:: wikimiki.org ::

Colony

Colony

In politics and in history, a colony is a territory under the immediate political control of a geographically-distant state (or city, in ancient times). Some colonies were historically separate countries, while others were territories without definite statehood at the moment of colonization. The metropolitan state is the state that owns the colony. In Ancient Greece, the city that owned a colony was called the metropolis within its political organization. Mother country is the term used to refer to the metropolitan state by its citizens that live in a colony. Today, the terms overseas territory or dependent territory are preferred. See also the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. People who migrated to settle permanently in colonies controlled by their country of origin were called colonists or settlers. A colony differs from a puppet state or satellite state in that a colony has no independent international representation and the top-level administration of a colony is under direct control of the metropolitan state. The term "informal colony" is used by some historians to describe a country which is under the de facto control of another state, although this description is often contentious.

Definitions

In the modern usage, colony is generally distinguished from oversea possession. In the former case, the local population, or at least the part of it not coming from the "metropolitan" (controlling) country, does not enjoy full citizenship rights. The political process is generally restricted, especially excluding questions of independence. In this case, there are settlers from a dominating foreign country, or countries, and often the property of indigenous peoples is seized, to provide the settlers with land. Foreign mores, religions and/or legal systems are imposed. In some cases, the local population is held for unfree labour, is submitted to brutal force, or even to policies of genocide. By contrast, in the case of overseas possessions, citizens are formally equal, regardless of origin and it is possible for legal independence movements to form; should they gain a majority in the oversea possession, the question of independence may be brought, for instance, to referendum. However, in some cases, settlers have come to outnumber indigenous people in overseas possessions, and it is possible for colonies to become overseas possessions, against the wishes of indigenous peoples. This often results in ongoing and long-lasting independence struggles by the descendants of the original inhabitants. Colony may also be used for countries that, while independent or considering themselves independent of a former colonizing power, still have a political and social structure where the rulers are a minority originating from the colonizing power. Such was the case with Rhodesia after the Unilateral Declaration of Independence. The term informal colony has also been used in relation to countries which, while they have never been conquered by force or officially ruled by a foreign power, have a clearly subordinate social or economic relationship to that power.

History

informal colony Originally, as with the ancient (Hellenic) Greek apoikia, the term colonization referred to the foundation of a new city or settlement, more often than not with nonviolent means (but see for instance the Athenian re-colonisation of Melos after wiping out the earlier settlement). The term colony is derived from the Latin colonia, which indicated a place meant for agricultural activities; these Roman colonies and others like them were in fact usually either conquered so as to be inhabited by these workers, or else established as a cheap way of securing conquests made for other reasons. The name of the German city Cologne also derives from colonia. In the modern era, communities founded by colonists or settlers became known as settler colonies. The "age of imperialism" began in the 15th century with the initiation of the vast Portuguese Empire and also the Spanish Empire in the Americas and lasted until the mid-20th century with the dismantling of the British Empire. During these centuries European states, the United States and others took political control of much of the world's population and landmass. The term "colony" came to mean an overseas district with a majority indigenous population, administered by a distant colonial government. (Exceptions occurred: Russian colonies in Central Asia and Siberia, American settlements in the American West, and German colonies in Eastern Europe were not "overseas"; British colonies (or "overseas territories") like the Falkland Islands and Tristan da Cunha lacked a native population.) Most non-European countries were colonies of Europe at one time or another, or were handled in a quasi-colonial manner. The European colonies and former colonies in America made extensive use of slave labor, initially using the native population, then through the importation of slaves from black Africa. The Spanish colonial empire once encompassed all of South and Central America except for Brazil, with few exceptions; it crumbled starting in the early 19th century. After the Spanish and the Portuguese, the Dutch East India Company (VOC-1602) and later the Dutch West India Company (WIC) took over a lot of Portuguese possessions and expanded their large trade empire (See; Dutch colonial empire). In the 19th century, the largest European colonial empire was the British Empire under Queen Victoria, including India. France once held much of Western and Central Africa, along with Indochina. There existed various statuses and modes of operation for foreign countries, direct control by the colonizing country being the most obvious. Some colonies were operated through corporations (the British East India Company for India; the Congo Free State under the very brutal rule of Léopold II of Belgium); some were run as protectorates. Quasi-colonies were run through proxy or puppet governments, generally kingdoms or dictatorships. For instance, it may be argued that Cuba before the Revolution was a quasi-colony of the United States, with an enormous influence of US economic and political interests; see banana republic. The United Kingdom used Australia as a penal colony: British convicts would be sent to forced labor there, with the added benefit that the freed convicts would settle in the colony and thus augment the European population there. Similarly, France once deported prostitutes and various "undesirables" to populate its colonies in North America, and until the 20th century operated a penitenciary on Devil's Island in French Guiana. The independence of these colonies began with that of 13 colonies of Britain that formed the United States, finalised in 1783 with the conclusion of a war begun in 1776, and has continued until about the present time, with for example Algeria and East Timor being relinquished by European powers only in 1962 and 1975 respectively (although the latter was forcibly made an Indonesian possession instead of becoming fully independent). This process is called decolonization, though the use of a single term obscures an important distinction between the process of the settler population breaking its links with the mother country while maintaining local political supremacy and that of the indigenous population reasserting themselves (possibly through the expulsion of the settler population). The movement towards decolonization was not uniform, with more newer powers, sometimes themselves ex-colonies or once threatened by colonial power, trying to carve a colonial empire. The United States, itself a former colony, expanded westwards by waging brutal wars against the Native American population, including whole massacres of civilians, so as to make it possible for settlers to colonize the American West. It also colonized Hawaii, and waged various wars and conduct armed expeditions so as to assert power over local governments (in Japan, with Commodore Perry and in Cuba, for example). European countries and the United States, exploiting the weakness of China's waning imperial regime, also maintained so-called international concessions in that country, a sort of colonial enclave; the coastal towns of Macau and Hong Kong were held on long-term leases by Portugal and the United Kingdom. During the first half of the 20th century, until its defeat the Second World War, Japan, once afraid of becoming a European or American colony, built itself a colonial empire in China, Korea and the Western Pacific, using brutal military force. Under the Geneva Conventions of 1949, it is a war crime to transfer, directly or indirectly, the civilian population of a country power onto land under that country's military occupation. The reasoning for this crime is apparently to emphasise that it is now a violation of international law to annex territory through military force. This phrase describes many of acts of colonisation in the past, and arguably outlaws colonisation. See also: British Empire, Portuguese Empire, Spanish Empire, French colonial empire, Dutch colonial empire, Colonialism, Colonial mentality,Colonization, British Nationality Law, Slavery, Imperialism, New Imperialism, settler. Compare protectorate, Crown colony, dominion, Proprietary colony. The Latin name colonia also became the name of several towns, the most famous of which is Cologne.

Colonies in ancient civilizations (examples)

- Assyria was originally a colony of Babylonia
- Carthage was a Phoenician colony
- Cyrene was a colony of the Greeks of Thera
- Naples formed as a Greek colony See also Colonies in antiquity

Recent colonies (examples)

- West Papua has been a colonial possession of Indonesia since 1969.
- India was a Dominion in the British Empire until 1947. See also Crown colony.
- Rhodesia was formally a colony in the British Empire until 1980.
- Korea was a colony of Japan
- The Philippines were a colony of the United States until 1946 Today, none of the colonizing European and North American powers hold colonies in the traditional sense of the term. Some of their former colonies have been integrated as dependent areas or have closer integration with the country. Category:Colonialism zh-min-nan:Si̍t-bîn-tē ja:植民地

Politics

Politics is the process by which decisions are made for a given society. The method of making decisions for groups varies, but the act of decision making is the key component that characterises politics. Although it is generally applied to governments, politics is also observed in all human group interactions, including corporate, academic, and religious institutions. Political science is the study of political behavior and examines the acquisition and application of power, i.e. the ability to impose one's will on another. One theorist, Harold Lasswell, has defined politics as "who gets what, when, and how." Another definition of 'politics' is: "how power is distributed within a group or system".

A natural state

In 1651, Thomas Hobbes published his most famous work, Leviathan, in which he proposed a model of early human development to justify the creation of human associations. Hobbes described an ideal state of nature wherein every person had equal right to every resource in nature and was free to use any means to acquire those resources. He noted that such an arrangement created a “war of all against all” (bellum omnium contra omnes). Further, he noted that men would enter into a social contract and would give up absolute rights for certain protections. While it appears that social cooperation and dominance hierarchies predate human societies, Hobbes’s model illustrates a rationale for the creation of societies (polities).

Early history

V.G. Childe describes the transformation of human society that took place around 6000 BCE as an urban revolution. Among the features of this new type of civilization were the institutionalization of social stratification, non-agricultural specialised crafts (including priests and lawyers), taxation, and writing. All of which require clusters of densely populated settlements - city-states. The word "Politics" is derived from the Greek word for city-state, "Polis". Corporate, religious, academic and every other polity, especially those constrained by limited resources, contain dominance hierarchy and therefore politics. Politics is most often studied in relation to the administration of governments. The oldest form of government was tribal organization. Rule by elders was supplanted by monarchy, and a system of Feudalism as an arrangement where a single family dominated the political affairs of a community. Monarchies have existed in one form or another for the past 5000 years of human history.

Definitions

- Power is the ability to impose one's will on another. It implies a capacity for force, i.e violence.
- Authority is the power to enforce laws, to exact obedience, to command, to determine, or to judge.
- Legitimacy is an attribute of government gained through the acquisition and application of power in accordance with recognized or accepted standards or principles.
- A government is the body that has the authority to make and enforce rules or laws.

Political power

Samuel Gompers’ often paraphrased maxim,"Reward your friends and punish your enemies," hints at two of the five types of power recognized by social psychologists: incentive power (the power to reward) and coercive power (the power to punish). Arguably the other three grow out of these two. Legitimate power, the power of the policeman or the referee, is the power given to an individual by a recognized authority to enforce standards of behavior. Legitimate power is similar to coercive power in that unacceptable behavior is punished by fine or penalty. Referent power is bestowed upon individuals by virtue of accomplishment or attitude. Fulfillment of the desire to feel similar to a celebrity or a hero is the reward for obedience. Expert power springs from education or experience. Following the lead of an experienced coach is often rewarded with success. Expert power is conditional to the circumstances. A brain surgeon is no help when your pipes are leaking.

Authority and legitimacy

Max Weber identified three sources of legitimacy for authority known as (tripartite classification of authority). He proposed three reasons why people followed the orders of those who gave them:

Traditional

Traditional authorities receive loyalty because they continue and support the preservation of existing values, the status quo. Traditional authority has the longest history. Patriarchal (and more rarely Matriarchal) societies gave rise to hereditary monarchies where authority was given to descendants of previous leaders. Followers submit to this authority because "we've always done it that way." Examples of traditional authoritarians include kings and queens.

Charismatic

Charismatic authority grows out of the personal charm or the strength of an individual personality (see cult of personality for the most extreme version). Charismatic regimes are often short lived, seldom outliving the charismatic figure that leads them. Examples include Hitler, Napoleon, and Mao.

Legal-rational

Legal-Rational authorities receive their ability to compel behavior by virtue of the office that they hold. It is the authority that demands obedience to the office rather than the office holder. Modern democracies are examples of legal-rational regimes.

References

GOMPERS,SAMUEL; “Men of Labor! Be Up and Doing,” editorial, American Federationist, May 1906, p. 319

State

:This article discusses states as sovereign political entities; for other meanings, see state (disambiguation). A state is an organized political community occupying a definite territory, having an organized government, and possessing internal and external sovereignty. Recognition of the state's claim to independence by other states, enabling it to enter into international agreements, is often important to the establishment of its statehood, although some theories do not make this a requirement - for instance, the Montevideo Convention. The "state" can also be defined in terms of domestic conditions, specifically, as conceptualized by Max Weber, "a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory." [http://www.mdx.ac.uk/www/study/xweb.htm] The exact meaning of this definition depends on what is understood by "legitimate". For more information see government.

Introduction

The word "state" in contemporary parlance often means the "Westphalian state", in reference to the Peace of Westphalia of 1648. In this sense, the modern state is an entity that enjoys extensive autonomy in its domestic economic and social policy, largely free from interference from other states and powers. A number of modern commentators have claimed that we are experiencing the decline of the Westphalian state as the principal actor of the international system, pointing to economic, cultural, political, and technological changes in the world, such as globalization and the emergence of regional and supernational groupings such as the European Union. The term "state" is also used to describe subnational territorial divisions within a federal system, as in the case of the United States of America. See state (law) and state (non-sovereign). In common speech, the terms country, nation and state are casually used as synonyms, but in a more strict usage they are distinguished:
- country is the geographical area.
- nation designates a people (however, national and international both confusingly refer as well to matters pertaining to what are strictly states, as in "national capital", "international law").
- state refers to the government, and an entity in international law. Currently, the entire land surface of the Earth is divided among the territories of the roughly two hundred states now existing, with the special case of Antarctica, a variety of disputed territories, and a number of areas where state power exists in theory, but not in practice (the most significant of these being Somalia and Iraq).

Etymology

The word "state" originates from the medieval state or throne upon which the head of state (usually a monarch) would sit. By process of metonymy, the word state became used to refer to both the head of state and the power entity he represented (though the former meaning has fallen out of use). A similar association of terms can today be seen in the practice of referring to government buildings as having authority, for example "The White House today released a press statement..."

Formation of the state

The birth of the state, in the broadest sense of the word, coincides with the rise of civilization. For most of the existence of the human species, people lived as nomadic hunter-gatherers. That lifestyle began to change with the invention of agriculture around the 9th millennium BC. The practice of agriculture made it necessary for human beings to build permanent settlements and spend most of their lives in close proximity to the land they cultivated. Thus, control over land became an issue for the first time. To express that control, various forms of property rights developed, with people claiming different kinds of rights over various areas of land. Disagreements over the nature and extent of such claims of ownership degenerated into violence and the first "wars". In some parts of the world, notably Mesopotamia and the Nile valley, natural conditions favoured the concentration of land ownership in few hands. Eventually, a small group of people found themselves owning the land on which many other people worked for a living. This control over the land meant control over the people whose livelihoods depended on the land; thus, the first primitive states arose. These states were usually despotic and unstable, with the ruler(s) holding absolute power over their subjects until some other ruler(s) displaced them. Since there were no laws and no infrastructure, and since power was exercised arbitrarily, some political theorists and historians do not consider such early forms of despotic rule to have been states in the proper sense of the word; they are sometimes called proto-states. One of the earliest known sets of laws, the Code of Hammurabi, has been dated to ca. 1700 BC. It was around this time that the concept of law - one of the foundations of the modern state - began to appear. But the rulers of the Ancient Near East had a long tradition of holding absolute power and claiming the status of god-kings (see hydraulic despotism). Thus, laws limiting the power of monarchs did not develop very far in that region. The city-states of Ancient Greece were the first to establish states whose powers were clearly defined in laws (even if the laws themselves could usually be changed quite easily). Also, notably, the idea of democracy was born in ancient Athens (see Athenian democracy). Many institutions of the modern state (especially in Western Europe and areas once dominated by Western-European empires) can trace their origins back to Ancient Rome, which inherited the political traditions of the Greeks and developed them further (particularly the rule of law, albeit in incomplete form). However, the Roman Republic gave way to the Roman Empire - which, in turn, created the concept of universal empire: the idea that the entire world was (or should be) under the authority of one single legitimate state. The fall of the Roman Empire and the Great Migrations changed the character of European politics. The "barbarian" (i.e., non-Roman) kingdoms and chieftains that followed the Roman Empire were ephemeral and transitory and bore little resemblance to the modern state. Even the kingdom of Charlemagne was fleeting; without the tradition of primogeniture, it dissolved into three smaller kingdoms with the Treaty of Verdun in 843. These kingdoms were treated more as land holdings by the royalty that ruled them. Once again, the state became little more than an expression of the ruler's private ownership of a certain area of land. The lack of a real successor to the Roman Empire in Western Europe created a power vacuum. The kingdoms of Western Europe were besieged by invaders on the frontiers - first, the Muslim invasions from the south, then a series of new migrations from the east and finally the Viking invasions from the north. At the same time, the various kingdoms (and smaller political units) were often involved in wars with each other over territory and succession. The solution that evolved out of these affairs was decidedly opposed to the system of independent states and temporary alliances that dominate the modern international system. Religion, which had rarely been a factor in the power calculations of Ancient Greece and the Roman Empire, became the cornerstone of an extremely loose pan-European defensive bloc under the aegis of the Catholic Church. This system produced an extensive framework of institutions - sometimes called "feudalism" - that regulated internal conflict and enabled Western Europe to confront exterior threats, even while no individual secular entity was truly independent in the sense of the modern state. This system asserted itself abroad in the form of the Crusades as the Middle Ages progressed. In 1302, Pope Boniface VIII stated that the political powers of Christendom exercised their prerogatives "at the command and sufferance of the priest." This limited the power of kings, who were obliged to pledge their ultimate allegiance to the Pope. The Holy Roman Empire, one of the strongest medieval authorities, emerged as a competitor to Papal power under Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, who invaded Italy to press his claims to secular authority in the mid-12th century. The weakening of the papacy was a major theme of the Middle Ages; the Western Schism in the later 14th century, a dispute over papal succession, was exploited by secular authorities and contributed to their growing power. The emergence of large, stable land holdings by single dynasties - for instance, France and Castile - enabled them to take a more active and independent role than their traditionally subsidiary role in the earlier middle ages. This shift to more independent, more secular actors would become a major point of controversy in Early Modern Europe. The great dynasties of Europe dramatically consolidated power by the beginning of the 16th century; additionally, the external threats to Europe had considerably lessened. The Reformation was to have a powerful impact on the structure of European politics; the dispute was not only theological, but also threatened the very fabric of the ancient political institutions of feudalism. The bloody conflicts that followed, blending the religious and political, pitted those who asserted the authority of the Pope (and in Germany, the Holy Roman Emperor) against those who asserted the authority of secular authorities and their sovereign ability to make internal policy, particularly when that policy reflected religious affiliation, Roman Catholic or Protestant. These conflicts culminated in the Thirty Years' War of the 17th century. In 1648, the powers of Europe signed the Treaty of Westphalia which ended the religious violence for purely political motives and the Church was stripped of temporal power - even though religion continued to play a political role as the foundation of the divine right of kings. The principle of "cuius regio, eius religio" established at Westphalia and previously in the Peace of Augsburg set a precedent of noninterference in other states' internal affairs that was key in the evolution of the modern state. In Germany, the office of the Holy Roman Emperor, the most prominent symbol of lingering institutions of feudalism, was emasculated as a secular authority in favor of the constituent elements of the Holy Roman Empire. The modern state was born. The state continued to develop as monarchs brought nobles and free towns into line and amassed spectacular resources and prestige. The growing numbers of civil servants eventually became known as the bureaucracy after the elevation of the Republican ideal. Nearly a century and a half after the Peace of Westphalia, the state became fully modern through the French Revolution. Claiming 'national will' as its justification, Napoleon and the Grande Armee of France swept over Europe. In response, conquered and neighboring principalities discarded their old systems and adopted the new model of the nation state. The nation state has remained the dominant political entity all over the world ever since, even though the many ideologies of the 19th and 20th century have created numerous different ways of running the affairs of nation states, as well as numerous different forms of internal and external organization (see political system and economic system).

International point of view

The legal criteria for statehood are not obvious. A document that is often quoted on the matter is the Montevideo Convention from 1933, the first article of which states: :The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states. Also, in article 3 it very clearly states that statehood is independent of recognition by other states. This is the declarative theory of statehood. While the Montevideo is a regional American convention and has no legal effect outside the Americas, some have nonetheless seen it as an accurate statement of customary international law. On the other hand, article 3 of the convention is attacked by the advocates of the constitutive theory of statehood, where a state exists only insofar as it is recognized by other states. Which theory is correct is a controversial issue in international law. An example in practice was the collapse of central government in Somalia in the early 1990s: the Montevideo convention would imply that the state of Somalia no longer existed, and the subsequently declared republic of Somaliland (comprising part of the so-called "former" Somalia) may meet the criteria for statehood. However the self-declared republic has not achieved recognition by other states. Article 1 of the convention is also attacked by those who claim that it fails to take into account the complicated situations of military occupation, territorial cession, and governments in exile. Richard W. Hartzell is a leading proponent of this view, and stresses that the four criteria of article 1 need to be expanded to nine. See [http://www.taiwanadvice.com/conventions/montconv.htm The Montevideo Convention and Military Occupation].

The domestic point of view

Looked at from the point of view of an individual nation, the state is a centralized organization of the whole country. Those studying this dimension emphasize the relationship between the state and its people. The English political philosopher Thomas Hobbes argued that in order to avoid a multi-sided civil war, in which life was "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short", individuals must necessarily surrender many of their "natural rights" -- including that of attacking each other -- to the "Leviathan", a unified and centralized state. In this tradition, Max Weber and Norbert Elias defined the state as an organization of people that has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force in a particular geographic area. Also in this tradition, the state differs from the "government": the latter refers to the group of people who make decisions for the state. For Weber, this was an "ideal type", or model, or pure case of the state. Many institutions that have been called "states" do not live up to this definition. For example, in countries such as Afghanistan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the central state has so far not succeeded in monopolizing the legitimate use of force, and must compete with various local warlords. These cases are sometimes called "failed states". One of the most basic characteristics of a modern state is regulation of property rights, investment, trade and the commodity markets (in food, fuel, etc.) typically using its own currency. Although many states (by their own decision) increasingly cede these powers to trade bloc entities, e.g. North American Free Trade Agreement, European Union, it is always controversial to do so, and opens the question of whether these blocs are in fact simply larger states. The study of political economy, which evolved into the modern study of economics, deals with these specific questions in more detail. However, although states are often influenced in their decisions and no longer hold an absolute jurisdiction over their internal affairs, they are nonetheless much stronger in relation to international organizations or to other states than lower (substate) political subdivisions normally are. But the trend at the moment is for the power of superstate levels of governance to increase, and there is no sign of this increase abating. Many (especially those who favour constitutional theories of international law) therefore reject as outdated the idea of sovereignty, and view the state as just the chief political subdivision of the planet.

Philosophies of the state

Different political philosophies have distinct opinions concerning the state as a domestic organization. In the modern era, these philosophies emerged with the rise of capitalism, which coincided with the (re)emergence of the state as a separate and centralized sector of society. Philosophers such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau pondered issues concerning the ideal and actual roles of the state. Recent philosophers like John Rawls and Robert Nozick were more concerned with distributive justice and the morality of exercising political power. There are four theories about the origin (and indirectly the justification) of the state. They are:
- Supernatural or natural authority - In this view, the state is either ordained by a higher power (such as God for the "Divine right of kings") or arises naturally out of a presumed human need for order and authority.
- Natural rights - According to this theory, human beings have certain rights that are "natural" (the implications of this word may vary), and establish states for the protection of those rights.
- Social contract - This idea holds that the state is established by the people (i.e. through the consent of the governed) in order to provide for various collective needs that cannot be satisfied through individual efforts, such as national defense, public roads, education, "the general welfare", etc.
- Conflict - Perhaps the simplest of the theories, it holds that the state did not arise out of any conscious decision, but merely as the result of violent conflict. Various groups of people fought each other for control over land or other resources, and the winning side imposed its domination on the losing side. These four theories can accommodate the full spectrum of political views. In practice, most people (and most political philosophies) subscribe to a combination of two or more of the above theories - arguing, for example, that different states have different origins. The conflict theory, in particular, is often combined with one of the other three in order to separate the illegitimate states (those created through conflict and subjugation) from the legitimate ones. There are at least five major philosophies of the state today, the last four of which correspond to specific political ideologies: contractarianism, liberalism, Marxism, conservatism, and anarchism. Contractarianism, as the name implies, is based on the social contract theory. It is also the only major philosophy of the state that does not fall within any single political ideology - perhaps because several different ideologies have adopted it as their own. Contractarianism is the foundation of modern democracy, as well as most forms of socialism and some types of liberalism. In contractarian thinking, the state should express the public interest, the interests of the whole society, and reconcile it with the separate interests of individuals. The state provides public goods and other kinds of collective consumption, while preventing individuals from free-riding (taking advantage of collective consumption without paying) by forcing them to pay taxes. Liberalism, in the classical sense, is based mainly on the natural rights theory. In this view, some or even all "rights" exist naturally and are not created by the state. For example, John Locke believed that individual property rights existed prior to the creation of the state, while the state's main job should be to preserve those rights. Historically, liberals have been less concerned with determining what the state should do and far more interested in stipulating what the state shouldn't do. The liberal philosophy of the state holds that the powers of any state are restricted by natural rights that exist independently of the human mind and overrule any social contract. However, there has been considerable debate among liberals as to what these natural rights actually are. Critics argue that they do not exist at all, since they are not evident from any observations of nature. On the other hand, there are also liberals who subscribe to the contractarian theory. In most cases, they fall on the left wing of liberalism, being social liberals ("New Deal" liberals; see American liberalism) and arguing for a welfare state. They stand in opposition to adherents of the natural rights theory, who tend to be libertarians, falling on the right wing of liberalism and arguing for a "minimal" state. The Marxist philosophy of the state is based on the conflict theory - specifically, on the idea of class conflict. In this view, the primary role of the state in practice is to enforce the existing system of unequal property and personal rights, class domination, and exploitation. The state also mediates in all types of social conflicts, and supplies necessary social-infrastructural conditions for society as a whole. Under such systems as feudalism, the lords used their own military force to exploit their vassals. Under capitalism, on the other hand, the use of force is centralized in a specialized organization which protects the capitalists' class monopoly of ownership of the means of production, allowing the exploitation of those without such ownership. In modern Marxian theory, such class domination can coincide with other forms of domination (such as patriarchy and ethnic hierarchies). Further, in Marxist theory, classes and other forms of exploitation should be abolished by establishing a socialist system, to be followed later by a communist one. Communism, the final goal, is a classless, propertyless and stateless society; however, socialism still preserves personal property and a (democratic) state. Thus, Marxism is opposed to the state (which it views as illegitimate, in accordance with the conflict theory), but does not wish to abolish the state immediately. As such, there is some overlap between Marxism and contractarianism: the socialist state that Marxists wish to establish as their short-term goal is to be based on a form of social contract. This state ought subsequently to slowly "wither away" as the representative democracy of socialism gradually transforms into the direct democracy of communism. Once the process is complete, the communist social order has been achieved and the state no longer exists as an entity separate from the people. In conservative thinking, which is based on the theory of (super)natural authority, the existing structure of traditions and hierarchies (of class, patriarchy, ethnic dominance, etc.) is seen as benefiting society overall. Thus, in a way, conservatives accept some ideas from both the Marxist and the liberal schools of thought, but view them in a different light: the state forces people to accept class and other kinds of domination, but this is seen as being for their own good. This perspective posits that, in general, current traditions only exist because they have been demonstrably successful in the past. Further, as with the liberals, the state is seen as always existing and/or "natural". Many conservatives, especially in recent decades, have come out in favor of the liberal theory of natural rights. Finally, in anarchist thinking, the state is nothing but an unnecessary and exploitative segment of society. Totally rejecting the Hobbesian notion that only a state can prevent chaos, anarchists argue that the state's monopoly of violence creates chaos. They believe that if the state and its restrictions on individual freedom were abolished, people could figure out how to work together peacefully and individual creativity would be unleashed. Contrary to the Marxist perspective, the anarchists see the state as an unnecessary evil, rather than a tool to be used in the class struggle.

References

-
-
-

External links

- Franz Oppenheimer; [http://www.opp.uni-wuppertal.de/oppenheimer/st/state0.htm The State. (1914/1922)]
- Franz Oppenheimer; [http://www.opp.uni-wuppertal.de/oppenheimer/fo27a.htm The Idolatry of the State. (1927)] Category:International law Category:International relations Category:Social sciences Category:Political geography ja:国家 simple:State th:รัฐ

City

:For alternate meanings see city (disambiguation) A city is an urban area that is differentiated from a town, village, or hamlet by size, population density, importance, or legal status.

Introduction

In most parts of the world, cities are generally substantial and nearly always have an urban core, but in the United States many incorporated areas which have a very modest population, or a suburban or even mostly rural character, are designated as cities. City can also be a synonym for "downtown" or a "city centre". A city usually consists of residential, industrial and business areas together with administrative functions which may relate to a wider geographical area. A large share of a city's area is primarily taken up by housing, which is then supported by infrastructure such roads, streets and often public transport routes such as a subway or a metro rail system. Lakes and rivers may be the only undeveloped areas within the city. The study of cities is covered extensively in human geography. "The city is a human habitat that allows people to form relations with others at various levels of intimacy while remaining entirely anonymous." (This definition was the subject of an exhibition at the Israeli pavilion at the 2000 Venice Biennale of architecture)

The difference between towns and cities

The difference between towns and cities is differently understood in different parts of the English speaking world. There is no one standard international definition of a city: the term may be used either for a town possessing city status; for an urban locality exceeding an arbitrary population size; for a town dominating other towns with particular regional economic or administrative significance. Although city can refer to an agglomeration including suburban and satellite areas, the term is not appropriate for a conurbation (cluster) of distinct urban places, nor for a wider metropolitan area including more than one city, each acting as a focus for parts of the area. In the United Kingdom, a city is a town which has been known as a city since time immemorial, or which has received city status by royal charter — which is normally granted on the basis of size, importance or royal connection (traditional pointers have been whether the town has a cathedral or a university). Some cathedral cities, for example St. David's in Wales, are quite small, and may not be known as cities in common parlance. (See the City status in the United Kingdom.) A similar system existed in the medieval Low Countries where a landlord would grant settlements certain privileges (city rights) that settlements without city rights didn't have. This include the privilege to put up city walls, hold markets or set up a judicial court. In Australia and New Zealand, city is used to refer both to units of local government, and as a synonym for urban area. For instance the [http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au City of South Perth] is part of the urban area known as Perth, commonly described as a city. On the other hand, Gisborne in New Zealand is known as the first city to see the sun, despite being administered by a district council, not a city council. An interesting phenomenon in American English is the generalisation of the term city to all settlements. Britons may be bemused by forms with fields headed, not Town and Postal code, but City and ZIP, even though the person needing to fill it in could be living in a city, a town without city status, or even a village or hamlet. In turn, many Americans often talk of "City Halls" when referring to town halls in quite small European towns and villages. Strangely, even though Americans are well aware that "village" means something smaller than a town, the word has often been co-opted by enterprising developers to make their projects sound welcoming and friendly. The result are so-called villages with 20 and 30-story high-rises, like Westwood Village in Los Angeles.

Geography

Westwood Village, of around 1550. The city is completely surrounded by a city wall and defensive canal. The square shape is inspired by Jerusalem.]] The geographies of cities, both physical and human, are diverse. Often cities will either be coastal and have a harbour or be situated near a river giving economic advantage. Water transports on rivers and oceans were (and in most cases still are) cheaper and more efficient than road transport over long distances. Older European cities often have historically intact central areas where the streets are jumbled together, seemingly without a structural plan. This quality is a legacy of earlier unplanned or organic development, and is often perceived by today's tourists to be picturesque. Modern city planning has seen many different schemes for how a city should look. The most commonly seen pattern is the grid, almost a rule in parts of the United States, and used for thousands of years in China. Derry was the first ever planned city in Ireland, begun in 1613, with the walls being completed 5 years later in 1618. The central diamond within a walled city with four gates was thought to be a good design for defence. The grid pattern chosen was subsequently much copied in the colonies of British North America [http://worldfacts.us/UK-Londonderry.htm]. However, the grid has been used for a long time in history. The Greeks gave their colonies around the Mediterranian often with a grid. One of the best examples around is the city of Priene. This city even had it's different districts. Much like modern city planning today. Also in de Medival times we see a preference for lineair planning. Good examples are the cities establish in the south of France by various rulers. And city expantions in old Dutch and Flanders cities. Other forms may include a radial structure in which main roads converge on a central point, often the effect of successive growth over long time with concentric traces of town walls and citadels - recently supplemented by ring-roads that take traffic around the edge of a town. Many Dutch cities are structured that way: a central square surrounded by a concentric canals. Every city expansion would imply a new circle (canals + town walls). In cities like Amsterdam and Haarlem this pattern is still clearly visible.

History of cities

Towns and cities have a long history, although opinions vary on whether any particular ancient settlement can be considered to be a city. The first true towns are sometimes considered to be large settlements where the inhabitants were no longer simply farmers of the surrounding area, but began to take on specialized occupations, and where to trade, food storage and power was centralized. Societies that live in cities are often called civilizations. By this definition, the first towns we know of were located in Mesopotamia, such as Ur, and along the Nile, the Indus Valley Civilization and China. Before this time it was rare for settlements to reach significant size, although there were exceptions such as Jericho, Çatalhöyük and Mehrgarh. The growth of ancient and medieval empires led to ever greater capital cities and seats of provincial administration, with ancient Rome, its eastern successor Constantinople and successive Chinese and later Indian capitals approaching or exceeding the half-million population level. It is estimated that ancient Rome population exceeded one million people by the end of the last century BCE, which is considered the only city to reach that number until the Industrial Revolution, however, Alexandria population was close to one million at the same time. Similar large administrative, commercial, industrial and ceremonial centres emerged in other areas, though on a smaller scale. During the European Middle Ages, a town was as much a political entity as a collection of houses. City residence brought freedom from customary rural obligations to lord and community: "Stadtluft macht frei" ("City air makes you free") was a saying in Germany. In Continental Europe cities with a legislature of their own wasn't unheard of, the laws for towns as a rule other than for the countryside, the lord of a town often being another than for surrounding land. In the Holy Roman Empire (i.e. medieval Germany and Italy) some cities had no other lord than the emperor. In exceptional cases like Venice, Genoa or Lübeck, cities themselves became powerful states, sometimes taking surrounding areas under their control or establishing extensive maritime empires. Similar phenomena existed elsewhere, as in the case of Sakai, which enjoyed a considerable autonomy in late medieval Japan. Most towns remained far smaller places, so that in 1500 only some two dozen places in the world contained more than 100,000 inhabitants: as late as 1700 there were fewer than forty, a figure which would rise thereafter to 300 in 1900. A small city of the early modern period might contain as few as 10,000 inhabitants, a town far fewer still. While the city-states, or poleis, of the Mediterranean and Baltic Sea languished from the 16th century, Europe's larger capitals benefited from the growth of commerce following the emergence of an Atlantic economy fuelled by the silver of Peru. By the 18th century, London and Paris rivalled the well-developed regionally-traditional capital cities of Baghdad, Beijing, Istanbul, Kyoto and Venice. The growth of modern industry from the late 18th century onward led to massive urbanization and the rise of new great cities, first in Europe and then in other regions, as new opportunities brought huge numbers of migrants from rural communities into urban areas. In the Great Depression of the 1930s cities were hard hit by unemployment, especially those with a base in heavy industry. Today the world's population is about half urban, with millions still streaming annually into the growing cities of Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Modern conceptions

Traditional approach

A universal linear approach to cities has been in place and accepted for a long time. As this approach falls short of explaining a number of aspects of city life, such as the diversity between cities, new ways have been sought. Influenced by post-structuralist thinking a new approach was born: using spatial thinking it is possible to not only fill the gaps, but indeed replace the old completely. Three characteristics have been identified as defining a city: the number of people to area (density), the networks of the city, as well as a particular way of life. None of these characteristics alone is enough to make a place a city. Until recently cities were almost exclusively viewed as part of a single, linear line of development. Starting with the Greek city-state, this linear approach placed each city somewhere, and it was believed that it was only a matter of time until the next stage along the prescript path of advancement was reached. For each stage an exemplar was identified. Step by step from Athens onwards to Venice and London, Los Angeles seemed to be the ultimate stage of a postmodern city. Such an approach regarded a city as a single static entity, which could be studied disconnected in time and space. This leads to a theoretical framework with little connection to real cities, but these were simply seen as less clear examples. In spite of apparent shortcomings, this approach is still very commonplace in respected and popular publications.

Shortcomings

Despite its wide acceptance this traditional approach to cities had serious shortcomings. Firstly, leaving the latest stage aside, it was completely eurocentric. It was believed that every city in the world could be compared with a past stage in the history of one European city. Secondly, there was no real explanation when and how changes occurred, how another stage in the line of development was achieved. There seemed no need to follow the changes of one city, but instead attention was turned to another exemplar. Thirdly, the disconnected view of cities is problematic. It implies that history, culture and connections of a place do not influence a place, which is questionable. Some thinkers argue that a history ignoring connections is necessary incomplete. Fourthly, the traditional approach failed to define what makes a city. It is unclear why one place is regarded as a city while another one is not. Lewis Mumford argued in 1937 for a social dimension, describing cities as geographical plexuses. Finally, viewing cities as a single body misses modern conceptions that there is more than one story to a place. The city of an aristocrat will surely differ from that of a slave. This also reflects a shift away from one single history of the powerful élites (often referred to as city élites) to a multidimensional perception of history. The notion of city rhythms has been introduced to highlight the different aspects of city life... The term city can be used to mean either an area of contiguous urbanization or a particular municipality (an [http://www.demographia.com/db-world-muni.htm area within the political borders of an incorporated municipality]). There is a substantial variation in municipalities around the world. The largest municipality, Chongqing, is approximately the same size as the state of Indiana and contains much more rural territory than continuous urbanization. In most cases, however, the continuous urbanization popularly thought of as the city extends well beyond the boundaries of the core incorporated city.

Modern approach

As a modern approach to cities, urban thinking analyzes various issues that arise in urban areas. It focuses largely upon connections and internal divisions which helps create a better understanding of the dynamics of cities. Using such spatial thinking, it is possible to understand various aspects for which the traditional approach did not provide an adequate explanation. One important aspect of spatial thinking is looking at the connections of a city. Such connections allow one to understand the unique character of a place. Rather than treating all cities the same, places are seen as interconnected through networks of culture, economics, trade or history. So while London and Tokyo are economically linked through stock markets, Graz and Stockholm are linked via the Cultural Capital of Europe. These networks overlap and are concentrated in cities. Arguably this concentration of networks creates a unique feeling of a place. Such networks, however, do not only link cities with cities, but also a city to its surroundings. The notion of a city footprint reflects the idea that a city on its own is not sustainable: it depends on produce from its surroundings, it needs trade links and other connections for economic viability. Looking at networks, it becomes possible to explain the rise and fall of cities. This has to do with the changing importance of connections and is maybe best illustrated with the arrival of Spanish colonizers in America. Within a short time, connections to Madrid became more important than connections to the former centre Tenochtitlán. The concentration of networks in cities can be used as an explanation of urbanization. It is the access to certain networks that attracts people. As various networks spatially run together in a confined area, people gather in cities. At the same time, this concentration of people means the introduction of new networks, such as social links, increasing the creation of new possibilities within cities. Urban social movements are a direct result of this possibility of making new connections. It is this openness to new connections that makes cities both attractive and to a certain degree unpredictable. Another important aspect of modern urban thinking is looking at the divisions within a city. This internal differentiation is linked to the external connections of a city. As places of meeting histories, cities are hybrid and heterogeneous. Hybrid they are as the connections which link places are bilateral, involving giving and taking in both directions. Heterogeneous they are because of the dynamism of cities. New encounters are ongoing processes where social relations and differences are constantly negotiated and shaped, reflecting the unequal power involved. Neither the internal differentiations nor the connections and networks of a place on their own define a city. Internal divisions are caused by external links, while at the same time connections to the outside open up the possibility of new social divisions. Divisions and connections in every city are intertwined, and only by considering both aspects of spatial thinking the complexity of cities is approachable. Immigration illustrates this interconnection of external networks and internal divisions well. The networks concentrated in the core of the city attract immigrants. As they immigrate, the newcomers bring along their histories, bringing new networks or enforcing existing ones. At the same time, their history offers opportunities to identify with or likewise exclude. Division and connection come hand in hand. Rather than attempting to eradicate such tensions and contradictions in the theoretical framework, modern urban thinking – influenced by poststructuralist thought – accounts for both sides. Static universal bodies are replaced by multidimensional networks, allowing for fluidity and dynamism.

Global cities

A global city, also known as a world city, is a prominent centre of trade, banking, finance, innovations, and markets. The term "global city", as opposed to megacity, was coined by Saskia Sassen in a seminal 1991 work. Whereas "megacity" refers to any city of enormous size, a global city is one of enormous power or influence. Global cities, according to Sassen, have more in common with each other than with other cities in their host nations. Bangkok, Beijing, Brussels, Chicago, Hong Kong, Johannesburg, London, Moscow, Mumbai, New York, Los Angeles, Paris, São Paulo, Seoul, Shanghai, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo, and Toronto are commonly referred to as global cities, however, the term is also applied to other cities. The notion of global cities regards the power of cities as contained within cities. The city is seen as a container where skills and resources are concentrated. The more successful city is able to concentrate more of these skills and resources. This makes the city itself more powerful in terms that it can influence what is happening around the world. Following this view of cities, it is possible to rank the world's cities hierarchically (John Friedmann and Goetz Wolff, "World City Formation: An Agenda for Research and Action," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 6, no. 3 (1982): 319.). Critics of the notion point out to the different realms of power. The term global city narrowly focuses on economics. Cities like Rome are powerful in religious terms. Additionally, it has been questioned whether the city itself can be regarded as an actor. In 1995 Kanter argued that successful cities can be identified by three elements. To be successful, a city needs to have good thinkers (concepts), good makers (competence) or good traders (connections). The interplay of these three elements, Kanter argued, means that good cities are not planned but managed.

Environmental effects

Modern cities are known for creating their own microclimates. This is due to the large clustering of hard surfaces that heat up in sunlight and that channel rainwater into underground ducts. As a result, city weather is often windier and cloudier than the weather in the surrounding countryside. Conversely, because these effects make cities warmer (urban heat shield or urban heat islands) than the surrounding area, tornadoes tend to go around cities. Additionally towns can cause significant downstream weather effects. Garbage and sewage are two major problems for cities, as is air pollution coming from internal combustion engines (see public transport). The impact of cities on places elsewhere, be it hinterlands or places far away, is considered in the notion of city footprinting (ecological footprint).

Inner city

Main article: Inner city In the United States, United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland, the term "inner city" is sometimes used with the connotation of being an area, perhaps a ghetto, where people are less educated and wealthy and where there is more crime. These connotations are less common in other Western countries, as deprived areas are located in varying parts of other Western cities. In fact, with the gentrification of some formerly run-down central city areas the reverse connotation can apply - in Australia the term "outer suburban" applied to a person implies a lack of sophistication. For instance, in Paris the inner city is the richest part of the metropolitan area, where housing is the most expensive, and where elites and high-income individuals dwell. The United States, in particular, suffers from a culture of anti-urbanism that some say dates back as far as Thomas Jefferson who wrote that "The mobs of great cities add just so much to the support of pure government as sores do to the strength of the human body." On the businessmen who brought manufacturing industry into cities and hence increased the population density necessary to supply the workforce, he wrote "the manufactures of the great cities... have begotten a depravity of morals, a dependence and corruption, which renders them an undesirable accession to a country whose morals are sound." Modern anti-urban attitudes are to be found in America in the form of a planning profession that continues to develop land on a low-density suburban basis, where access to amenities, work and shopping is provided almost exclusively by car rather than on foot. However, there is a growing movement in North America called "New Urbanism" that calls for a return to traditional city planning methods where mixed-use zoning allows people to walk from one type of land-use to another. The idea is that housing, shopping, office space, and leisure facilities are all provided within walking distance of each other, thus reducing the demand for road-space and also improving the efficiency and effectiveness of mass transit.

References

- Toynbee, Arnold (ed), Cities of Destiny, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967. Pan historical/geographical essays, many images. Starts with "Athens", ends with "The Coming World City-Ecumenopolis".

External links

- [http://www.populationdata.net/palmaresvilles.html All 1M+ major urban areas]
- [http://www.p.lodz.pl/I35/personal/jw37/EUROPE/europe.html Place Names of Europe]
- [http://www.tageo.com/index.htm Place Names of the world - Index of 2M cities]
- [http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/geo_lar_cit&int=-1&b_ac=1 Most populous city of each country]
- [http://www.world-gazetteer.com/st/statb.htm For all countries, number of cities per size category]
- [http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/geo_lar_cit_pop_cap&int=-1 For each country, part of its population that lives in its most populous city] (with some odd figures due to the comparison of data of different years)
- [http://www.nlc.org/nlc_org/site/ The National League of Cities] (United States)
- [http://www.innercitypress.org Inner City Press] (Weekly publication on cities, United States)
- [http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv1-52 Dictionary of the History of ideas:] The City
- [http://www.morganquitno.com/cit05list.htm Morgan Quinto's 11th Annual America's Safest (and Most Dangerous) Cities]
- [http://www.skyscraperpage.com A friendly website designed by skyscraper enthusiasts featuring diagrams and descriptions of the buildings of cities around the world.]
- [http://www.bifurcaciones.cl bifurcaciones.cl, urban cultural studies journal]
- [http://worldheritage-forum.net/de/ Worldheritage-Forum] Weblog and Informationen on UNESCO World Heritage topics (with focus on cities) Category:Urban studies and planning Category:Cities ja:都市 ja:市 nb:By simple:city th:เมือง

Colonization

Colonisation (or colonization) is the act where life forms move into a distant area where their kind is sparse or not yet existing at all and set up new settlements in the area. Colonisation applies to all life forms in a sense though it is most often used in reference to insects and humans. Insect colonisation varies from species to species though it most often involves a queen setting out from its parent colony and establishing a colony of her own at a suitable location. Human colonisation is not to be confused with colonialism or imperialism, as colonisation is a broader category, encompassing all large-scale immigrations of an established population to a 'new' location, and expansion of their civilisation into this area. This process may or may not victimise an indigenous population (depending first on whether there is any indigenous population to victimise).

Historical Colonisations

Classical Period

In ancient times, maritime nations such as the city-states of Greece often established colonies. These appear to have been more benign, emphasising the farming of uninhabited land. In classical times, land suitable for farming was often claimed by migratory "barbarian tribes" who lived by hunting and gathering. To ancient civilised people, the land simply appeared vacant. Another great colonisation of ancient times was that of the Romans. The Roman Empire conquered a large part of western Europe, north Africa and west Asia. Though in North Africa and west Asia they were often conquering civilised peoples, as they moved north into Europe they often encountered little more than rural tribes with very little in the way of cities. In these areas, waves of Roman colonisation often followed the conquest of the area. Many of the current great cities of Europe began as Roman colonies, such as the German city Köln (better known in its French form Cologne), which was originally called Colonia Claudia by the Romans; and the British capital city of London which the Romans began as Londinium.

Middle Ages

The decline and collapse of the Roman Empire saw (and was partly caused by) the large scale movement of people in eastern Europe and Asia. This is largely seen as beginning with nomadic horsemen from Asia moving into the richer pasture land to the west and so forcing the people there to move further west and so on until eventually the Franks and their ilk were forced to invade the Roman Empire beginning the Dark Ages. The dark ages saw the large scale movement of peoples establishing new colonies all over western Europe, the events of this time saw the development of many of the modern day nations of Europe such as the Huns colonising Hungary, the Franks in France and Germany and the Anglo-Saxons in England. Another great colonising people were the Vikings of Scandinavia. The Vikings are best known as raiders, setting out from their original homes in Denmark, southern Norway and southern Sweden to pillage the coastlines of northern Europe and it is as this they mostly began however as time went by the Vikings moved more onto trade rather then raiding and established colonies again many of which exist as cities today e.g. York, Novogrod and Dublin. It was also the Vikings who first discovered Iceland establishing colonies here before moving onto Greenland where they briefly held colonies before the world's climate took a turn for the worse forcing them out. There is even very strong evidence that the Vikings launched a unsuccessful attempt at colonising a area known as Vinland which is often placed on Newfoundland or the surrounding coastline of Canada.

'Colonial Era'

1492 marked the discovery of the Americas by modern Europeans and it was not long after this that Castile began the conquest of South America and the Caribbean. However, western colonisation has its roots in Portuguese trips, these Portuguese went from Lisbon to the Cape of Good Hope before reaching India in 1498. Originally there was very little colonisation other than the soldiers and adventurers who had came to these areas seeking wealth (many of whom returned to Europe as rich men) however as time went by and the natives began to die out via the new disease pool of Europe and oppression by cruel landlords leaving a lot of vacant space open for colonisation by Europeans. Despite this the Spanish mode of colonisation still mostly consisted of young men who found native wives leading to the creation of a hybrid native/European culture. The 17th century saw other European nations beginning to colonise the Americas (mainly the Netherlands, France and England however many other nations attempted colonies) and these Europeans largely saw conventional movements of families into new lands. The desire for labour in the Americas by the various European nations also led to the booming of the African slave trade leading to black 'colonisation' of the Americas- today this is especially apparent in the Caribbean where the largest ethnic group is of African descent. The age of Imperialism in the 19th century saw much colonisation by the European powers in Australasia and Africa. Current debates on colonization and human rights (Falk 2000) raise questions about the notion of benign colonialism. The dominant language, culture and values of colonizers imposed on colonised peoples is often narrated as salutary. Dominant social and cultural institutions contributed to facilitating the entry of indigenous peoples trapped in unsustainable subsistence economies into a more progressive socio-economic reality. Previously colonised peoples claim that the colonization process resulted in a parallel process of the colonization of the minds of indigenous peoples. The process of decolonization of memory (Ricoeur 1980), history and the spirit is crucial for the social inclusion (OECD) of indigenous peoples and nations within nations, such as Canada.

Modern colonisation

Modern immigration may be referred to as a new type of colonisation, depending on the extent to which immigrants seek to preserve and extend the habits of the civilisation they have left, rather than adopting those of the civilisation now inhabited. Many countries have legal regimes established with the goal of preventing this. Science policy colonization (Weingart and Mouton (2004) refers to the rising influence of scientific experts from developed democracies on governance and policy-making in emerging democracies. In this period of mega-science projects such as those examining the impact of bio-engineering and climate change, the role of emerging or developing democracies may be reduced to collectors or harvesters of raw data. Outside researchers are more likely to perform the key roles of processing, analysing, interpreting, drawing conclusions and recommendations. These results are then published, reported and disseminated as unbiased scientific results. There are concerns that these outside (or inside) discipline-specific experts either from or trained in more advanced democracies, may harbour unchallenged assumptions about development policies that run counter to the best interests of emerging democracies such as South Africa (Weingart and Mouton (2004). There are also concerns (UNESCO 1999) that the accountability mechanisms imposed on knowledge experts are inadequate. There is a threat therefore that scientific or knowledge experts may act as the next generation colonizing force using data gathered in developing countries as raw resource to the detriment of the science-policy-colonised peoples and the benefit of more developed nations.

Expatriates

In some cases, expatriate communities do set up permanently in target countries, which is a 'truer' colonisation, though in many cases (especially when not gathered into a community) expatriates do not necessarily seek to 'expand their native civilisation', but rather to integrate into the population of the new civilisation.

Guest workers

Many nations also have large numbers of guest workers. Though they have little power - the guest worker or contractor can be removed at any time for any reason, in most countries - they remain "colonists" in the strict sense of biology. Many human colonists came to colonies as slaves, so the legal power to leave or remain may not be the issue so much as the actual presence of the people in the new country.

Managers

The IMF, World Bank, and commodity markets are often cited as being responsible for a new kind of colonising in which managers, professionals, and marketers may move around from place to place but populations remain in place, helpless to resist movements of valuable goods and capital. Some consider this use of the term to refer more to forms of colonialism than to actual colonisation, as peoples don't move permanently, but only a small number of people move to a target region temporarily, take what they want, deal for more, and leave. This is more akin to tourism, looting or raiding than it is to actual colonisation.

"Coca-Cola colonisation"

This term is used for the erosion of a country's indigenous culture and its replacement with corporate mass-culture, usually taken to be American in origin (see cultural imperialism). This is more metaphorical usage as people need not move, only cultural signals of various kinds.

Ocean colonization

The hypothetical permanent habitation of locations in Earth's oceans is called ocean colonisation. Related ideas such as the floating city are much less hypothetical - funds are presently being sought to build several large ships that would have permanent populations of up to 50,000 people each.

Space colonisation

In science fiction, space colonisation is sometimes more benign. Humans find an uninhabited planet, and inhabit it. In more recent science fiction, they may create inhabitable space (by terraforming or constructing a space habitat) and call that a "colony." On the other hand, if the planet is already inhabited, much less benign consequences ensue: indeed, some science fiction authors have used the colonisation of alien planets by humans, or the colonisation of Earth by aliens, to explore the real-world issues surrounding the phenomenon. Such works include those of Mary Doria Russell, Arrow and Children of God. Space colonisation seems to have become more plausible in today's age, as the process of terraforming could theoretically be used to create a breathable atmosphere.

Galactic colonisation

The ultimate expression of this view is the Kardashev scale which assumes that a single dominant intelligent species is fated to take over all energy on one planet, then one star, then a whole galaxy full of stars. However, this is not necessarily so if in time other species would be discovered during a galactic expansion which would also require the need for sharing the galactic space with other species.

References

Category:Colonialism als:Landnahme The Sexual Victimization of Native American Women

Overseas territory

:Overseas territory redirects here. Alternative meaning: territoire d'outre-mer (French overseas territory). A United Kingdom overseas territory (formerly known as a dependent territory or earlier as a crown colony) is a territory that is under the sovereignty and formal control of the United Kingdom but is not part of the United Kingdom proper (almost exclusively Great Britain and Northern Ireland). However, the term "crown colony" is still utilised when referring to the Falkland Islands, British Antarctic Territory, and Gibraltar. Overseas territories should be distinguished from crown dependencies (such as the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, which have a different constitutional relationship with the United Kingdom), and protectorates (which were not formally under the sovereignty of the United Kingdom). They should also not be confused with Commonwealth realms, which are independent states sharing the same sovereign as the United Kingdom. At one time, most crown colonies were directly administered by officials appointed by the British government. Today, however, most overseas territories are self-governing colonies, only relying on the UK for defence, foreign affairs, and some trade issues. Overseas territories have never been considered integral parts of the United Kingdom, and have never had representation in the British Parliament, on the grounds that they are separate jurisdictions. This is in contrast to other European countries, such as France, Denmark, and the Netherlands, whose dependencies have varying degrees of integration with their so-called 'mother countries'. Only in Malta was integration ever seriously considered by the British Government, in 1955, but this was later abandoned, while in Gibraltar it was rejected outright by the British government in 1976 (however, Gibraltarians vote in the elections to the European Parliament as part of the UK). Successive British governments have argued against integration, to the effect that it is not an appropriate alternative to the status quo or that it is not a modern form of existence, instead advocating the concept of 'partnership'. Queen Elizabeth II is head of state in the overseas territories in her role as Queen of the United Kingdom, not in right of each territory. This contrasts with independent realms of the Commonwealth of Nations, such as Canada or Australia, where the Queen has a separate and distinct role in each realm as "Queen of Canada" or "Queen of Australia". Each territory has a Governor (formally appointed by the Queen), who acts as a representative of the UK government. Unlike Governors-General in Commonwealth realms, the Governor may have real power, and is in charge of the territory's internal security matters, as well as acting as a delegate between the territory and the British government. Governors possess the power to dissolve the legislature and must give assent to all laws. Depending on the stage of the colony's evolution (see Stages of colonial evolution) these may be only exercised in a symbolic capacity. The Governor is usually from the United Kingdom. UK government policy on overseas territories is set out in the 1999 White Paper [http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1018028164839 Partnership for Progress and Prosperity: Britain and the Overseas Territories]. Over the years, colonial governments have evolved in stages, with the intent being eventual independence from the United Kingdom. Colonies with tiny populations rarely evolve beyond stage one.
Stages of colonial evolution
# In the first stage, there is no elected government of any sort. A governor, administrator or commissioner and a group of advisors run the affairs of the colony single-handedly. # In the second stage, a small elected legislature, usually called the legislative council, is founded. From the legislature, the governor appoints an executive council that the governor chairs. The highest ranking bureaucrat is known as the chief secretary. # In the third stage the legislature becomes larger, and political parties usually begin to appear. The cabinet is led by a Chief Minister, who is the leader of the majority party in parliament. The governor's powers are weakened, and deal mostly with foreign affairs and economic issues, while the elected government controls most "domestic" concerns. # In the fourth stage the Chief Minister becomes known as the Premier, and by this time virtually all executive authority has been delegated from the governor. At this stage or possibly the third stage, such a state may be described as a self-governing colony. The colony may be given 'Associated Statehood', as in the case of Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Saint Lucia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, and Saint Vincent, before they were granted full independence. # The final stage is complete sovereignty and independence from the United Kingdom. The Premier becomes the Prime Minister, and the Governor becomes a Governor General. The new nation only maintains superficial ties to the UK as a Commonwealth Realm, with the British monarch as head of state and (in some cases) the Privy Council as the highest court of appeal. This was originally known as Dominion status, and after 1931 did not include control of foreign affairs or defence policy. Canada was the the first to achieve Dominion status and served as the prototype for devolution elsewhere (Australia, New Zealand). That term has fallen into disuse for reasons of political correctness, and no longer applies to Canada since the 1982 Constitution, which repatriated powers above and beyond those already devolved through the previous Dominion status. The country remains a crown realm and part of the Commonwealth. Most other countries have become republics after independence, as a sort of sixth step, in which constitutional amendments are passed removing the British monarch as Head of State. India was the first country to become a republic while remaining in the Commonwealth, recognising the British monarch as "Head of the Commonwealth". This set a precedent for most other former British colonies, which have since become republics within the Commonwealth. Alternatively, some Commonwealth countries may choose to immediately become a republic upon independence, as did Cyprus, Zambia, the Seychelles and Zimbabwe, or have its own monarchy, like Malaya (now reformed as Malaysia). The fact that many colonies quickly abolished the monarchy after becoming independent made this "automatic" republican status common in the 70's and 80's. Since the process of decolonisation began in the 1960s, steps have been made to remove colonial reference to overseas territories. In 1983, all colonies were known as dependent territories, which later officially became overseas territories in 2002. Even though the nomenclature usually has little effect on the government of these territories, these definitions have implications on British overseas citizenship and immigration in those territories. For example, the British Nationality Act 1981 explicitly redefines citizenship of the United Kingdom and Colonies as: :# British citizenship; :# British Dependent Territories citizenship; and :# British Overseas citizenship, effective 1 January 1983. The Act had been superseded by the British Overseas Territories Act 2002 which granted full British citizenship to all British overseas territories.

Colony

Definitions

History

Colonies in ancient civilizations (examples)

Recent colonies (examples)

Politics

A natural state

Early history

Definitions

Political power

Authority and legitimacy

Traditional

Charismatic

Legal-rational

References

See also

State

Introduction

Etymology

Formation of the state

International point of view

The domestic point of view

Philosophies of the state

See also

References

External links

City

Introduction

The difference between towns and cities

Geography

History of cities

Modern conceptions

Traditional approach

Shortcomings

Modern approach

Global cities

Environmental effects

Inner city

See also

Lists

Miscellaneous

References

External links

Colonization

Historical Colonisations

Classical Period

Middle Ages

'Colonial Era'

Modern colonisation

Expatriates

Guest workers

Managers

"Coca-Cola colonisation"

Ocean colonization

Space colonisation

Galactic colonisation

See also

References

Overseas territory

Stages of colonial evolution