2007-10-20 12:44:28 · 9 answers · asked by magonzetcetcetc 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
Both are migrants:
1. ones came and commited genocide, stole land, destroyed cultures, spread deadly diseases, practiced discrimination, slavery, banned manifestation of aboriginal culture including language, shot indigenous people for fun, etc....
2. others come to what was their own land not too long ago and work for less than the minimum wage, abide by the law (except migration of course), pay taxes without getting social services or any labor rights, enroll in the military and fight for a country that discriminates them in exchange for residence, they are driven of their own countries to risk their lives and life savings crossing the border thanks to 'free trade agreements' that devastate their own agricultural economy, etc.
2007-10-20 14:47:57 · update #1
are you drinking?
2007-10-20 16:37:37 · answer #1 · answered by T 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
After reading the question several times, I have decided that he is asking us to compare the European colonists from centuries ago to today's illegal immigrants. Maybe he's looking for sympathy that way, which is laughable because we all know how it turned out for the Indians don't we.
As for the genocide comment, I'll point out that many of the tribes WANTED the help of the Europeans to exterminate other tribes. It's a myth that the Natives were a peace loving bunch prancing around the forest and that the evil colonists came along and destroyed their paradise.
We all know what happened to enemies of the tribes back in those days, so if we are going to compare these two groups I think that we're being very civilized in our treatment of trespassers, after all we only want to deport them not bash their heads in with wooden clubs or harm them in any way physically.
2007-10-20 21:17:34 · answer #2 · answered by Drixnot 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
What exactly are you asking? You can't compare one thing that has nothing to do with the other. What do their decendants have to do with this? The problem is that they are illegal, and sucking this country dry. That is the problem today. This is 2007, not 1807.
BTW, the English are not Europeans.
2007-10-20 19:55:04 · answer #3 · answered by Gretl 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The Conquistadors from Mexico reduced California's Indian population from about 1,000,000 to 5,000 at the time Mexico sold it to the United States.
2007-10-20 20:08:40 · answer #4 · answered by Yak Rider 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Indians lived in teepees and and did not do squat for America and it took anglo enginuity to get them squared away. So we kicked their butts and took their land, so what. Illegal Mexican do not have the guts to fight us square for our land they are just trashing it so its worthless for all of us. Indians massacred and raped and murdered countless colonists and one colony of 500 completely disappeared to this day. Indians are making too much money on casinos to worry about Wounded Knee today amigo.
2007-10-20 20:58:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
hi
2007-10-20 19:50:37 · answer #6 · answered by c d.o.t 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What are you talking about? Illegal immigrants are no longer practicing human sacrifice and cannibalism, if that is what you are asking.
2007-10-20 19:51:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Illegal immigrant`s are criminals and are treated way better.If you want to compare the two ,maybe the US should start sending them to the gas chambers.
2007-10-20 20:01:22 · answer #8 · answered by Zombie 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
stop sniffing spray paint, it isnt good for your brain &you need all the help you can get.
2007-10-21 02:06:12 · answer #9 · answered by renegade_ndn 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋