Immigration on such a scale as today has never happened before where people go to live in a country's existing infastructure. This is a new phenomenon (sp?) This is not how cultures work.
No, it had happened before, many times in history.
Consider the mass emigration of Jews into then almost-exclusively Arab Ottoman Palestine in the late 19th and early 20th century. Or the mass migration of Tamils into Sri Lanka or Nepalese into Sikkim, or of South Asians into Indian Ocean and Pacific islands, and places like Malaysia and Singapore (partly as a result of British policy of the time).
Also consider colonisation. In Australia, parts of Africa, and the Americas, the indigenous culture was superceded by the immigrant culture brought in by large movement of people. For earlier examples, think back to Turkish (from Central Asia) or Arab immigration in the Middle East in medieval times, Chinese immigration to South East Asia in the Ming and Qing dynasties, the Germanic Mass Migration into Roman territory, et cetera.
In all of these cases the immigrants came to live in areas with established indigenous population. The cultural mix of the area changes slowly over time, and, in these examples, the immigrant culture eventually became dominant, but usually incorporates many aspects of the indigenous culture. And that is how culture had been throughout history. It spreads, and changes as it does. And it spreads in most cases by immigration.
A bit off topic now, but some people use this as an example to show that multiculturalism doesn't work. And, in a sense, it doesn't in the long run, since usually one culture eventually gain prominence over others. However, I see multiculturalism as a useful concept in an interconnected world. It all comes down to respect or, at least, tolerance for other cultures.
And if your trying to say people didn't resist to cultural extermination in the past you are wrong. I'm not going to stand by and die slowly like a toad getting boiled and be, "supressed," as you put it, simply because it has happened before. People have been run over before but I'm pretty sure you look both ways before you cross the road...
For ANY foreign peoples to hold such Rasputin-like power over us, to an extent where we are bound to do as they wish, I naturally dislike it. I've said this before. All people have naturally disliked this throughout history, until the post-WW2 era where a form of indocrination has taken place.
So, what do you want to do? You talk as if different cultures are somehow perpetually at war.
I see culture as something complex, something that is naturally in competition with other cultures, but paradoxically can co-exist with them, and something that changes. That people dislike change in culture is understandable, but stopping change would only result in change, and in the end you can't please everybody.
You say you dislike foreigners holding "Rasputin-like power" over you. What about if it's people of your culture and not foreigners? Natives or foreigners, it all come down to a totalitarian society.
I would care however, if the whole town I've lived in all my life turned Chinese. This would give me no say in anything in my own town, few places of worship, at the mercy of foreign peoples, at the rule of foreign peoples, with no place to get the type of food (silly example,) I used to have, etc.
But what the heck, if wiping every single last western-Europeans has been going on for thousands of years, I'll sit back and take it. (???????????)
Maybe you should start looking into
(dare I say it) multiculturalism. If everyone is serious about multiculturalism and what's it's about (tolerance and co-existence) then a scenario like the one you describe would not happen.
You are being unnecessarily extreme. Wiping out whole cultures in a short period of time is not possible, except via nuclear holocaust or wholesale genocide. And just because you live in a place where another culture is dominant doesn't necessarily make your life hell.
