The Earl of Cromer's language and attitude both demonstrate how Europeans saw their place in the world during the nineteenth century, as better than others and rightly in charge. When he writes that the Egyptians do not, "appear to possess the qualities which would render it desirable, either in their own interests, or in those of the civilized world in general" to let them rule themselves, he is showing the slight racism which may be attributed to Social Darwinism. When he writes, "The special aptitude shown by Englishmen in the government of Oriental races pointed to England as the most effective and beneficent instrument for the gradual introduction of European civilization into Egypt" this is the other side of the coin, demonstrating his favor for Europeans. However, all of these slight prejudices seem mild compared to the types of actions and thinking which occurred around imperialism.…show more content… The Europeans believed that the most evolved people was themselves since they had the greatest culture and technological advancement. In the case of the Earl of Cromer, I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt and say he only had a slight prejudice, as he makes a logical argument for why the Egyptians are not fit to govern themselves. Although he may be quick to jump to European rule, it does sound like the Egyptians needed help setting up a
