When we try to analyze the modern world today, we’ll notice that it’s going through several changes. No one is sure who will control or shape the future. The big economic powers are either strengthening their politics, as is the case with China, or are gradually falling apart, as is the case with Europe; and instead of a disastrous economic crisis, the US seems to be facing an ideological one.

However, when we try to analyze the world from a historical standpoint and put our focus on the first half of the 20th century, we’ll notice that, even though things were much harder, they were also simpler. If today is all about politics, ethics, and ideology, then the past century was all about principles and political and socio-economic stability. Thus, we’ll mention the birth and the visions of modernity which took place in the 1930s.

When capitalism successfully tore down the old traditional and religious systems of the 18th and 19th century, it successfully paved the way for the rise of a new movement which preached the modern concepts of individualism, market economy, capitalism, democracy, and personal rights and freedoms. This new movement is called "classical liberalism". To express their different political opinions, anti-democratic supporters formed the concept of authoritarianism; and as a response to both movements, anti-colonialism was born.

Unlike liberalists, authoritarian supporters believed that democracy is not the best way to run a country and instead proposed authoritarian control, a strong central government, and limited political freedoms. Anti-colonialists, on the other hand, rejected both liberal and authoritarian regimes, calling them imperialistic. Instead directly opposed colonialism, they suggested the removal of all foreign powers and politics from native lands. According to them, the only way to achieve modernity was to achieve independence first.

All of these different visions of modernity came to a clash in the First World War. The Great Depression destroyed the liberal concept; the authoritarian regime was on the rise in the majority of the countries that participated in the war, each one promising a stable society and economy run by a capable leader; and the anti-colonial movement was overshadowed by the seemingly never-ending problem about imperialism. It was, however, successful in several countries, such as Turkey.

Over time, the problems with all of these movements and their various visions of modernity became clear, and everyone began to focus on the creation of a stable capitalistic, mass-democratic political system that promised solidarity, compromise, stability, and a balanced system of values.

What anti-colonial visions emerged in the early 20th century, and how did they develop?

In the first half of the 1900s, there were an array of movements that you could call anti-colonial. You could also call them decolonization. Their aim was to overthrow colonial powers. They envisioned a world in which the natural-born peoples of the given countries govern themselves and make their own laws.

In 1916, there was the Easter Rising in Ireland. This uprising was developed by the Irish Republican Brotherhood. While the uprising did not lead to independence from Ireland, it did help bring many more people into the movement for independence. The unduly, inaccurate force of the British also reinforced Irish people's contempt for them.

England faced more troubles with its colonies in other parts of the world. In 1918, Egyptian politicians demanded England cease their claim over their country and let Egyptians rule themselves. When England declined their request, Egyptians revolted. Around four years later, England recognized Egypt's independence.

You could compare England's recognition of Egypt's independence with their continuing rule over Ireland. You could analyze why England did not grant Ireland independence. Perhaps it's because Ireland's status as a colony proper is debatable. Maybe it's due to Ireland's proximity to England. It might also have to do with race.

I'd be remiss not to tell you about the anti-colonial movements happening in the United States. During the early 1900s, Marcus Garvey was promoting a strong anti-colonial vision for Africa. He was famous for saying African for Africans.

Garvey wanted European countries out of Africa. He championed an end to all of the boundaries and different territories that the European colonial powers created. He wanted one unified Africa that could provide a safe haven for Black people in the United States and around the world.

Meanwhile, Hubert Harrison was advocating a separate African-American state within the United States.

Again, in all of the above examples, you could see a vision of life in which the country is ruled and governed by people actually who live in it, reflect their culture, and are looking out for their best interest.