleonic wars), the French and Turks against he Russian (Crimean war), the french agains the Germans (WWI and II), the Arabs against the Turks (WWI) and the Chinese against the Japanese (WWII)? Face facts, every country fights out of its own interest. And that would be logical, nay, realpolitik

[LexBaird]

whoops, William was Hanover, then the Saxe Coberg Gotha line.

[Cronos]

Nope. The Stuarts were displaced by William of Orange, a German line. Saxe-Colburg IIRC. Thus the Rising to restore Bonny Prince Charlie (Stuart), which failed at Culloden.

Well, yes and no -- William of Orange's line was displaced by the German Hanoverian dynasty -- THESE were the Saxe-Coburgs (after Vicki married Alfred it became the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha family). But the subsequent dynasty did marry into the Stuart dynasty to ensure that the lineage from Alfred the Great was unbroken. The only rulers outside that lineage are Stephen, Richard IIIrd, the French Dauphin (who was invited to rule after King John's death), Queen Elizabeth I and Queen Anne.

[Cronos]

willim was NOT of the Hanoverian line, he was Prince of the Netherlands. The Hanoverian electors (the Georges) were of the Saxe-Coburg family

[Cronos]

Leopold shoudl be put in the same place as Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc. -- the untold suffering he caused for generations should merit him taht