| scottie said: Couldn't disagree more. Your own examples prove you wrong.
The Pilgrims initially traded with the Native Americans, for food, for land. They did this because they needed food and other things that the Natives could provide. When the settlements began to prosper, then trade was stopped - the colonialists no longer needed anythign from the Natives. The British traded with the Australian Aboriginees, particularly alcohol.
Assuming that the aliens turn up for either colonisation, or for resources (much more likely than simply turning up to wipe us out for the fun of it imo), then they would quite possibly try a diplomatic approach first. Who knows, they may end up attacking later, or they may not. |
Except in the case of an alien invasion, we would actually be significantly inferior to them, and an actual different species. Aliens could still probably view us the same way we view animals that inhabit a forest. I think that colonialism isn't the right conecpt to compare an alien invasion with 9and even if we do that, we know how colonialism turned out, no?), because colonialists were ignorant racists (natives were still humans, no different from themselves), while aliens would actually be justified in considering us mere inferior animals which they can disregard or use for whatever purposes they see fit(experiments, zoos, keeping us as pets etc.).
They fact that they're a superior evolved intelligent species would be justification enough (we use that justification to do whatever we want to animals).
"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"
"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."
(The Voice of a Generation and Seece)
"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"
(pizzahut451)







