Ka-pi96 said:
PDF said:
So only the places where the indigenous people were near completely removed and replaced by Europeans are considered colonized by your definition. I guess it's a good thing you weren't running the empire back then or there would be a lot fewer people on earth right now. To be clear I don't actually disagree with your larger argument that makes sense for countries that were created by those of European descent to learn about European history. It is useful in understanding the creation of the United States Government. I just have a problem with your definition of colonized. "they remained their own people and they still are their own people." These weren't just places that were allowed to live as they had previously, they were forced to adopt new customs, laws, borders, etc. In many places, there were multiple distinct groups of people but to Europeans, they were all the same and forced together. Whether they like it or not (and I am guessing not) European culture was forced upon them and is now part of their history. It feels offensive to say they weren't really colonized. |
Eagle367 said:
You just contradicted yourself mate. Ghana was a former colony. So was Palestine and Syria and Pakistan. The British and French basically made the modern middle Eastern map because most of the places there were colonies and they drew squiggly lines how they saw fit. That's how the mess of the modern middle east was made. Hong Kong was a British colony and that's why one country two systems exist(ed). Pakistan and Bangladesh probably wouldn't exist if India wasn't a British colony. Mass genocide and population replacement aren't qualifiers for a place to be a colony. |
The dictionary definition of "colonise" is to settle your own people somewhere, so yeah I don't consider a lot of countries former colonies since the "colonists" aren't there any more and weren't ever there in any great numbers in the first place They were no more colonies than all of the places that the Mongols conquered. Unless you want to start talking about the Mongolian "colonial" empire too? Or how about the Greeks? Would you call Ptolemaic Egypt a Greek colony just because it was ruled by Greek people, despite the Egyptians still being the majority of the population? I wouldn't. I would call Syracuse a Greek colony though, since it was set up by the Greeks and was basically 100% Greek. |
But you just called Ghana a colony and I find my description more consistent
