Throughout history there are examples where historically stable societies are preyed upon by outside and aggressive newcomers who desire to take over the land, resources, and space occupied by the local residents. European conquests seem to be a continuous fact of life, as well as what we have seen with the the age colonization, imperial conquests, etc. More "advanced" societies take over local groups, decimate them by direct conflict, and by sharing diseases the locals have no immunity to, among other strategies.
In general, the displaced cultures are not completely eliminated, but are reduced in number and moved into some smaller portion of the lands they held when first contact occurred. (As an example, the American Indians moved onto reservations.) In time their cultures and number recover to some extent, and with time the attitudes of the aggressor society can change and modify into something like accommodation, if not the recognition of the displaced group with possibly restitution in some way (financial payments to descendents of the original inhabitants, granting of casino licenses, and more).
During my recent tour through Scotland and Ireland I was reminded of the historical past, esp. with respect to British attitudes towards these areas and cultures, and how the past has shaped the current political and social climates of the two regions. We learn about these things in grade school when we study European history, but seeing them in person, accompanied by a Tour Director who spelled out the history of each and every place visited with the names and dates of those participating, with short and long term consequences noted, it became a living history as seen through the eyes of those who were there so many years ago.
OK, great introduction, Desmond, but what is the Big Question hiding behind all this rhetoric and nostalgia? The sequence of events that have created the world we live in today are all too familiar: exploration, colonization, exploitation, colonial independence from their European origins, expansion of territory, elimination of native inhabitants, and so on. This all seems to be historical fact based on hindsight, at least with respect to colonial activity in "the New World", meaning north, central, and south America specifically. British, Spanish, and Portuguese colonial activities shaped our current world, and they all followed the same general pattern just described.
Philosophically, the issue may be about the one-sided domination of native cultures, and the lack of respect and accommodation that might have occurred if the colonial powers had used a different approach. I looked up the history of the Moriori, one of the more pacifistic cultures the world has produced, who agreed to work peacefully and cooperatively with the invading group into their islands, and were summarily exterminated by them. Pacificism doesn't seem to always work, it seems. Could colonizing cultures have worked in a different manner that recognized locals, respected them, and worked with them in some form of harmony? I admit, it is hard to imagine this happening. There are certainly very few examples offered by history.
Come prepared to discuss your favorite example of cultural replacement, sharing perspectives from both sides of the process. Is cultural expansion a norm in the societies we live in? Was it true in the past but not today? Will it always be true?