The Zargons invade

[JockSporran]

The Zargons invade earth, looking humanoid but with green skin and pointed ears, zapping our cities without warning, they settle and build, driving us into the wilds. They enslave us and massacre us and continue to spread and settle. We try resistance but are brutally put down. After a few years , out of a human population of 6 billion, there are only six million of us left, living in reservations on the Sahara desert. With me so far?

OK, now we move on. Two hundred years have passed. Liberal Zargons have made reforms. Today there are laws against anti-human racism or discrimination against humans. We may choose to live in their society or live in improved reservations with good facilities. There are even humans in the World Parliament and we even have our own Human Parliament as well.

My question is this: do you see Earth as 'ours' and the Zargons, even modern liberal ones, as invading alien scum? Or do you accept history and try to get along with everybody?

[ludwig]

This scenario actually happened in 1066. The invading aliens split our land up between them and called themselves 'the aristocracy'. The natives were oppressed given the crap jobs and forced to bow and scrape to the invaders.
We're still bitter about it which is why we hate rich people as we have this inherited memory of them as invading oppressors who stole their wealth. If we see an expensive car we have a strange compulsion to scratch it. Contrast this attitude to America which has a completely different history and rich people are admired by one and all.

[JockSporran]

I'm just trying to imagine what it feels like to be a Native American or an Australian aborigine, Maori, etc.

[beso]

It is a great question but I must ask: How is America any different?

The invaders took everything, killed as many as possible and sent the remaining indigenous people further and further west until there was nowhere left to go. California was too valuable to let the "Indians" have it! (The invaders continued west and found Hawaii and the Phillipines, but that is another story). The indigenous people who tried to fit in to the new culture were still rejected. Plenty of pictures of native americans in suits but it did them no good.

The invaders hid behind their religion and "spread the Word". Those who where not already aware of the "compassionate God of the Bible" (ie everyone) were ruthlessly massacred. In many areas the gold and silver was the native's undoing because Abraham's God respects most those who kill and steal gold in silver in His name. (Don't argue, read the bl00dy Bible)

The Maori had a much better deal. They are the only indigenous people to agree to a treaty with their invaders. (They were also more agressive, powerful and pragmatic than most native people). I believe the Maori and the European immigrants have a much better relationship than any other conquered nation.

[123everton]

I always thought that the Maori were still technically at war with Britain.

[jno]

the point about the settlement of New Zealand - and it's to Britain's credit - is that it was done via a treaty with the Maori. There were already Europeans there - sealers and whalers and generally scum - and some officials who'd gone out from Britain to try to keep them in order, but without much power to do so. But unlike Australia or America Britain then signed a treaty with the natives before any proper settlements were begun.

There was subsequent fighting, mostly over land rights, and the treaty was widely broken by the settlers. This has been mainly sorted out over the past 20 years or so with big payments to Maori tribes to settle grievances. So I don't think they're still at war - there never was a 'war against Maori'.

Regarding the original question: no idea, because having different species makes it hard to imagine. I think the big question is: can we interbreed? If so then yes, we will gradually merge. The story of the Sabine women more or less illustrates this process, as does the gradual integration of Angles and Saxons and Vikings. It took longer with the Normans because they took over administration of the country and had a different language; but we're all the same people now.

(Ludwig, why don't Americans scratch big cars? Many of them came from Britain too, after all.)

[JockSporran]

My point is this. It seems there are some native people, also black Americans of slave ancestry, who hold a grudge against the white race. This may be understandable, but is it right? Surely none of us today are to blame for the actions of our ancestors?

[jno]

We may not be to blame from the actions of our ancestors but we can certianly profit from them. There are still a lot of rich white people whose wealth arose from slavery - I think the Tate galleries arose out of fortunes made on sugar plantations in the Caribbean that used slave labour. Have Tate & Lyle ever tried to make reparations to the descendants of those slaves? I have no idea, and no idea if anyone else has either; maybe some have. But you could hardly blame black people today who resented Tate & Lyle for past activities.