History shows me only one way in which a high state of civilization has been produced: the struggle of race with race, and the survival of the physically and mentally fitter race. The struggle means suffering, intense suffering, while it is in progress; but that struggle and that suffering have been the stages by which the white man has reached his present stage of development. They are why he no longer lives in caves and feeds on roots and nuts. You will see that my view-and I think it may be called the scientific view-is that a nation must be kept up to a high pitch [level] of effectiveness by contest (competition): chiefly by way of war with inferior races, and with equal races by the struggle for trade-routes and for the sources of raw material. This is the natural history view of mankind, and I do not think you can subvert [go against) it. Mankind as a whole, like the individual man, advances through pain and suffering only. The path of progress is strewn (scattered]) with the wreck of nations; traces are everywhere to be seen of the tombs (graves] of inferior races. Yet these dead peoples are, in very truth, the steppingstones on which mankind has arisen to the higher intellectual and deeper emotional life of today. You may say: Let us cease this cruel and bloodthirsty struggle; let us leave the lands of the world to the races that cannot fully profit by them; let us cease to compete in the markets of the world. However, science clearly tells us this: a community of men is as subject as a community of ants or as a herd of buffaloes to the laws which rule all organic nature. We cannot escape from them; it serves no purpose to protest at what some term the "cruelty" or "bloodthirstiness" of natural law. Source: Karl Pearson, British intellectual, from National Life from the Standpoint of Science, 1900.

Explain ONE way that the passage illustrates a motivation for European imperialism. Explain ONE ideological belief from the 19th to 20th century that supports the author’s argument.