2006-10-29 00:31:38 · 12 answers · asked by CurlyQ 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
Probably, when the native population count is lower then the immigrants (just like those poor native americans were forced to endure!!)
2006-10-29 00:41:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Whatever the vote seekers are telling you, immigration is never uncontrolled. Illegal immigration maybe. Anyone from the UK is on a sticky wicket when talking about colonisation. Having once colonised a large part of the world, it would be justified to ask if John Company et al had valid passports and entry visas when they over-ran India and large parts of Africa? This also applies to France, Portugal, Spain and Turkey, all of whom had extensive empires in their hey.day.
2006-10-29 00:50:47 · answer #2 · answered by cymry3jones 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Take the example of the Brits in Australia, America, Africa and Asia, only in this case it was not uncontrolled immigration it was uncontrolled exploitation.
2006-11-01 20:38:29 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not really, since immigration implies some sort of control by the authorities of the recipient nation, whereas colonisation implies a concerted and political will to rule a country. The difference is probably in the political will.
2006-10-29 00:37:12 · answer #4 · answered by satyricon_uk 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I think so yes!Modern immigration may be referred to as a new type of colonisation, depending on the extent to which immigrants seek to preserve and extend the habits of the civilisation they have left, rather than adopting those of the civilisation now inhabited.
2006-10-29 01:19:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
I believe that immigration specifically illegal immigration can become colonization or invasion.
To a certain degree it is already happening here now. English speaking Americans are supposed to learn Spanish to accommodate the influx / invasion of Hispanic speaking immigrants including illegal immigrants.
The majority of Hispanic speaking immigrants are illegal immigrants. Due to the influx / invasion of immigrants, English speaking Americans are being an minority in some areas.
Why does Spanish need to be an unofficial second language of our country? Why are certain groups trying to make Spanish the primary language of our country unless we are being colonized / invaded in a bloodless coup being allowed by our own people and by allowing this our own government?
What I don't understand is why English speaking Americans are working so hard to make this happen. English speaking Americans are going to be hoisted by their own petard. In other words why are English speaking Americans causing our own downfall from within of our own country.
Can you tell this is quite a topic of conversation in my household? lol
2006-10-29 00:50:39 · answer #6 · answered by pj_gal 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Yes, and America may reach it unless our government gets real about enforcement of immigration laws.
2006-10-29 01:48:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
There was such a point about 500 years ago, between 1492 and 1890. Just ask a Native American.
2006-10-29 00:56:39 · answer #8 · answered by Concerned Citizen 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No...colonisation suggests a genuine, planned movement to somewhere.
I would say integration is the word here, as populations merge and the balance shifts.
Britain has been multi-cultural mixed race from the start-The term 'Anglo-Saxon' refers to two races of people.
2006-10-29 00:36:20 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
The definition of a colony is:
A body of emigrants, or their descendants in a remote region, under the control of a parent country.
So, the answer to your question is no.
2006-10-29 01:55:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋