Andrelvis said:
I would like that only pops from national cultures be able to move to colonies. Historically only national pops were permitted to colonize regions.
I'd disagree with your point, since there are many examples of colonial regimes that had no problem allowing 'non-national' settlers into the colonies.
For example, in Algeria the French had no problem allowing poor Spanish and Italian immigrants settle there, to the point that Spanish and Italian immigrants actually outnumbered the French in Algeria by 1890, and the French administration ended up passing laws shortly after 1900 IIRC that made the children of Spanish or Italian immigrants automatically "French" and greatly reduced barriers to allow the parents to "naturalize" themselves as French citizens.
Most of the British colonies in Sub-Saharan Africa had no bars whatsoever from what I have read, with the result that in several colonies communities in West Africa of Middle Eastern (mostly Lebanese) merchants came to settle and fill a niche in the colonial economies that neither Africans nor English were filling. And those peoples were not originally part of the British Empire.
Meanwhile in Southeast Asia neither the British in Malaya-Singapore or the Dutch in Indonesia made more than brief limits to halt the growth of Chinese migration from Southern China into Southeast Asia. The process had begun much earlier than the 19th C, but since it was useful to the colonial regimes in Jakarta-Batavia and Singapore, for the most part importation of "coolie" labor was not just allowed, but at times encouraged.
