Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The definition of colony.
"a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country, typically a distant one, and occupied by settlers from that country."
So, yes, the US colonized the western part of the United States. The 13 colonies were a colony of Great Britain until they revolted creating a new independent country. When the United States starting expanding, it was colonizing, whether through purchase from other countries or through annexation. Those regions are no longer colonies as they are now integral parts of the United States. When does a colony become integral, I will say thats blurry. But, once a territory or colony becomes developed enough and starts to be represented in the national government, I would say its likely an integral part of the country. That does not necessarily mean there is not some self-ruled nationalist movement. Go to a country like Spain, and many regions have nationalist movements to break away from Spain.
In the modern world, there are not very many colonies left. For example, I would not consider Reunion a colony. It is a French island off the SE coast of Africa. The inhabitants are all French (not ethnically, but nationally) and have representation in the French government. Guam on the other hand, could be considered a colony and most consider it so. It has no representation in the US government despite everyone there being US citizens, so it does not have full self control. It is still heavily governed from the US mainland and has no say in some matters. The same is true for all US territories, they do not have equal rights in the US government.
Let's try this; can you point me to a credible source outside of City-Data that backs up what you're saying?
Ok, let's understand that in this piece, the west of then was not the west of now. From the article: "Between 1812 and 1821, six new western commonwealths were added to the union; Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri, Indiana, and Illinois. The definition of western has obviously changed since the mid 1800's as things do over time so I think we can say that the definition of colonization has too. Using 200 year old definitions to fit what you're saying doesn't make it valid.
Ok, let's understand that in this piece, the west of then was not the west of now. From the article: "Between 1812 and 1821, six new western commonwealths were added to the union; Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri, Indiana, and Illinois. The definition of western has obviously changed since the mid 1800's as things do over time so I think we can say that the definition of colonization has too. Using 200 year old definitions to fit what you're saying doesn't make it valid.
I can see the argument that the former US continental territories could have been considered colonies at one time. It is an interesting argument but it also has some glaring weaknesses.
For one thing, as several people already mentioned, the poster was stretching the word colony so much that virtually the entire world could be considered colonial in one way or another. I mean basically the entire world is inhabited by peoples who were not the original inhabitants of the land.
There is also a difference between a nation which owns less populated land contiguous to its own territory versus a nation which owns land far from its homeland. I mean for example, some people might argue that Texas or California was a colony of Mexico and then later the United States. It is debatable. But what is not debatable is when Spain owned Texas and California, they were clearly Spanish colonies thousands of miles away from Spain itself.
That last example is what most people think of when they hear the word colony.
Finally, the key difference between the US western territories and what most people think of colonies? When US territories reached a certain population threshold they could join the United States as full states with equality and the same rights as the already existing states. This is also true of other nations like Canada and Australia.
Think about that for a moment. How many European countries would allow their African or Asian colonies to join the mother country with full political equality? Clearly there is a huge difference between US territories, and Canadian and Australian territories as well, from what most people think of colonies.
^
The US allowed Hawaii to join as a full state so I don’t see your argument and most European colonies have full rights and are fully integrated such as French Guiana which is part of the EU. Then there is the fact that for a time Portugal moved their capital to Brazil in Rio for 13 years until Brazil gained independence forming the Brazilian empire.
I can see the argument that the former US continental territories could have been considered colonies at one time. It is an interesting argument but it also has some glaring weaknesses.
For one thing, as several people already mentioned, the poster was stretching the word colony so much that virtually the entire world could be considered colonial in one way or another. I mean basically the entire world is inhabited by peoples who were not the original inhabitants of the land.
There is also a difference between a nation which owns less populated land contiguous to its own territory versus a nation which owns land far from its homeland. I mean for example, some people might argue that Texas or California was a colony of Mexico and then later the United States. It is debatable. But what is not debatable is when Spain owned Texas and California, they were clearly Spanish colonies thousands of miles away from Spain itself.
That last example is what most people think of when they hear the word colony.
Finally, the key difference between the US western territories and what most people think of colonies? When US territories reached a certain population threshold they could join the United States as full states with equality and the same rights as the already existing states. This is also true of other nations like Canada and Australia.
Think about that for a moment. How many European countries would allow their African or Asian colonies to join the mother country with full political equality? Clearly there is a huge difference between US territories, and Canadian and Australian territories as well, from what most people think of colonies.
^^^Well said and I think we can move past this weak definition of colony now.
^
The US allowed Hawaii to join as a full state so I don’t see your argument and most European colonies have full rights and are fully integrated such as French Guiana which is part of the EU. Then there is the fact that for a time Portugal moved their capital to Brazil in Rio for 13 years until Brazil gained independence forming the Brazilian empire.
You should stop. Your weak, manufactured definition of colony has been destroyed.
You should stop. Your weak, manufactured definition of colony has been destroyed.
Well I guess there isn't any point to debate this subject here on this thread since we are talking about modern colonies, and not historic ones, and in that case modern colonies are defined as non self governing territories by the UN. In that case these are the current colonial powers.
By Area
U.K: 614,146 km2
*Spain: 266,000 km2
France: 22,575 km2
U.S.A: 1,092 km2
New Zealand: 12 km2
By population
*Spain: 531,000
France: 523,000
U.K: 233,867
U.S.A: 177,282
New Zealand: 1,411
*Disputed territory.
Oh, and the UN used to consider Alaska and Hawaii as colonies before they were granted statehood, and Puerto Rico as well before they were granted commonwealth status.
^
The US allowed Hawaii to join as a full state so I don’t see your argument and most European colonies have full rights and are fully integrated such as French Guiana which is part of the EU. Then there is the fact that for a time Portugal moved their capital to Brazil in Rio for 13 years until Brazil gained independence forming the Brazilian empire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grega94
Well everything west of the Appalachian mountains could be considered an American colony, if that is the case then the US would easily be one of the largest. In terms of Land area it would be Russia’s lands east of the Volga river.
I made 3 main points and you come back at me with this, none of which addresses what I said?
And btw is Hawaii one of the 48 continental states? This whole debate began because someone made a farfetched comment back on page 1 (shown above) that he regarded the states west of the Appalachians to be colonies. So I am obviously talking about the 48 contiguous states, not Hawaii or Alaska.
So I have a question for you. Do you consider Canada to be a major colonial power? How about Australia, Brazil, Mexico or Argentina?
Do you mean by colonies, territories that fall under the souverainity of another country, or all colonies that a country once had by historic dimensions?
France has the most overseas colonies, that still belong to France.
I think Britain had the most significant overseas empire, but after HongKong was returned to China, it has become France that has the most significant overseas empire.
Spain had the largest colonial empire that is under the same culture.
Britiin had the largest overall colonial empire.
Russia had the largest continous colonial territory and most populous, however these lands are now mostly Russian and are nolonger considered to be colonies.
France is a centralized country; its colonies have no exclusive rights...I think the British colonies have more rights. The French ones are foreign-ruled by Paris. One could argue that interior metropolitan France is also foreign-controlled by Paris - that's right, too.
Paris decides everything about its colonies - so they remain colonized.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
