Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker
In Sitchu wrote:I'm rather interested in looking at non-military invasions and conquests throughout history, if anyone has any good examples.
aufbahrung wrote:Islam is the latest of the three great religions and more close to a political ideology with consequent pyschologicol techniques.
aufbahrung wrote: It might spread because of military expansion but the Islamic preachers spread it around India. Obviously I've read this and feel free to find holes in my tinned history of the world thus far, for which I can blame a poor memory.
In Sitchu wrote:I don't really have any examples that come to mind. I'm not sure how one would consider immigration to be an invasion. People moving from one area to another has always occurred, whether on a small or large scale.
3 million square miles
Convinced of the economic potential, on May 2, 1670 - with a stroke of the royal pen - King Charles II created a monopoly over 3 million square miles of land. The Hudson's Bay Company - the Honourable Company of Adventurers - was born.
In Sitchu wrote:I just thought of one example. It's the only one I can think of so far, which is the occupation of Austria by Germany. Technically it did involve their military, but in reality they were welcomed and they just walked right in without any resistance. That would indicate (I'm guessing) that if Hitler had just declared Austria to be part of Germany and if germans had begun coming into Austria, the Austrians would have been like, yeah ok.
Macdoc wrote:re Hudson Bay
Again the was no fur trade in that area without cooperation of the indigenes.
There was an ongoing war between France and Britain which overlaid the commercial aspect and indigenes were drafted, willingly in that for trade goods or revenge on rival tribes.
You don't conquer militarily a place the size of Europe in the 16th century.
Also armed aspects applied to indigenous tribes for their own security and for the trading companies each had it's own para-military ....not sure a handful of ships and a very few king's own qualifies as an invading force.
That said France, Britain and Russia were imperialists and Russia in particular was brutal in its quest for furs ...really to the point of enslaving locals.
But then indigenous tribes enslaved each other. Such a peaceable bunch H Sapiens![]()
Another situation that comes to mind is the migration south and west of the agricultural Bantu in S Africa away from the military pressure of Shaka Zulu to occupy lands lightly traversed by an older hunter gatherer culture the Bushmen who'd been there forever.
Was that a military invasion?
Yes by Shaka Zulu to displace the Bantu who would not be engulfed.
Not sure about the Bantu moving into areas not cultivated.
Hermit wrote:
Although support for unification was massive among Austrians, more than 60% of the population was opposed to it in 1933.
Hermit wrote:After the annexation came the plebiscite. It was rigged, of course. Thousands of voters were disenfranchised first on the grounds of being social democrats Jews or any other reason for which they might be suspected to vote against the annexation. The ballot sheet itself graphically betrays that it was rigged.
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest