Summary of the Argument of The Invention of the White Race1 by its author, Theodore W. Allen (Part One)
quote: 34. "When the first Africans arrived in Virginia in 1619, there were no white people there." If philology is granted its dominion, certain incidental items in the record appear significant in regard to this brash assertion on the jacket blurb of Volume One of The Invention of the White Race.50 35. English ship captain Richard Jobson made a trading voyage to Africa in 1620-21, but he refused to engage in trafficking in human beings, because, he said, the English "were a people who did not deal in any such commodities, neither did we buy or sell one another or any that had our own shapes." When the local dealer insisted that it was the custom there so sell Africans "to white men," Jobson answered "they [that is "white men"] were another kinde of people from us...."51 George Fox, founder of the Quaker religion, in 1671 addressed some members of a Barbados congregation as "you that are called white."52 Another seventeenth-century commentator, Morgan Godwyn, found it necessary to explain to the English at home that, in Barbados, "white" was "the general name for Europeans."53 Even a century later, a historian writing in Jamaica for readers in England, felt impelled to supply a like parenthetical clarification: "...white people (as they are called here)."54 Winthrop D.Jordan, author of White Over Black found that, "After about 1680, taking the colonies as a whole, a new term appeared--white." During my own study of page after page of Virginia county records, reel after reel of microfilm prepared by the Virginia Colonial Records Project, and other seventeenth-century sources, I have found no instance of the official use of the word "white" as a token of social status before its appearance in a Virginia law passed in 1691, referring to "English or other white women."55 When considered in the context of events, these linguistic details are seen to reflect the reality of social relations as they existed in the seventeenth-century Chesapeake.
Class Struggle and the Origin of Racial Slavery: The Invention of the White Race Theodore W. Allen Edited, with an introduction by, Jeffrey B. Perry ISBN 978-0-9792337-3-9
Click here for order form
Foreword by Michael Zweig Racial distinctions in U.S. society, and the racism that accompanies them, continue to be integral parts of the American experience more than 100 years after W.E.B. DuBois identified “the color line” as the most significant social feature of the United States. Even within the complex racial and ethnic dynamics that have developed in the United States since the immigration reform of 1965 opened the door to millions of Latino and Asian newcomers, the question of racism directed at African-Americans carries special weight.
This is so not just because millions of African-Americans continue to be adversely affected. As Ted Allen shows in this pamphlet, the system of racial oppression in the United States, rooted in African-American slavery, was organized to discipline and suppress European as well as African labor, and has from the beginning had profound and contradictory consequences for European-Americans. For almost the whole of American history, this system of social control has effectively derailed working class unity. And it continues to shape controversies surrounding the arrival and absorption of new “minorities” to this day.
Ted Allen was a pioneer thinker and historian on these matters. Jeffrey B. Perry, Allen’s literary executor, has written and introduction for this pamphlet and prepared a slightly edited form of the text, according to Allen’s instruction. Jeff Perry is editor of A Hulbert Harrison Reader (Wesleyan University Press, 2001) and author of a two-volume biography of Harrison, forthcoming from Columbia University Press. He is the Treasurer of Local 300, National Postal Mail Handlers Union [New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut], div. of Laborers International Union of North America (LIUNA).
The Center for Study of Working Class Life is pleased to bring back the original 1975 article, long out of print. This work by Ted Allen has had a profound effect on the scholarship of race and class in the United States. As we continue to grapple with racism and the legacies of “whiteness” as a category of social control, it deserves renewed study and critical evaluation.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: GEORGE FOX
quote: From Summary by Ted Allen: 51 George Fox, founder of the Quaker religion, in 1671 addressed some members of a Barbados congregation as "you that are called white."52 Another seventeenth-century commentator, Morgan Godwyn, found it necessary to explain to the English at home that, in Barbados, "white" was "the general name for Europeans."53 Even a century later, a historian writing in Jamaica for readers in England, felt impelled to supply a like parenthetical clarification: "...white people (as they are called here)."54 Winthrop D.Jordan, author of White Over Black found that, "After about 1680, taking the colonies as a whole, a new term appeared--white." During my own study of page after page of Virginia county records, reel after reel of microfilm prepared by the Virginia Colonial Records Project, and other seventeenth-century sources, I have found no instance of the official use of the word "white" as a token of social status before its appearance in a Virginia law passed in 1691, referring to "English or other white women."
IT’S MY CONTENTION THAT EUROPE WAS RULED BY A BLACK AND COLOURED ELITE (1500-1789). THEY WERE A FIXED MULATTO RACE. TODAY WE ARE SHOWN WHITENED FAKES OR PORTRAITS WHICH ARE JUST IN BETWEEN.
Without starting a new topic I like to say that this discussion reminds me of similar processes as the existence of the Black Dutch: the Black European immigrants who arrived in America in the 17th century. Mike Nassau wrote an Internet article about Black Dutch (Deutsch) and Black Irish. What makes this highly interesting to me is that there were Blacks or at least Black looking people coming from Europe who were not to be treated as the enslaved Africans. And that later on people claimed descent from these Black Dutch to escape slavery or not be treated and segregated as if they were ‘n*gg*rs.’
Some might argue that as long as people are not SSA looking, they are okay! Some even believe those people to be Whites! Rhett Jones (2003: 257-285) writes about coloured American communities as Freejacks, Cape Verdians, Lumbee and Black Seminoles; which had visible Black, Indian and White admixture but under pressure of racism decided to regard themselves as White’s. I guess that they would make sure that the more White looking ones were given front seats.
I’m further reminded of some people of Aruba, a former Dutch colony, who seem to consider themselves White and would for example frown on Aruban women with braided hairstyles. I guess that women with frizzy hair are expected to straighten the kinkiness out. They even deny having any Black ancestors and a slave great-grandmother is sometimes regarded as shameful. Perhaps they also fear the lost of tourism from certain Americans. This I did not fully research but relied on information of people who regularly visit Aruba.
Some of it consistent with what I find in my research about colonial Surinam. But Surinamese have strong and proud traditions around slavery and nobody tries to hide slave ancestors.
Egmond Codfried Holland
source: ODR.org
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
An Interview with Theodore W. Allen by Jonathan Scott and Gregory Meyerson
QUESTION: How did you arrive at "social control" as a conceptual framework through which the origins of racial oppression could be analyzed and understood?
T.A.: A short answer is "doesn't everybody?"--doesn't every "political scientist" understand that the first principle of "governance" is the maintenance of social control? My book is simply a study of the history of governance as instituted by the ruling class of colonizing powers, particularly, the English and Anglo-American plantation bourgeoisie. I offer the following summary argument of the matter. In regard to those class societies that I have had a chance to study, in connection with research for The Invention of the White Race, and also those in regard to which I have merely relied upon studies made by other scholars, the following generalization seems justified:1 In such class societies there is the ruling class, that part of society which, having established its control of the organs of state power, and having maintained domination of the economy through successive generations and crises, is able to limit the options of social policy in such a way as to perpetuate its hegemony over the society as a whole. Being itself economically non-productive, the ruling class is optimally a small numerical proportion of the society. Therefore, the maintenance of state power in the form of military forces and their attendant bureaucracy is an indispensable condition for the continued dominance of the ruling class. Reliance on force alone, however, is ill-advised. Military forces, being economically unproductive,2 must be compensated by deductions from the gross social resources; therefore, the greater the reliance on the military, the greater this unproductive outlay. Secondly, such reliance on military force for social control tends to political destabilization through military coups conducted with or without the connivance of other partisan factions.3 It is for these same reasons that the ruling class, in effect, commissions an intermediate buffer social control stratum, classically composed of self-employed small land-owners or leaseholders, self-employed artisans, and members of the professions, who live in relative economic security, and in social subordination to the ruling class and normally in day-to-day contact with their social inferiors. This is a far less expensive bulwark of ruling-class power than mere military force. Finally, at the bottom of the social pyramid are those devoid of productive wealth (except their ability to work), who constitute the majority of the population, and whose general condition of extreme dependency and insecurity is essential for the purposes of the ruling class. That provides a rational basis for explaining the phenomenon of class oppression; but how can the social structure characteristic of racial oppression be explained in terms consistent with this theory of class rule? That simple question contains the alpha and omega of the struggle for a consistent theory of United States history. If white supremacism was brought to these shores as an inborn trait from England, the fundamental nature of the society established here, and the interpretation of its historical development, cannot be analyzed in terms of class differences. How can racial oppression,4 with its implicit denial of the significance of social class distinctions, be explained in terms that conform to the simple class theory of bourgeois social control as schematized in the paragraphs above? That is the essence of the issue I sought to address in this work. My study of the historical record of the colonial period in Ireland as well as in Anglo-America led to the understanding of the invention of the "white" race--not as the outcome of some inherent pre-disposition, a "need to know they were white," as Jordan puts it--but as a bourgeois social control formation, inclusive not merely of the upper and the intermediate social classes, but of the very "white" workers who were themselves the subjects of class exploitation. The essence of the analysis can be stated thus: Where the particular pattern of the establishment and conduct of a colonial economy resulted in a critical attenuation and weakening of the presumptive intermediate social stratum; or, as in the Anglo-American continental plantation colonies, where the colonial economy created a mass of non-essential labor that could not be absorbed into the ranks of a normal middle stratum, the ruling class resorted to racial oppression. Under this form of social organization, capitalist exploitation of labor is intensified, while the potential social control problem that might arise from the combined resistance of the propertyless classes is addressed by: 1) recruiting a strictly defined portion of the laboring classes into the intermediate social control stratum by a conferring on them a system of anomalous privileges vis-a-vis all members of the excluded group; and, concomitantly, 2) by denying to all members of the excluded group, propertyless or otherwise, the normal social distinctions characteristic of class systems.5 Thus there was created an anomalous all-class social control formation, the Protestants as the "Protestant Ascendancy" in Ireland,6 and the "white race" in continental Anglo-America. This undeniable fact of life presents the greatest obstacle to "the ascendancy of the working classes"7 in the United States, and to the most basic premise of the theory of it.
Robert Deveraux: When one is familiar with the concept, its easy to recognize black portraits.
I have introduced a new approach to looking at portraits, where the personal description leads to the identification of true and false portraits.
I have introduced the concept of 'Whitened' portraits of persons who are described as coloured: Black, brown, basané, chimney sweep, not the white hands, swarthy, etc
I have stated that some authentic portraits are repainted to hide black or brown skin colour, they are over paints.
I have said that some authentic portraits were copied to make the person appear White.
Then I have found that persons ordered White portraits themselves for propagandistic reasons, because of a fashion for the Greek Ideal, connected with the white-makeup and blond wig fashion, or because the black looks of the elite which signalled Blue blood, came under fire. ==================================================
Robert Deveraux, a lover of Elizabeth I.
This looks to me like an over paint of an authentic Black painting, which showed his black complexion. Its a whitened fake, of a authentic portrait. The visible dark under painting would in this case not be the legitimate technique, but a complete detailed face. This is how the revisionist concept of a White dominated Europe and White supremacy was created. ===========================================================
Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex (10 November 1566 – 25 February 1601), a favourite of Queen Elizabeth I of England, is the best-known of the many holders of the title "Earl of Essex." He was a military hero and royal favourite, but following a poor campaign against Irish rebels during the Nine Years War in 1599, he defied the Queen and was executed for treason.
Robert Deveraux: When one is familiar with the concept, its easy to recognize black portraits.
Robert Deveraux, a lover of Elizabeth I.
Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex (10 November 1566 – 25 February 1601), a favourite of Queen Elizabeth I of England, is the best-known of the many holders of the title "Earl of Essex." He was a military hero and royal favourite, but following a poor campaign against Irish rebels during the Nine Years War in 1599, he defied the Queen and was executed for treason.
The Drake Jewel(1575): Another image of Blackness connected with Elizabeth I.
She gave her whitened miniature, the Sphinx Portrait to her admirer Sir Drake, and he made a suitable encasement, with a Moor symbolising Africa and black superiority, dominating the profile of a White woman: Europe.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
Sir Thomas, Lord Fairfax 1612-1671; named ‘Black Tom’
Leading Parliamentarian general of the First and Second Civil Wars and Lord-General of the New Model Army. Refused to fight against Charles II in the Third Civil War and supported the Restoration.
Thomas Fairfax was born at Denton Hall, near Otley, Yorkshire, on 17 January 1612, the eldest son of Ferdinando, 2nd Lord Fairfax.
Known as "Black Tom" for his dark complexion, Sir Thomas gained a reputation as a gallant and courageous commander in the struggle to control Yorkshire — but his fortunes were mixed. In March 1643, the Fairfaxes were routed by Lieutenant-General Goring at the battle of Seacroft Moor near Leeds; then in May, Fairfax took Goring prisoner in a spectacular victory at Wakefield against heavy odds. The Marquis of Newcastle attacked the Fairfaxes at Bradford and inflicted a major defeat at the battle of Adwalton Moor in June 1643, which left the Royalists in control of all of Yorkshire except the port of Hull. After an epic fighting retreat from Bradford, during which Sir Thomas was shot through the wrist and suffered serious loss of blood, the Fairfaxes fortified themselves in Hull. From here they mounted lightning raids on Royalist positions, which kept Newcastle's army occupied in the north and prevented a Royalist advance towards London.
Clearly someone has been paying attention to my theories about Black blood is Blue blood.
Re: The Afrocentrism Thread ________________________________________ Outside the "The Anglo-Saxons were Black" trash, has anyone got any other good sources of Afrocentrist humour? There was a good video on YouTube (taken off, as the owner was banned - presumably by Afrocentrist whining, as quite a few of us refuters were) called "Black Egypt??? The Race Controversy". Some of the so-far-out-someone-forgot-their-medication claims were: * The Great Wall of China was built by the "indigenous Black Chinese to keep out White Barbarian invaders". * Every non-white race on this Earth - Native Americans to Middle Easterners to East Asians even - were the "end result of millenia of White and Black miscegenation". * The non-white Alexander the Great built the Gates of Alexander to "keep out the White Barbarians from his empire". * White europeans are the end result of "Khazar Jews driving their White Slaves eastward after the collapse of their empire". * Black Egypt "discovered space travel, and colonised other planets" and Area 51 actually holds the remains of Black Egyptian spacecraft.
Really, the bizarre claims are the best part of "Afrocentrism" for me - only rivalled when two far-out claims clash (i.e. the "technomalogical Empire of Black Egpyt" getting overrun and miscegenated by "White, Albino, Cave-dwelling Barbarians"! )
Basically, between the 1500s-1800s (arbitarary dates, of course): * A "fixed mulatto race" ruled Europe, between the 1500s-1800s. * This "fixed mulatto race" horribly oppressed the white serfs under their control, even turning their skins into book-bindings. * The French Revolution was a result of the oppression of the "fixed mulatto race" upon the white peasantry. * Currently, all known portraits of the "fixed mulatto race" have either been whitened, or are hidden in family vaults across Europe. * Every time you see a "Moor", or a black person in European art from that period, it's a subtle message that even the most-tangentially-related European noble was part of the "fixed mulatto race"
posted
Fixing the Color Line: The Mulatto, Southern Courts, and Racial Identity Teresa Zackodnik University of Alberta
quote: In July 1857 Abby Guy sued for her freedom and that of her four children in an Arkansas court. The court records state that Abby Guy had been supporting herself and her children by farming and selling her own crops. The Guy family "passed as free persons": Abby's oldest daughter "boarded out" so that she could attend school, and the family "visited among white folks, and went to church, parties, etc.,--[such that one] should suppose they were white." 1
Following these accounts of where and how the Guys lived, the court required that the family be presented for physical inspection by the jury, which was to base its decision of whether Abby Guy and her children were black or white, slave or free, on their appearance as well as on any testimony offered: "Here the plaintiffs were personally presented in Court, and the judge informed the jury that they . . . should treat their . . . inspection of plaintiffs' persons as evidence." 2
Following their evidentiary "inspection" of the Guy family, the jury was told that the Guys had lived as "free persons" in Arkansas since 1844. In 1855 they moved to Louisiana where a Mr. Daniel "took possession of them as slaves" roughly two years later, claiming that Abby Guy "came with . . . [him] from Alabama to Arkansas" as his slave. 3 Witnesses for Daniel testified that Abby's mother, Polly, was said to have been "a shade darker than Abby," such that they "could not say whether Polly was of African or Indian extraction." 4 Determining Abby Guy's status and race solely according to her complexion and that of her mother was complicated by the fact that neither woman's complexion was considered white, nor could they be said to be of either African or Native American descent. Consequently, the nature and degree of Abby Guy's "otherness" as [End Page 420] focused through the lens of "blackness" became the issue in this case; investigating how black Abby Guy was, not how white or "Indian," became the first step in containing the threat she posed. A Dr. Newton was then called to testify on Abby Guy's behalf and, in an attempt to clarify racial distinctions, he cited additional bodily evidence:
"[T]he hair never becomes straight until after the third descent from the negro. . . . The flat nose also remains observable for several descents."
Daniel countered this testimony by introducing his father's will which "devised Abby as a 'negro girl slave' to his daughter . . . bill of sale . . . 1825, conveying to him, for . . . $400 . . . 'one negro girl named Abby, thirteen years old.'" 5 Testimony apparently ended here, and the judge then gave the jury the following instructions:
If the jury find . . . that the plaintiffs had less than one-fourth of negro blood in their veins, the jury should find them to be free persons upon that fact alone--it being prima facie evidence of freedom--unless defendant . . . had proven them to be slaves. . . . If . . . less than one-fourth negro, . . . . defendant can only prove them to be slaves, by proving . . . that . . . plaintiffs are descended from a slave on the mother's side, who was one-fourth negro or more.6
The jury found in Abby Guy's favor, and the judge ordered that she and her children "be liberated."
posted
Brazil Wants to Ban Mulattos and Give Blacks an ID. They Call This Progress Written by Janer Cristaldo Thursday, 20 July 2006 20:36
A stupidity cloud seems to hover over the Brazilian national Congress these days. Not that it would be easy to find any intelligent cloud over the Congress. But now there's a high concentration of stupidity and the whole country is threatened with a stupidity rain. Two projects, that intend to send Brazil two centuries back are being discussed in Brasília.
One of them, by senator Paulo Paim, already approved in the Senate, wants to send Brazil back to the racist America of the America when Jim Crow laws were in force or perhaps to the Hitlerist Germany or even to the South Africa of apartheid.
To be honest, I have nothing new to say about the matter. Since talks about quotas started I have been denouncing this tactic adopted by the black movements as something that will only serve to stimulate racism. The stupidity keeps moving on with ever increasing audacity.
While before all we talked about were quotas, senator Paim's project now intends to identify Brazilians by race, as it was done to Jews in Nazi Germany. Is the stupidity being repeated? This chronicler feels compelled to repeat himself.
I have already commented on the Statute of Racial Equality, when I denounced recently the extinction of the mulatto. With a stroke of a pen, the senator intends to extirpate from the country's history the most evident proof of the good racial conviviality. The expedient is elementary.
As blacks comprise a mere 5,4 % of the national population, the senator decides to call black the whole mulatto contingent, which represents 39.9% of the population. Give a little time and Brazil will be defined as being for the most part black. By the way, this is how the country is already seen by many Americans and Europeans.
The intention is to adopt the American model, which does not admit miscegenation. It's either black or white. Some intellectuals, able to escape the herd spirit that characterizes the species, presented to the Congress a document with 114 signatures, with arguments opposing the Statute and the reserves required by racial quotas.
Right away the document was satanized as the "White Elite's Manifesto," as if the mean white men were interested in maintaining the black population far away from their territory.
The government, which since then had been insisting on maintaining the academic quotas, felt compelled to back out. Now they are talking about social quotas. If on one hand it disengages the reserve of vacancies from the racial element, on the other it maintains the absurd purpose of sending to the university people who do not fill the basic requisites to enter college, ruining once an for all the academic teaching, which is already extremely deficient.
Paulo Paim put a goat in the room. The government removes the goat but leaves the rest of the animals in the room. That goes without saying that such a project is flagrantly unconstitutional. "All are equal under the law, without distinction of any nature," says article 5th of our Magna Carta. If the new proposal is approved, some will be more equal than others.
Good part of the black population liked the idea of winning with bent rules and they can't even see the trap they are falling into: having entered university through the back door they will be naturally rejected in the labor market.
Anticipating that, the senator has already added to his project a guarantee that the law will assure at least 20% of the positions in show or advertising on TV to Afro-Brazilian actors. The logic next step will be to impose these same quotas to the private sector, ending once and for all any merit criterion left.
The project also includes a mandatory course in high school, General History of Africa and of the Black in Brazil, as if Africa's history and that of blacks were more important for Brazil than Greece's History and of the Greeks, or Portugal and the history of the Portuguese, or Italy and the Italians, America and the Americans.
It would be interesting to imagine the way the new course will deal with the sale of slaves to the European whites by the black tribal chiefs of Africa. Or will it be a forbidden chapter of history, like the slaughter of Polish officers in Katyn forest by Stalin's troops, like the slaughter of 7,000 Spanish members of the clergy by the communist in Spain?
The senator's project still anticipates the creation of a special ID that will identify blacks racially. According to the statute, blacks will be required to carry their black ID card. It's funny to observe that in past decades the black movements had arrived at the conclusion that race doesn't exist.
Now it does exist and must appear in a document. Since whitening is quite generalized in Brazil, perhaps a better solution would be to create a tattoo or another very visible accessory, like Hitler created in Germany for Jews and homosexuals.
If such monstrosity is approved this country where miscegenation has always been the rule will start to officially discriminate by race. We are walking with large steps towards a black Nazism.
If such foolishness weren't enough, another project, this one from House Representative Pastor Amarildo intends to take the country even farther back in time, to Middle Age days, when the guilds controlled with an iron fist the exercise of professions.
Basically, the intention is to smother freedom of expression, regulating journalism, a profession that cannot be regulated.
If thanks to a decree-law passed by a military junta in 1969 only those with a journalism course can be journalists in Brazil, the new project, approved by the Congress in the quiet of the World Cup, intends to regulate even columnists and commentators.
Now, this dictatorial rule does not find a parallel in any democratic regime in the world. Journalist is he who gets his income from the exercise of the journalism profession and that's it.
The pastor's project is in reaction to the rejection of a proposal by Fenaj (National Federation of Journalists) to create a Federal Board of Journalism. That proposal was sent in 2004 to Congress by the Federal Government. Due to the pressure by the journalists and the media owners, however, the attempt to curtail even more freedom of expression in Brazil was withdrawn on that same year.
Again, the quotas. The white guild wants to protect the corporation. While the country was getting thrilled and distracted by the World Cup, the project was approved almost clandestinely in Congress. It now depends only on a veto or an approval by the Supreme Ignoramus, the president. It's amazing that such a rule would appear now in these Internet days, a time in which any citizen can start his blog and do journalism the way he pleases.
The Supreme Ignoramus, as it is known, has no love lost for the press. He might very well adopt such juridical excrescence. Right now when the Web has liberated journalists from the costs of paper, printing and distribution. Blogs represent today high level journalism and they are nimbler than the journalism on paper. The Chinese communists have already realized this and are censoring the Internet.
If he adopts this scourge, the Supreme Ignoramus will be fighting in vain against tomorrow's dawn.
Janer Cristaldo - he holds a Ph.D. from University of Paris, Sorbonne - is an author, translator, lawyer, philosopher and journalist and lives in Săo Paulo. His e-mail address is janercr@terra.com.brThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .
Translated from the Portuguese by Arlindo Silva.
Set as favorite Bookmark Email This Hits: 40263 Comments (189) Subscribe to this comment's feed No punishment to journalists... is this a joke? written by Augusto Falk, July 21, 2006
You said: "Basically, the intention is to smother freedom of expression, regulating journalism, a profession that cannot be regulated." Why not? Bad professionals have to be BANNED from the free channels of expression, as they are using a very sensitive and influential weapon to spread their sometimes IRRESPONSIBLE and UNFOUNDED comments about something they have no idea about. No freedom WITHOUT the corresponding RESPONSIBILITY should be tolerated from anybody. Why are "journalists" better than me? Are they some kind of untouchable Gods or Godesses? Give me a break... Next, please! Why ban Mulattos? written by Antonio Owens, July 21, 2006
Why ban Mulattos? As an African American having visited Sal paulo and Rio, I felt very unwanted and alienated when I was around light skinned Brazilians, but when I was around mulattos and darker skinned people they were very friendly and I had the time of my life! To me Brazil is very racist towards it's own mulattos and dark skinned people and very racist towards outside blacks from other countries. The problem is that Brazil is a unique situation but something has to be done to provide opportunities to darker skinned Brazilians. Here in America, as you know, is very racists even today 2006, However Blacks have ther own universities and colleges. We have our own television stations,newspapers,and magazines. I am very proud that Brazil now has it's first Black owned TV station and magazine called RACA.The government of Brazil is racist but They are at least acknowlegding that there is a race problem, in the past they did not, so now progress is coming! Looks like we may have a racist here... written by Maximus IV, July 21, 2006
I think Janer Cristaldo may be the racist here. What's wrong with lumping all persons of African descent together? Europeans do this everyday with the resultant benefits accrued as a result of walking around in "Whiteface." With 50% of the Brazilian population unified by their Afro-Brazilian heritage they in turn can walk about in "Blackface" with the resultant benefits accrued thereof.
But alas, your concern is the potential political power that would be gained by a unified tagging system such as that in use in the United States! The results would surely be the same as Blacks in "Blackface" start electing Blacks to political offices once held by Whites in "Whiteface."
This would also break down the crony sytem of corruption so rife in Brazilian politics as newer Blacks would be looked on in suspicion and mistrust as outsiders who could upset the balance of GRAFT! ... written by Charles, July 21, 2006
I agree with both comments above. Brazillians claim there is no discrimination in their country, yet majority of the poor are black. I visited a medical school in Salvador in my last trip to Brazil, and majority of the students were Lighter skinned Brazillians, In fact the only Black student I saw was an African. I asked my Brazillian guide why this was the case, and he told me about an exam called the Vestibular, and how that exam is very difficult to pass. I inturn told him that having met many Black physicians in America and England, I see no reason why Blacks cannot pass what can be at best "a simple test" it is at that point he confided in me that this issue was caused by racism. The writer of this article is barking up the wrong tree. Give Blacks an opportunity to climb out of the Favelas, then Brazil will be able to benefit from a better skilled population. Congratulations to the author written by Bruno, July 21, 2006
I disagree with all comments here. The article is CORRECT. We don't need to transform this country in black version of the Nazi Germany. Mulattos like me are the PROOF of how race is seen, or better, not seen. Are there too much mulattos in US or Europe? I am not saying there isn't any racism, I am saying that it is FAR LESS than in US and in Europe and these kind of laws are backward step of a few hundred years.
About the "simple test", do you know why they don't pass? Because public school sucks. If you want to pass in it you must not only study all your life in private schools but attend a course known as "cursinho" made specially for this purpuse. Know what else? Since there aren't many public colleges the competition is very high. It's not only blacks, a lot of other people do NOT PASS that exam. That doesn't mean they aren't good enough, it means that they aren't well prepared for the exam and that's all.
The second laughable argument is "blacks = favelas", I have blacks in my family and they aren't in the favelas. Know why? Because they work. That's all the magic a person needs, to work and study. Is that difficult?
People that support it are no better than those young alienated white americans that become neo-nazis out of frustation and not fitting in a high competitive society, blaming blacks and immigrants even for the bad weather. You see, similar kind of people. Help Support Positive Mulatto Identity Globally at http://www.mulatto.org written by Dave, July 22, 2006
Janer Cristaldo, Thanks for writing this informative article. If folks want to support positive mulatto identity as an option, not just in Brazil, but globally, please visit the community at http://www.mulatto.org Blacks and African Centrics - Our Time is NOW. written by AfroBrazilian, July 22, 2006
Dave's mulatto.org website is a racist website that despite aiming for a "positive mulatto identity" 95% of the time can only relate their "mulatto" "identity" through a Black context. Please visit http://www.afrolatino.org/forum/ where real 100% African Centric Afro Latinos discuss Black issues.
Having African descended people all united under one label "Black" is an excellent idea and I commend Senator Paulo Paim with all my heart .. and with all my soul. May God Bless him. Please, don\'t make me laugh,,,, written by Salsassin, July 22, 2006
Afrolatino.org is mostly Afro American with a spattering of American raised Afro-Latinos. Each time an AfroLatino raised in Latin America posts they weigh the guy to see if he buys into their Afrocentricity, then they either welcome him or harass him. The fact is both American mulatto oriented and black oriented extremists (not just regular identified people) tend to miss the picture. In Latin America it has a lot more to do with where you are raised and who you see as kin. Some people may identify one way, and others identical in look will identify differently. I have no problem whatsoever with mixed people identifying as Blacks in the the AfroBrazilian Black communities. On the same token, others are raised in the more mixed communities and identify as Mulato, Pardo, Mestizo, etc. So long as they aren't denying their Afrodescent, its fine. If fact many Brancois also are Afrodescent. Any inmposing of an identity is wrong. including any ODR or hypodescent. No matter who applies it. .............. written by The Mestre, July 22, 2006
A racist site like Afrolatino.org calling someone else racist? Hahahaa That's a good one.
Anyways, I hope the Brazilians steer clear of applying the flawed American racial concepts to their society. They have enough problems to worry about. May the Strongest Survive ... written by AfroBrazilian, July 22, 2006
Salsassin,
Well, you're either African centric or not .. what don't you understand about that? Black people are descended from Africa and we will pay homage to our homeland and our ancestors. "Black" isn't a label that exists in and of itself. Are we African Centric? You betcha, no apologies whatsoever. Now on to your ""I have no problem whatsoever.." and your "people identify" and your "It's fine." You have no authority on the matter. I don't care what you accept and what you don't. I don't care how you "feel" or how you "think things should be." Are you even of African descent? The fact of the matter is that a society in which all Blacks are grouped together has more unity and progress than a society that has different layers of acceptance. LOL, many things are "wrong." What it really comes down to is who has more power to impose his or her will - Me or you? Janer Cristaldo and the racist end of objectivity written by Gustavo Brum, July 22, 2006
This is person is not a journalist!!! Nothing can be worse in news person than not having objectivity!!! This article is so lopsided that is almost unreadable. What's funny is, everybody in Brazil alaways talks about diminishing the cruel income gap between the rich and the poor, between the well-off whites and the starving blacks. However, if a law is proposed to help reduce the abysm between classes, then the so called intelectuals, "opinion-formers, all scream in unison and write biased articles like Janer Cristaldo's one. They believe in the utopic concept that Brazil is a racial democracy yet their skin is always very, very light!!! Brazil IS NOT America! written by Prince Kusi, July 22, 2006
Black Americans are hilarious. It's very frustrating for me to see so many of them speaking out in favor of Brazil adopting a U.S.-style racial identification system with absolutely no regard for Brazil's unique culture and history. Not unlike the Coca-Cola corporation, or Nike, these most fortunate of the new world blacks seem intent on using their "first world" influence to make Brazil exactly like the USA. And I would be willing to wager that very few of them speak Portuguese, or would be able to define the terms "cafuzo" or "caboclo." Nor are most aware that, by upholding the American racial caste system, they pay homage to Richard Nixon, its creator.
More to the point, black Americans seem totally oblivious to their own contradictory attitudes about race. So imprecise is the English language that it allows them to say they are "pro-black" while upholding what are clearly white-supremecist values and notions of beauty. Quick, who's prettier, Vanessa Williams or Whoopi Goldberg? Here we can see how it would be beneficial (and a hell of a lot more honest) to employ the term "mulatta" to refer to Vanessa Willams, Alicia Keys, Mariah Carey, Halle Berry, etc. "Negros” (people with black skin – the color black, that is) are looked down upon in the States, as they are in Brazil. Nomenclature doesn't appear to matter.
Listen, Brazil IS NOT the United States, people! Yes, there is extreme inequality within her borders. Yes, blacks (in the Brazilian sense of the word) are horribly discriminated against and underrepresented in popular media, but Americanization is not the solution. The fact is that the vast majority of Brazil's population is poor, undereducated, malnourished, underrepresented in popular media, exploited, subject to police brutality, etc. Though they seem to mean well, Brazilian politicians are taking the easy way out by trying to replicate the American model. Do negros deserve more rights than morenos, mulattos, cafuzos, caboclos, arabes and japas? I think not. Rather than "transforming" mulattos into blacks on paper to ameliorate this systemic problem, funding better primary and secondary schools, literacy programs and libraries would be a good start. Forcing people into asinine racial categories won't end discrimination or lead to empowerment. Valeu! full of ignorance this Cristaldo !!!!!!!! written by ch.c., July 22, 2006
Since when has Brazil 5,6 % of Blacks ?????? Are you referring only to your securitized community in SP where domestics, nurses are blacks ??????
Shameful your desire to minimize the simple truth as to the race mix of Brazilian society !!!!!!!
Was your father or grand father a German Nazi who escaped to Brazil to avoid jail for the attrocities commited during W.W.II ??????? Re: No punishment to journalists... is this a joke? written by a guest, July 23, 2006
Actually, it's the author who is defending that journalists be no gods. What the law project aims to is to regulate blogs and other types of media so that only the people with a journalist diploma, obtained from a 4 or 5-year long university course, can do that. If such a law passes, even your commentary is likely to be regulated and you would be forbidden to express yourself. Got it? ... written by Lord Invader, July 23, 2006
It always amuses me how white Brazilians try to pretend that their country doesn't have a racial problem. I have heard this line thrown at me on a couple occasions, first by a black Brazilian, then a white one(on different occasions). And yet in the upper-middle-class and upper-class sections of Rio, all you see are white faces. During my stay in Brazil I recalled seeing no black doctors, or even mulatto doctors, for that matter. I saw almost no black bank tellers, maybe three or four at the most; few, if any, black waiters in the resturants in Copacabana. On the other hand, I saw plenty of black beggars, minstrels(on the beach), prostitutes, neer-do-wells, etc. But of course, it's always these white Brazilians pushing this fantasy of a "cosmic race" where North American style racial discrimination doesn't exist. They will never tell you the truth--that all these various little racial subdivisions are meant to divide and control the black population. And that, of course, white Brazilians don't give a s**t about black Brazilians whether they are pure black or pardo or confuso/cafuzo, or whatever...however, a white Brazilian will lie to your face about what he really feels about you. I agree with you, Lord Invader written by Salsassin, July 23, 2006
White Brazilians are hypocritical. It's usually the light skinded members of the Brazilian upper class who like to fantasize about a "Brazilian racial utopia." Mulatto.org is not \"racist\" but, yes, we have racists on our website written by Dave, July 23, 2006
I strongly disagree with "Afrobrazilian." Yes, mulatto.org has its fair share of racist members, but that doesn't mean everyone at our forum is racist. There is space for everyone at our site. We try to see all view points. If you have a positive black identity, then we'd like to hear from you. Yes even racists, be they mulatto racists, are welcome at our site. Everyone is racist. I could be "considered" racist against blacks (or whites) but hey, my current girlfriend is full black. So, it really matters what perspective you see things through. Visit mulatto.org - Everyone is welcome. May Brazil Stay Multiracial & Unique written by e harmony, July 24, 2006
Even with the U.S. massive economy after the fall of the Soviet Union, apparently the Black middle class in the U.S. has been shrinking since the 1970's into the 1990's. Where exactly it stands right now in 2006 I'm not sure. But pbs.org "Frontline" did a report on it. If you consider middle class in the U.S. begining at $15,000 a year then Black America in the 1990's had about 13 million in the middle class. If you consider middle class in the U.S. beginning at $25,000 a year then Black America in the 1990's had about 9 million in the middle class. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/...lysis.html
The U.S. econonmy is the largest on planet earth. If all Mulattos being classified as Black would automaticlly transform Black society in a mecca of social and financial prosperity, then there would be few single Black mothers, few Black males in prison, and an upper class of Blacks bursting through the seems, there would be no Crips or Bloods gang, no GD's or Vice Lords gang, few black men would get shot in gun violence. Because behold! The "Black" label would have created awe, mystery, and bliss.
The "Black" label does not create awe, mystery, and bliss in the Nigerian economy. It has not done it in the Black American economy or "quality of life" social sphere. Why would it magically create awe, mystery, and bliss in Brazil?
Furthermore, I'm a member at mulatto.org. And the site itself, per its purpose, is not intended for racism.
Another person on a another forum, I read, stated something quite interesting. In an era in which we keep espousing "people should be allowed to be themselves," be that in sexual orientation or gender identification, or even in so called "equal rights," some how the United States (and some other peoples) deems it proper that Mulattos are denied right of self identification - or "being themselves." Re: May Brazil Stay Multiracial & Unique written by a guest, July 24, 2006
Interesting. And the decrease on the black middle class coincides with the beginning of affirmative actions. Re Prince Kusi written by Maximus IV, July 24, 2006
Who's prettier Kate Beckinsale or Rosie O'Donnell? Whites are the ones who started this looks madness so don't be surprised if Black finish it. Re: Black Middle Class written by Maximus IV, July 24, 2006
The shrinking Black middle class comes as a result of more White social mischief. More Black Women in the workforce more Black Women choosing careers over child rearing Pro Choice Abortions on demand= Shrunken Black Middle Class. Any more questions? Black Americans Out of Brazil written by sammy artista, July 27, 2006
Please do not put your black american racist views in with the brazilian way of life.We dont need your music,your culture,and your opnions.I live in america and white.And never found a black american that new was not a racist.We brazilians dont wanna your kind there.Also ID is only one,the national ID,and it shopuld not have any race on it.A brazilian dont have race,either we are Brazilians or not.If you born in brasil,your color should not be in a ID,be it your japanese or arab or native brazilan,or injun.heheh Those things are the work of americans ,black american and their racist influences.I had musician from bahia over here,and as soon he got involved with the hip hop cloud he started talking about race just like a american,and how blacks been slaves etc...A nivce guy just turned racist becuase of rap crap...and the media is patronizing this rap crap,and more....pretty soon they will have tv station where they will play rap 24 hous in Brazil,and lots of stupid kis are going to eat it like bananas,and someone will get rich,for sure.so.... Racist White Brazilians Out of America written by Lord Invader, July 27, 2006
Please do not put your black american racist views in with the brazilian way of life.We dont need your music,your culture,and your opnions.I live in america and white.And never found a black american that new was not a racist.We brazilians dont wanna your kind there.Also ID is only one,the national ID,and it shopuld not have any race on it.A brazilian dont have race,either we are Brazilians or not.If you born in brasil,your color should not be in a ID,be it your japanese or arab or native brazilan,or injun.heheh Those things are the work of americans ,black american and their racist influences.I had musician from bahia over here,and as soon he got involved with the hip hop cloud he started talking about race just like a american,and how blacks been slaves etc...A nivce guy just turned racist becuase of rap crap...and the media is patronizing this rap crap,and more....pretty soon they will have tv station where they will play rap 24 hous in Brazil,and lots of stupid kis are going to eat it like bananas,and someone will get rich,for sure.so....
You say you live in the States? Get the f**k out of the U.S.A., then. The US has enough nazi wannabe types running around with their tiny dicks and shaved heads, we don't need your latent passive-aggressive Brazilian-type racist bulls**t. FYI, if the black Brazilians weren't feeling hip-hop, they would have ignored it. Hip-hop caught on in Brazil because black Brazilians were tired of motherf**kers like you lying to them. Face it, Alfredo, the jig is up--your cosmic highfalutin nonsense about "no racism" has been disproven, and now your neguinhos are facing reality for the first time in centuries. Can you dig it, baby? Re: Racist White Brazilians Out of America written by Heitor, July 28, 2006
The level of ignorance from the Nazi blacks is appaling. I have met some americans and got prepared to see "racism" (that is what the propaganda says, right?) but I was very well treated by the white americans I met (after showing I was above average of course) and the only racist people I happened to find were black. Quite strange isn't it?
Take this racist crap out of my country, we don't need "black supremacy" around here, no one's supremacy as a matter of fact. If all those blacks you talk that live in the favelas could stop staring at women's butts and could stop making those horrible noise they call music and start WORKING AND STUDYING, they would be better. Less beer, more work.
People speak of "african culture" but there's nothing pretty about that culture. I would like to see black people that were like Beethoven, Mozart, etc, but I all see are rappers! Rappers that can't even speak a language properly. Please produce beautiful things so all the world can applaud! Big Mouth Dirty Dagos Won\'t Shut Up written by Lord Invader, July 28, 2006
The level of ignorance from the Nazi blacks is appaling. I have met some americans and got prepared to see "racism" (that is what the propaganda says, right?) but I was very well treated by the white americans I met (after showing I was above average of course) and the only racist people I happened to find were black. Quite strange isn't it?
Take this racist crap out of my country, we don't need "black supremacy" around here, no one's supremacy as a matter of fact. If all those blacks you talk that live in the favelas could stop staring at women's butts and could stop making those horrible noise they call music and start WORKING AND STUDYING, they would be better. Less beer, more work.
People speak of "african culture" but there's nothing pretty about that culture. I would like to see black people that were like Beethoven, Mozart, etc, but I all see are rappers! Rappers that can't even speak a language properly. Please produce beautiful things so all the world can applaud!
Isn't that funny? A Nazi calling us Nazis. The next thing they'll do is accuse us of trying to exterminate them.
Look, dago dumbass--it's no wonder you were treated wonderfully by whites(providing you are telling the truth; I seriously doubt it). You ARE white. Naturally, they are going to relate to you better. And judging from the bulls**t you speak, it's no wonder the "blacks" hated you so much.
What kind of dumbf**k thinks that the only thing about black culture is rapping? I guess you've never heard of Duke Ellington--a hell of a lot better than your schmaltzy-ass Villa-Lobos, or that watery bossa-nova crap! Or Thelonious Monk, Benny Carter, Charlie Parker, John Coltrane, William Grant Still, Louis Armstrong, Sidney Bechet, SUn Ra, Coleman Hawkins, etc., etc., etc.
When was the last time you monkeys produced anything--except the world's biggest brothel(ie., O Brasil????)
FYI, if you guineas actually GAVE blacks and mulattoes opportunities to be successful, they would be successful. But that's not what you people want, is it? http://www.afrolatino.org written by http://www.afrolatino.org, July 28, 2006
AMEN!! Re:Big Mouth Dirty Dagos Won\'t Shut Up written by Heitor, July 28, 2006
Hahahahahah. No genius, I am not white, nor black and I am not that "dago". But I related well with some american whites simply because I didn't have the monstruous inferiority complex you have, and dealt with them as an equal, sometimes showing I could do things better than anyone else. That's how I gained respect, it wasn't by whining. Whiners like yourself deserve nothing but despise.
Another thing genius, the "rapper" was just an example. Living in Brazil I had more of what I would wish of this "African culture" than you will ever have in your lifetime. All kinds of things, being flushed through the media 24x7. Music, every february or so that samba crap, all kinds of rythms coming from Bahia, all kinds of "baianos" beating their bongoes, foods. And those black cults, those primive cults I had the opportunity to see with my own eyes.
Imagine someone sacrifice a cow in the name of Zeus, or contacting the Oracle to know what to do of their lives. No this is not ancient Greece, this is the everyday life of many blacks in Bahia. As if those bunch of christians weren't enough with their fairy tales we have things even worse. That beating, that singing, those black images in their rituals.None of that is pretty.
Eventually we find dead chickens with some food from those black cults, and I am talking about Sao Paulo. Imagine that in Bahia. How is this pretty? The beggars must love the free lunch though.
If you want to be respected you should work on beautiful things, so everyone could appreciate you. Being a Nazi and spreading hate all over the globe won't help.
So, this mulato here asks you:
- How's it like to live in hell? This constant inferiority burden you carry with you wherever you go?
What a loser. What irritates me the most is that this kind of black american loser will come to Brasil, not study at all, just assume their crappy society somehow is a model for all others, and tell the lazy black relatives I have "are oppressed by the evil whites". They live in s**t because they drink too much beer, can't take their eyes off women, and don't like working!!!
Not all are like that, but that's the generalization american idiots are trying to sell. The message of hate.
About the brothel thing, that coming from the country with the biggest pornographic industry can only be a joke. Any men on earth can see american girls (the black ones too) with someone else's sperm on the face just by going to the closest video store.
Have a nice day in hell. ... written by Lord Invader, July 28, 2006
Hahahahahah. No genius, I am not white, nor black and I am not that "dago". But I related well with some american whites simply because I didn't have the monstruous inferiority complex you have, and dealt with them as an equal, sometimes showing I could do things better than anyone else. That's how I gained respect, it wasn't by whining. Whiners like yourself deserve nothing but despise.
No, it's because you think you are white....and, most likely, you ARE just a white boy troll, pretending to be Brazilian.
Another thing genius, the "rapper" was just an example. Living in Brazil I had more of what I would wish of this "African culture" than you will ever have in your lifetime. All kinds of things, being flushed through the media 24x7. Music, every february or so that samba crap, all kinds of rythms coming from Bahia, all kinds of "baianos" beating their bongoes, foods. And those black cults, those primive cults I had the opportunity to see with my own eyes.
Oh, I get it. So you're not really a Brazilian, you're just some sad-ass hillbilly faggot clown posing as one....I bet you went to Brazil with your flabby low-rent ass, trying to get some pussy from the mulatas--but even the scaggiest, most toothless trannies on Avenida Atlantica turned you down. Figures.
Eventually we find dead chickens with some food from those black cults, and I am talking about Sao Paulo. Imagine that in Bahia. How is this pretty? The beggars must love the free lunch though.
If you want to be respected you should work on beautiful things, so everyone could appreciate you. Being a Nazi and spreading hate all over the globe won't help.
I agree--get the f**k off the message board and grow your hair back, and get rid of all those "SIEG HEIL" tattoos, you pussy wanker.
So, this mulato here asks you:
- How's it like to live in hell? This constant inferiority burden you carry with you wherever you go?
What's it like? It's full of greasers, especially dumbf**k Brazilians--like you. And it looks exactly like Sao Paulo!!
What a loser. What irritates me the most is that this kind of black american loser will come to Brasil, not study at all, just assume their crappy society somehow is a model for all others, and tell the lazy black relatives I have "are oppressed by the evil whites". They live in s**t because they drink too much beer, can't take their eyes off women, and don't like working!!!
Brilliant job, mulatto muthaf**ka. If we didn't work, we could not afford a $1600 round-trip ticket, now, could we? You just keep shooting yourself in the foot....
About the brothel thing, that coming from the country with the biggest pornographic industry can only be a joke. Any men on earth can see american girls (the black ones too) with someone else's sperm on the face just by going to the closest video store.
Yeah, sure, pal. Most of the really cruddy porn we see nowadays--especially the faggoty/shemale stuff--comes out of Brazil. Which means that those American girls are probably your sisters--nay, your brothers after going under the scalpel!!
Have a nice day in hell.
Sorry, I don't live in Latin Amerikka!! ... written by Charles, July 29, 2006
To Heitor, you say you live in the states but it is obvious from your diatribe that you are extremely ignorant. I suggest you use some time in the states to take some community classes on the history of the United States, it will do you some good. You say you are a mullatto who is accepted by whites. Guess what, I do not know what state you are in America, but in many parts of the United States, if people know that you are a Brazillian, you will be equated with being a mexican, and even though they will accept you to your face, they will sell you out when La Migra (Immigration) comes calling. As for you Prince Kusi, I hope you are not Black, if you are, I truly feel sorry for you. Your example of beauty was to compare Whoopi Goldberg to Vanessa Williams. Let me point out some truly beautiful Black women to you. Angela Bassett, Sanaa Lathan, Aunjanue Ellis and Kimberly Elise. If you are Black, please understand that your comments suggest that you hate yourself. There is nothing worse than a self loathing Black man. ... written by guest, July 29, 2006
Janer you are the BIGGEST a*****e on this website. No Brazil is not 5.6% black dumbass. It's 45% black. It has THE LARGEST BLACK POPULATION OUTSIDE OF NIGERIA. Don't believe me? Then take it up with the UN, UNESCO, Brazilian DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Brazilian BLACK MOVEMENT, Brazilian 1980 CENSUS. Everyone in the world knows that Brazil is black and mixed, and filled with shame and self-hate. That the white elites have been committing GENOCIDE by trying to WHITEN the populaton. That 20 million black Brazilian women were STERILIZED. That immigrant was CONTROLLED so that Africans could not enter, only Europeans. That the use of blonds in the media and in schoolbooks has made Brazilians ashamed of black looks. Is that the wonderful magical history you celebrate as uniquely Brazilian? Then I just pity you.
Yes mulattos need to unite with blacks, it is for their own good. It's like bisexual people going under LGBT so they can have help from gays. Or Agnostics being with Atheists under the label Secular. IIt's common sense to unite as have-nots against the haves. To Charles written by Prince Kusi, July 29, 2006
Hi Charles. Thanks for your comments. Note that I posed a question regarding who was prettier in my earlier posting, I did not answer it. You answered it, and responded accordingly. The fact that you were somewhat disoriented by not knowing my race ("is this a brother or the other?") really speaks to my point. Most Americans are accustomed to "shading" their reactions based on the color of the person they are reacting to rather than focusing on the persons ideas, which amounts to racism in my view. From your list of "beautiful Black women," at least two of them would not be called "negras" in Brazil; again you have bolstered my argument. Also, I noticed that neither India.Arie, nor Alek Wek, and not even Naomi Cambell made your cut. Interesting. Racism in Brasil? Nooo written by bronx dialect, July 30, 2006
Well after reading all of these comments, i have to explain why American Blacks will never agree with Brasil on issues of race or vice versa. America had a lot less racial mixing that in Brazil. Besides the prevalent rape that plagued female slaves, the Blacks and the whites did not mingle that much. That is how we graduated into a Jim Crow society. it was inevitable. Now Brasil and Dominican Republic mixed purposely. Some utopic intellectual named vasconcelos called it the cosmic race where we get the best of the three racess: the intelligence of the white man, the strength of the Black man (to haul and push like a mule of course) and I don't remember what the indigenous contribution was. But places like Brasil and DR prescribed to the race whitening theory which is disguised as a ploy to get rid of racism by eliminating race, but is really a racist concept to eliminate Black. So whoever is giving "biggups" to miscegenation is a rapist and an imperialist.
Someone said that America has MORE racism than Brasil. You cannot quantify racism. There is no such thing as more racism. Racism is not counted by the number of events that make it in the news or the number of political leaders that have mad it in out history. It is a deep rooted system that continues to regenerate itself with each generation. It can manifest itself in different ways and sometimes has clandestine forms. It's like saying that my church has less sinners than yours.
OK, let's talk about the rap music comments. So, Heitor has taken a Humanities class and is familiar with high art and low art in American culture. Great!! The problem is that this beauty that you discuss is subjective. Distinguishing between high art (which usually refers to white society and kindly includes jazz- thank you, I guess) and low art (something that people of color create) can be racist because it is going to result in these racial distinctions.
I wiuld also like to say that talking about the ills of slavery is not being a Black supremist. It is what it is. In Brasil, a mulatto gets better treatment, so they don't have many complaints, but in good old Dixie we SEE and are cognizant of our racism. Americans know what they have against them and i don't know if it is fair to say that Brazilians live in ignorant bliss because they don't even know that they are being racist. Racism is ingrained inthe racist and in the victim to the point where the two of them don't even recognize it any more. it is like a sickness. But ignorance is Bliss, so I hope that you are happy since you think that we live in hell here. I wish I could be blind and ignorant too.
Oh yeah and who in the hell started a mulatto site? That is sick. No straddling the fence! Get Real written by Seeing Reality, July 30, 2006
Reality check ... when blacks in the past sat back and did nothing, no organization, no representation, no economic clout, white racism zoomed out of control. I'm sure millions of people of color can tell the story similiar to the experiences I've had with those who see themselves as white feeling it is their god given right to be racist and conduct themselves accordingly from puberty till old age. Attacking you for dare trying to improve yourself and not being white. I've spent a great deal of my life trying to get along with people regardless of race or color, but people are tired of racists and their schemes and feel it NECESSARY to single them out. I do not hate white skin. I dispise SPECIFICALLY whites who talk crazy to you because you're not white.
Reality check ... it's a trust issue. Black people (after 500 years of this) instinctively distrust those with white skin who talk to blacks crazy.
After 500 years I think black folk around the world just want a break from white schemes and lies and seek to organize and build economic institutions of their own to be cushioned at least from those white people who are evil and insane. I KNOW THERE ARE BAD BLACK PEOPLE BUT WHITES GENERALIZE BLACK AS BAD INHERITLY AND GENETICALLY WHICH IS PART OF ** THEIR ** EVIL. I WILL NEVER SAY THAT ** ALL ** WHITE PEOPLE ARE BAD, BUT ANYONE WHO DON'T THINK SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE ABOUT WHITE EVIL ARE THEMSELF INSANE AND SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH THEM. PERIOD. The white racist mindset is clear to all but two types of people. The white racists and those who are sick in the head who think "white people can do no wrong".
The issue reaching the highest levels of Government in Brazil clearly shows a willingness to stop pretending all is good among darker Brazilians. As with the United States, if whites were really interested in color blindness then why do THEY make everything about SKIN COLOR. Bending over backward to maintain WHITENESS EXCLUSIVELY. This post was made by an impostor written by Salsassin, July 30, 2006
written by Salsassin on July 23, 2006, 6:17 pm
White Brazilians are hypocritical. It's usually the light skinded members of the Brazilian upper class who like to fantasize about a "Brazilian racial utopia." I find it entertaining how white racists and black racists argue with each other written by Salsassin, July 30, 2006
you both sound mighty stupid. Sorry but brazil is not just a White and Black problem. My post on AfroLatino written by Salsassin, July 30, 2006
in Brazil discrimination is more on a sliding scale than on some segregated color line. It is gradual and those with predominant indigenous and African features are on the low end while those with European and also some other ethnicities are usually on top. Creating a OD color line in Brazil will not aleviate this problem, nor would it address the problem of colorism, as intra Afrodescent discrimination (wether you cal them Black or not) will still exist. Furthermore, because of the variety of appearances, in one family you will have people who may look more Black or White. So where do you draw this segregatory line if there has never been a policy of segregation? When `Whites` in Brazil have a much higher level of admixture than in the USA. Where do you draw the line for people who choose to Claim Blackness to get the benefits of Affirmative Action type policies? What if the guy looks European but has 20% of his ancestry that is African?
Brazil is not the same as the USA that hasd a history of segregation and antimiscegenation laws well before any Jim Crow and ODR rules were enacted. ... written by Charles, July 31, 2006
My list was not meant to be all encompassing. Of course, I also consider India Irie and Alek Wek beautiful. I personally do not like Naomi Campbell, so I will pass on her. As for the fact that some of these women would not be considered Negras in Brazil, what exactly is your point. Who gives a damn how Brazillians consider Blacks. Re: Brazil is not the same as the USA written by Maximus IV, July 31, 2006
It's 100 times worse--Black Brazilians think they're white "so confuuused" only to treated like Brazilian Nigras by the Whites who hold all the power. Elect some Black politicians and get real power over the resources of your country. Short of that--expect to be at the back of the line for future generations! The imposter above me. written by Salsassin, August 01, 2006
I agree. Many Brazilians are white-washed. I think that when Brazilians embrace their blackness instead of running away from it they will progress. I would rather call them Black than the dubious term "muleatto." I disagree with Janer. I fully support Paulo Paim, however. Janer Cristaldo must be kiddin\' written by J. Berkowitz, August 02, 2006
"With a stroke of a pen, the senator intends to extirpate from the country's history the most evident proof of the good racial conviviality."
'The project also includes a mandatory course in high school, General History of Africa and of the Black in Brazil, as if Africa's history and that of blacks were more important for Brazil than Greece's History and of the Greeks, or Portugal and the history of the Portuguese, or Italy and the Italians, America and the Americans."
Um Africans history and the History of Black in Brazil is way more important to Brazilians than the History of Greece or their Portuguese oppressers. That quote sounded real racist, it sounded like the writer didn't want anyone to know about Africas lush history. Also Brazil is way more than 5.4 percent Black, it's majority Black and Mulatto What is racism written by Aprelle, August 02, 2006
These denial-having white elites will never let the blacks in Brazil have power. They will keep using that 5.4% figure as long as they live, even though the whole world knows this to be untrue, with or without the one-drop rule.
But I have to ask, what is racism, because people here have been throwing the word around loosely. Black racists go home written by Heitor, August 05, 2006
Too many responses. To those that really doubt that I actually made contact with a white american and wasn't discriminated, I feel sorry for you. You live in an island of "blackitude", your mind is your ghetto. And the comment about "denouncing to la migra" was really funny. Unfortunately there are many unworthy brazilians giving Brazil a bad name around the world, like living illegally in other countries. In my case it was everything under the law, I went, stayed the time I needed and came back, but I have enough sense of humor to smile with such generalizations though.
The problem here is that black americans assume too much about other countries and cultures, or want people to think so. There are many differences from Brazil to US relating to race, and your mindset just doesn't cut it in here. But even so you seem to want to force a kind of "revolution", which lead me to think that:
- either you are completely clueless; - or you have agenda to meet behind the nice words of "better life for the opressed people";
The first option is very unlikely, the leaders of such movements are leaders because they are intelligent and know how to use the masses to achieve their goals. It seems more a form of gaining political power by maneuvering alienated young people like pawns, but what for? To protect blacks wherever they are? Oh right, and I believe in Santa Claus too. It seems to be all about power, and a national threat I might say. Foreigners inciting violence and dictating how things must be run, as if the security problems we have just weren't enough.
Your kind of "racial segregated" thinking is exactly what I mean by RACISM. Any non racist person would consider people by what they are and not by what they look like, but you seem to make a big deal of "mixing" as if it were something bad. In the other hand, I believe mixing is the step in the right direction for stopping people from blowing each other up, and that's why we, brazilians, are hundreds of years ahead of you on that matter and achieved more than you ever will in the US.
The thing about "blacks and mulattos unite" is just laughable. I won't share my conquests with a bunch of losers. A club that accepts everyone is not a club good enough to me. There are many unworthy blacks and mulattos around and don't want to be shoulder to shoulder with them! The same way there are many unworthy whites and I don't want to be with them either.
I have seen all kinds of people, dumb whites, dumb blacks, smart of all types, people with questionable ethics standards, and none of those qualities is related to their color.
So, to the histerical one that claims "ethnic cleansing", you should seek professional help, like a shrink. I have seen many white women married to black men, and black women married to white men and all other kinds of mixtures out of free will in here to know you are completely retarded.
And to finalize, the Nazi-like comment about "Africa is more important than Greece". This is the finest example of STUPIDITY, of NARROW MINDEDNESS, OF NAZISM, OF RACISM, OF THE WORST IN HUMANITY I am referring to. It's sad that people reach this state of ignorance not because it was born unprivileged, but because of pure lazyness. Tha makes me want to vomit.
So, african geniuses, the people that developed the study of medicine, philosophy and mathematics is NOT IMPORTANT?????
KNOWLEDGE HAS NO COLOR YOU IDIOT! And you like it or not they influenced greatly all western countries, directly or indirectly.
American blacks, no mulattos feel compelled to join you in your hell. There aren't a "white elite" oppressing anyone, people should call the responsibility of their lives to themselves and do something about it. The thing that rules here is the same as in the US,i.e., money. If you have it then you are fine.
Have a nice day in hell, black americans. And keep that nazism out of my country. The imposter above me. written by Heitor, August 05, 2006
"I agree. Many Brazilians are white-washed. I think that when Brazilians embrace their blackness instead of running away from it they will progress. I would rather call them Black than the dubious term "muleatto." I disagree with Janer. I fully support Paulo Paim, however."
You are such a loser. You must hate yourself and want make everyone else to feel like you do. BTW, I am happy not to be black. Mulatto Racists Shut the f**k Up written by Lord Invader, August 05, 2006
Your kind of "racial segregated" thinking is exactly what I mean by RACISM. Any non racist person would consider people by what they are and not by what they look like, but you seem to make a big deal of "mixing" as if it were something bad. In the other hand, I believe mixing is the step in the right direction for stopping people from blowing each other up, and that's why we, brazilians, are hundreds of years ahead of you on that matter and achieved more than you ever will in the US.
The thing about "blacks and mulattos unite" is just laughable. I won't share my conquests with a bunch of losers. A club that accepts everyone is not a club good enough to me. There are many unworthy blacks and mulattos around and don't want to be shoulder to shoulder with them! The same way there are many unworthy whites and I don't want to be with them either.
The fact that you would write these lines--and accuse blacks of being racist--really shows what an amazing f**kwad you really are. Truly amazing.
I would be even more amazed if you were a real Brazilian, rather than a dumbf**k white hillbilly troll who posts crap on this board because no parda slut in Rio will suck his dick. Mulatto Racists Shut the f**k up, part two written by Lord Invader, August 05, 2006
American blacks, no mulattos feel compelled to join you in your hell. There aren't a "white elite" oppressing anyone, people should call the responsibility of their lives to themselves and do something about it. The thing that rules here is the same as in the US,i.e., money. If you have it then you are fine.
Our hell can't hold a candle to yours. Look at how your happy mulattos live in Brazil. The white elite--which you pretend doesn't exist, and which you are probably one of--doesn't give a f**k about them. You don't understand that the average black American who comes to Brazil can buy your greasy olive-skinned butt several times over. Or maybe you do, and it just pisses you off. AWWWW, poor baby.
Have a nice day in hell, black americans. And keep that nazism out of my country.
Our hell is heaven compared to that s**t down there you live in. What's Harlem--compared to a BRAZILIAN FAVELA!?!?!?!!!?!?!?!??!!!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!!?!??????????????? Long debate about race in Brazil written by Brazuca, August 05, 2006
Hey, guys, check out this long and extensive debate undertaken on this site's forum in 2003 where yours truly argued that darker-skinned Brazilians were generally poorer than lighter-skinned ones not due to discrimination but due to cultural reasons. I'm the guy who posted as Brazuca:
Liston here Mr kkk if you love your country so damn much than "Why" are you living here in the usa? : Yes there is racism in Brazil I know this because my friend have visited Brazil A few times before and talk to some of the Brazilian Blacks down there as well as articles I read posted by black Brazilians. You seem to "hate" Blacks in amerika why? keep in mind mr.kkk man about the contributions Black Amerikans made in this country-music,entertainment,education,military,inventions in science,medicine and engineering and so forth.Just google this info on the web and you will "See"!! Reading your post mr.kkk man you sound like an damn "nazi" yourself!! Qui bom Brazu written by Abriu, August 05, 2006
I'm black and I completely agree with you Brazuca. There is no doubt in my mind that blacks via Afro-Diasporan culture, not race, and Hispanics are more Dionysian and whites and Asians more Apollonian. That culture is the reason the world is the way it is, and everything else is just a bunch of excuses. We're supposed to believe that an upper middle class kid in ritzy Shaker Heights does poorly on the SATs because of the prison system? The level of excuse-making in black America today is beyond absurd. Americans are expected to believe that upper middle class Ivy League black kids have the lowest GPA of any other group because they're oppressed? They couldn't be more priveleged! Besides, then it would follow that Asians and Jews are not oppressed groups. How pathetic that an impostor needs to state claims using my screename written by Salsassin, August 06, 2006
Heitor. The guy who pretends to be me is a pathetic fool. I am mixed and not a one dropist like this fool. Nor do I support Paulo Paim and his foolish one droppism. http://backintyme.com/ODR/
My posts speak for themselves. Thomas Sowell written by Brazuca, August 06, 2006
Thanks, Abriu. Hey, a guy you may enjoy reading immensely is Thomas Sowell. In that forum, I post an exerpt of his on the fourth page -- interesting reading. ... written by Abriu, August 06, 2006
Yeah I do enjoy Thomas Sowell thoroughly. So...Brazucass Returns written by adrianerik, August 06, 2006
Hey Brazucass...still spreading your Neo-Conservataive version of the Brazilian Chronicles (and African-American Chronicles) despite the gross contradictions thrown in your face then...and, if necessary, now. But not to drag others into your nonsense...back to Cristaldo. He follows the American conservative mold with the careless tossing of labels (Nazi, apartheid) without any sense of the systems that these words represent. He is quite laughable, for a supposed intellectual. Particularly of the Sorbonne. I would be ashamed to write such a rambling article such as this and then link my educational credentials to the Sorbonne.First of all, he and Brazilians should take a good look to the "Aryan Supremacy' movement by the Nazis in the 20's and its resemblance to the 'white supremacy' existing in Brazil at the present time. White Supremacy and its attendant bastard children (Moreno supremacy, pardo supremacy, not-too-black supremacy, et al). One should carefully look at how the Nazis, through their clever propaganda, propagated the images of Aryan Supremacy, blonde hair and blue eyes throughout the German society and the effect of this supremacy on those non 'aryans' as they appropriated these images into their communities and turned on each other. When the raids began on nightclubs and stores it was often done with the tacit approval of the 'accepted' members of the excluded communities who wanted to rid themselves of those 'animals' of their communities who were acting so 'un-German'. In Brazil, one should ask themselves what is meant by a 'policy' of miscegenation. People repeat it all of the time, but what does it mean. Really, isn't all that is necessary for a society to push interaction among it people is to accept the humanity of every member of society. This is not the same as setting standards of White Supremacy in a society and, like the Australians, determining, FROM THE BASIS OF WHITE SUPREMACY, who is most human (ie...closer to the standards of whiteness). And what of those who are not close to those 'beloved standards'? Hopefully, a quiet fading away by any means necessary. One does not need the presence of whites to have white supremacy predominate in a society (the oppression of the darker black people by the lighter black people in the Caribbean is proof to this, particularly in the French Caribbean, documented in the book Black Skin, White Masks). In essentially all of these posts I have seen what I generally hear from many Brazilians here...opposition to ANY solution, a general apathy towards the presentation of solutions, and, in some cases, the DENIAL of a problem. This was set forth in a research done in Folha do SĂŁo Paulo several years ago, where only ten percent of Braziians considered themselves racist but when polled about their beliefs about their fellow Brazilians of other hues, almost 80 to 90 percent held strongly racist beliefs. This was not an American or African-American research but a Brazilian research. In another study published in the O Globo, about 4 years ago, it showed that Black AND PARDO Brazilians having the same qualifications and education earned far less than white Brazilians and the supposed 'colorless' rise through the corporate world stopped at the point of having Black AND PARDO Brazilians in managerial positions. I have a reference for the research for anyone interested. Whether quotas are the (or 'a') solution in Brazil is polemical, but there is a deeper issue affecting Brazilian society besides quotas. What is Racism? written by adrianerik, August 06, 2006
This was a very good question because, from my experience, there has been a a revionist movement to separate racism from its oppressive elements and, in so doing, label everyone who uses color in any sense, a racist. W.E.B. DuBois, years ago, separated the terms RACIALism and RACEism. The first is what many scientists and academics now call racism...the belief that behaviour in human beings is due to race. Dubois calls this RACIALism. Taking this belief AND believing that you race is superior to and constructing systems of society (economics, religion, history, politics, etc) is what DuBois calls RACISM. Throughout the liberation movements where countries freed themselves from European colonialism and throughout the African-American civil rights and black consciousness movement, this has been the operative definition of racism. Using race preferences to remedy a racist caused situation was not racist because there was no intent to impose a society that was better than another person. The purpose of quotas is not because blacks feel that they are superior to whites...which has ALWAYS been the operative norm and defintion or racism. Current attempts by Cristaldo, the negro conservatives and others purposefully (or ignorantly) try to cloud the terms and thus link correctives systems of race to oppressive systems of race. They are two completley different animals. ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 06, 2006
I was the one who asked what racism is. I'm glad that a voice of reason clarified, because black people embarass me continually by not having a grasp on the definition of the term. I had one say it was "stereotyping people". I had another say "when the media has stereotypical images of blacks". As usual I was disgusted. Liberals, especially black ones change the definition of racism to whatever they want so it can be a crutch for every failure. Typically, black Americans seriously expect people to believe that they live with racism everyday. In the year 2006. I'm black and I have only been subjected to racism only three or four times in my life, none of which had any effect on me. Well either these blacks all live in the wrong side of the country or they need a reality check. Racism isn't someone not liking you, nor is it SYSTEMATIC FAILURE. Now they're trying to get black Brazilians into the business of excusemaking, so they can make demands for quotas because ultimately they are completely helpless without white mercy. Saying it's all racism is just a way of making themselves feel better about this sad fact of life.
I don't know if Brazu is a neo-con or not but I know, as an urban black person would say "dat nigga ain't NEVA LIED." (I'm black by the way). Obviously it's the culture. Many black people in America has fortunately woken up to this fact. Black culture is the same everywhere and it's Dionysian. White culture is the same everywhere and it's Apollonian. Not all blacks are Dionysian or whites Apollonian, just their CULTURES. That is not even REMOTELY racist. Black Americans incidentally are more Apollonian than are white Brazilians. But they're not as Apollonian as white Americans. Black culture's specialty is music. Anyone with any grip on reality can see this. Brazilian culture is a black production. In fact worldwide American culture is defined by the small black American minority. Blacks dominate in music because that's what the culture values. But economic and technological advancement is a white production. Racism is just a coincidence and has nothing to do with success or failure. If black culture succeeded in other areas besides the arts, sports, and religion, you or if they just said "who gives a f**k" and were proud of being Dionysian, whether the white world sees that as failure or not, then you wouldn't hear anything about racism. Good Character written by Brazuca, August 07, 2006
Bloody well said, Abriu! I can testify to this Dionysian-Apollonian dichotomy with reference to my people back in Africa.
Because my particular people, the Banyarwanda (specifically Tutsi) are more Apollonian than the other Africans around them, they are generally more successful. My mother's family and relatives arrived in Uganda from Rwanda destitute as refugees in 1959, and in short order had risen to the highest and most prestigious positions in Ugandan public life to a disproportionate degree. Most of these people have now returned to Rwanda.
And guess what? Rwanda is essentially set to become the first African success story. By the year 2020, its ambitious goal to become a middle-income country is sure to be realised as a result of the cultural capital of the population. For example, there is little crime and corruption in Uganda, in contrast to the surrounding countries. The Rwandan Army, to offer another example, is nowadays recognised as being one of the most capable in Africa, earning its redoubtable rep**ation largely as a result of its discipline and efficiency -- again, in direct contrast to many African armies. (The Rwandan Army was largely responsible for toppling Zairien dictator Mobutu Sese Seko's regime in a matter of months, rapidly advancing through a country the size of Western Europe that simply dwarfed tiny Rwanda.)
Such achievements and capabilities are the result of our culture. Rwandans (particularly the Tutsi) look down on the gregarious, spontaneous behavioural characteristics of many Africans, preferring instead to place a premium on dignity, self-control, pride, character, reserve, etc. And the results are there for the world to see; and will only become more pronounced with time for those who have not yet seen.
God bless Good Character. Re Abriu written by Maximus IV, August 07, 2006
Your Appolonian and Dionysian characterizations sound very educated indeed. However 6,000 years of recorded history shreds your theory into dust. The main reason why the world is the way it is today is because people from one village made weapons and raided the village of their neighbors. Why? Why not! Because they could! Maybe they were bored. Maybe they they were voyeristic, sent spies to peer on their neighbors, and decided that "since their neighbors couldn't possibly be better than them, we must gather our weapons go in and annhilate them! Take these things that were produced by these savages and convert them to our use. Yes! This is the way to true enlightenment! Taking from others!
So you see--White or Asian--Black or Brown, respect or disrespect for the boundaries of others are responsible for all of the conflicts in the 6,000 recorded years of Mans history. ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 07, 2006
Are you black? Also are you conservative? Just wondering.
The liberal explanation for Tutsi success in Rwanda is that when Europeans went in to Rwanda, they measured Hutu and Tutsi noses, proclaimed Tutsi to be noble blooded because they looked more Caucasian, and gave them all the resources, also putting a disproportionate amount of them in the army. But this doesn't explain their success when they migrated to Uganda, so you're right.
Like you I also happen to like both Apollonian and Dionysian. They both have their strengths. Dionysian is fun but disorganized. Apollonian is organized but dull. That's why I agree that Brazil is O Melhor Pais No Mundo tambem because they have been able to bring whites into the Dionysian culture, which is very exciting. The only problem now is that blacks haven't stepped into the Apollonian world enough. I believe with you that they have little racism there, although there are some cases, but not enough to explain the disparities.
Meanwhile I wonder why, if racism is as bad as black Americans make it out to be, they would insist on staying somewhere where A) they have been unable to become part of the American fabric, as three waves of immigrants coming in 200 years later have been able to B) where they feel that everyday they are slighted and not wanted. Is the money really that good? Or is it really that separation is entirely their choosing and that racism is almost completely abated? I'd be willing to bet it's the second one. Or else there would be boats going to Brazil and Haiti right now. That saddest part is that Brazilians, who are more Dionysian than black Americans, are able to come here and mingle with white Americans just fine. So it's not as if white Americans refuse to associate with Dionysian peoples. Even though I'm culturally Dionysian, I'm Apollonian to the extent that it helps further my education and career. That's the magic recipe. That's all it takes and problem would be solved. Such Broad Assertions written by adrianerik, August 07, 2006
Abriu - sorry that you mis-interpreted my post. I am a VERY liberal African-American and the two responses you cited by so-called 'ignorant' black people are right on the money. Both are correct and are essential elements of racist systems and both are prevalent with devastating impact in Brazil (The 'white novelas', 'white society pages', the objectification of black culture to the level of caricature, which you also so sweepingly do ie "black culture is music!!!!!"). Most of my liberal friends are quite successful (oops there goes your moaning unsuccessful liberal theory)yet we are still advocates for the elimination of any aspect of racism that affects any segment of our people. Financially moving into the so-called 'middle class' does not blind us to racist trends and systems still existing in American society. You say that you have never been affected by racism but reading your post, and your gross generalizations show that you have. Racism does not only oppress, it also co-opts. Culture is not inbred. It is transmitted by the social institutions of a society. Is the African culture 'more' musical than the culture of India, or the Chinese. What a silly assertion! African-American kids surpass white kids scholastically until about the third grade. What happens around age eight or nine. That's when kids begin to look for their reflections in the greater culture around them. When they look for heroes and heroines. When their sense of expectations and their possible place in the world is solidified and affirmed by the external society. In a research done in the 70's, narrated by Bill Cosby, it was shown that, at this time, the world shrunk for many young black kids. Where their vision of the world became reduced tremendously. I won't respond to your spiel that the black american world seems to spend their entire lives complaining about racism. Where exactly do you live? In community after community there are thousands of community leaders working with kids, organizing, tutoring, going to the university after night, all trying themselves (not begging anyone else) to establish their lives. In this regard one sees the huge growth in African-American home ownership and the slow buildup of African-American wealth. Someone earlier in these threads mentioned the drop in the black middle class in America. More smoke-blowing. Two questions should have been asked. Why, after 70 years of white racism in the 20th century was the black middle class only 20%? And two, what was the corresponding increase or decrease in the white middle class during this same period. The first question begs conservatives (black and white) to shut their mouths. During the period that conversatives consider the Nirvana of consevatism their jack boots were etched deeply into African-American necks. And the second shows that the middle class, IN GENERAL, in America, suffered as a result of the economic re-alignment of manufacturing jobs being shipped out of the country and (as a result of Reagon's supply-side witchcraft), watching as more jobs were lost with the junk-bond raids on companies in the 80's. The entire rust belt of the northeast was decimated as a result of these macro-economic forces. Only racist ignorance would try to ascribe the middle class decline to some specirfic aspect of African-Americans. Back to Brazil! Clearly, Brazil's problems are a mixture of class, gender AND race. There is a complete confusion about race in Brazil. It is a paradoxical situation where a certain group of people can be targeted and excluded, and yet have no ethnical ties to unite and face their common problems. It is a place where the false definitions of race is used not to state who or what you are but to make it clear who and what your ARE NOT! And this ability to beat, kill, exterminate, exclude without fear of mass community reprisals works to the advantage of those who accept as normal this type of behaviour. Good Character = Anglo-Saxon Colonial Values written by Lord Invader, August 07, 2006
Bloody well said, Abriu! I can testify to this Dionysian-Apollonian dichotomy with reference to my people back in Africa.
Because my particular people, the Banyarwanda (specifically Tutsi) are more Apollonian than the other Africans around them, they are generally more successful. My mother's family and relatives arrived in Uganda from Rwanda destitute as refugees in 1959, and in short order had risen to the highest and most prestigious positions in Ugandan public life to a disproportionate degree. Most of these people have now returned to Rwanda.
And guess what? Rwanda is essentially set to become the first African success story. By the year 2020, its ambitious goal to become a middle-income country is sure to be realised as a result of the cultural capital of the population. For example, there is little crime and corruption in Uganda, in contrast to the surrounding countries. The Rwandan Army, to offer another example, is nowadays recognised as being one of the most capable in Africa, earning its redoubtable rep**ation largely as a result of its discipline and efficiency -- again, in direct contrast to many African armies. (The Rwandan Army was largely responsible for toppling Zairien dictator Mobutu Sese Seko's regime in a matter of months, rapidly advancing through a country the size of Western Europe that simply dwarfed tiny Rwanda.)
Such achievements and capabilities are the result of our culture. Rwandans (particularly the Tutsi) look down on the gregarious, spontaneous behavioural characteristics of many Africans, preferring instead to place a premium on dignity, self-control, pride, character, reserve, etc. And the results are there for the world to see; and will only become more pronounced with time for those who have not yet seen.
God bless Good Character.
Brazuca also overlooks the fact that most African countries were utterly demoralized by the colonial experience. Their "childish" behavior is the result of systematic and sustained depersonalization under colonial economic/social/educational systems that, essentially, destroyed African minds. (Which countries? Virtually all of them, even Ethiopia.) And with this coming from an African, it is rather mind-boggling. But maybe not so mind-boggling: look at the African elite, the African leadership; look at how inept most of them have been since the end of colonialism in Africa.
Also: he implies that Europeans and Asians are known for their "restraint" and "dignity." Sorry, but I don't see this whenever I'm in Europe. I don't even see this in a white, middle-class, American community. Most white people are even more undignified and f**ked in the head than your average African, but you wouldn't know this simply by looking at television. ... written by Lord Invader, August 07, 2006
Your Appolonian and Dionysian characterizations sound very educated indeed. However 6,000 years of recorded history shreds your theory into dust. The main reason why the world is the way it is today is because people from one village made weapons and raided the village of their neighbors. Why? Why not! Because they could! Maybe they were bored. Maybe they they were voyeristic, sent spies to peer on their neighbors, and decided that "since their neighbors couldn't possibly be better than them, we must gather our weapons go in and annhilate them! Take these things that were produced by these savages and convert them to our use. Yes! This is the way to true enlightenment! Taking from others!
So you see--White or Asian--Black or Brown, respect or disrespect for the boundaries of others are responsible for all of the conflicts in the 6,000 recorded years of Mans history.
Amen!! ... written by Aprelle/Abriu, August 07, 2006
But what about Liberia, where my parents are from, and Haiti? ... written by Aprelle/Abriu, August 07, 2006
how do you know this and how can this be when stereotypes are on average true?
I'm sure there are plenty of liberals who are quite successful.
I can't believe it, that some people will find fault with everything. Brazil is a success story when it comes to incorporation of African culture into the mainstream.
The so-called middle class? I think you guys are seeing something that I'm not seeing.
Of course it is! There is no doubt about it. Observations of Africans as being particularly rhythmic date back to ancient Greece and ancient Ethiopia.
No it's because they are no longer eligible for programs like Head Start that provide adequate nutrition and other IQ enhancing needs.
Who is being targeted and excluded? ... written by Aprelle/Abriu, August 07, 2006
It didn't print any of the parts I quoted so I hope you're able to follow along. Correction written by Brazuca, August 07, 2006
In my post above entitled Good Character, I said: "For example, there is little crime and corruption in Uganda, in contrast to the surrounding countries." Obviously, I meant to say Rwanda and not Uganda, as I think may have been obvious from the context. There is PLENTY of corruption in Uganda! Black People in Brazil are very lazy most of the time! written by Maria Valentine, August 07, 2006
First of all, I am black, very dark and proud I can not overlook to my people and claim for better education and treatment since we (not all but Most) love favela life, beers, prostitution, drugs, government support in all aspects, quotas at universities, we are major jail population, so complain about what?? We are not worse nor better than anybody but it seems like we prefer to live a miserable life, I am sorry for all anti racism activists but if you really think about "unfortunatelly" you eventually agree with me. Look at the U.S. however country offers all conditions for one to succeed actually most of any immigrant from anywhere get there and quickly build a better life than black community (of course leave out the exceptions). It is easy to say black people suffer, are persecuted, get nothing, look over Asians when they first get to a different country with nothing, in a short period he has his own small business, take over best positions at colleges and do not get involved in crimes, drugs, etc. Are they better than blacks which already live in the country, was born in the country, have all rights and opportunities??? NO!!! we blacks should stop complaining and begging for justice and start studying, stop glamurizing "pimps" and bitches and give right value to the books and education. there is a way..lets find it instead of blaming all other races who just want to live in peace! The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life written by Brazuca, August 08, 2006
The liberal explanation for Tutsi success in Rwanda is that when Europeans went in to Rwanda, they measured Hutu and Tutsi noses, proclaimed Tutsi to be noble blooded because they looked more Caucasian, and gave them all the resources, also putting a disproportionate amount of them in the army. But this doesn't explain their success when they migrated to Uganda, so you're right.
Hi, Abriu. The Rwandan genocide ultimately stemmed from the fact that the Europeans ascribed group differences to evolutionistic causes. The Rwandan population is made up of people from three historically distinct population groups: the indigenous pygmies, the Bantu, and the Hamites. The Hamites, who as the last arrivals came in the 15th century from the north, conquered the existing population and instituted their system of government. Tutsis were those who possessed ten head of cattle or more and were essentially the aristocratic class; the Hutu were those who lived by subsistence farming; and the Twa were hunter-gatherers who lived in the forests. These socio-economic classes were transmutable. If the king rewarded a Hutu or Twa for, say, performing particularly bravely in battle by awarding him 10 or more cattle, then he would move up the ladder into the Tutsi socio-economic group, would marry Tutsi and behave like a Tutsi. And vice-versa: if a Tutsi, say, lost his cattle in a drought or what have you, then he would become a Hutu, marry and associate with Hutus and so forth.
When the Europeans arrived, they noticed something. For historical reasons, most Tutsi were Hamites, most Hutu were Bantu and most (or all) Twa were pygmies. This was because it was Hamitic culture that introduced the tradition of assigning value to cattle, and so Hamites, bringing the cattle with them, had a head start; the Bantu had already been subsisting on farming as their way of life; and the pygmies had been living their traditional hunter-gatherer lifestyle for who knows how long. The Europeans, however, chose to change the meaning of those words from that of being socio-economic terms describing positions that were changeable to that of being racial terms, describing immutable, biologically determined physical as well as behavioral characteristics. From then on, the word Tutsi described a person who had the physical characteristics of a Hamite; a Hutu someone with Bantu/Negroid features; and a Twa a pygmy. It mattered not how wealthy, dignified, aristocratic an individual may be: if he looked a certain way, then that was to constitute his identity for the rest of his life regardless of personal circumstances. The Preservation ... continued written by Brazuca, August 08, 2006
The Hamites had brought with them a superior and more sophisticated culture. (The contrast with the surrounding African cultures they demonstrated was shown in the 1950s film “King Solomon’s Mines”.) They also, coming originally from Ethiopia or thereabouts, had more Caucasian features, as anyone who knows what Somalis, Eritreans or Ethiopians look like would be able to attest to. The Europeans put two and two together and concluded this was not a coincidence but rather that the Hamites were in fact a superior race, either just below or equal to the European in standing. The Bantu, as Negroids, were of course deemed inferior, belonging to an altogether different order, and the Twa were seen as members of a “worn out and dying race” not far removed from the monkeys they apparently chased around in the forests.
These weren’t just Europeans looking to give “dead white males” a bad name for the benefit of posterity. These were Europeans acting according to their metaphysical assumptions which they considered to be scientific. It ought to be remembered that the subtitle to Darwin’s seminal On the Origin of Species is The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. Quite understandably, the Europeans viewed and interpreted things through Darwinian glasses and ascribed group differences to differing levels of evolutionary development. They were just being consistent evolutionists, for if man had evolved according to his responses to environmental stimuli, then men would have evolved at different rates due to their inhabiting, and responding to, differing environmental stimuli. Today’s evolutionists are not as consistent with their premises as their forbears, the latter of whom were only guilty of making valid logical inferences from their metaphysical premises.
Such thinking, as you may imagine, caused some serious problems, with the Hutu/Negroids developing a festering inferiority complex which explosively culminated in genocide.
If we ascribe the effect to the wrong cause, we can get into all sorts of problems. The Tutsi/Hamites were “superior” because their culture was less pagan than those of the surrounding cultures. Tutsis, for example, were monogamous, whereas most traditional African cultures were polygamous. They were Apollonian, whereas Africans, particularly the Bantu, tended to be Dionysian. And so on and so forth. It is important to interpret cause and effect correctly; otherwise we can get ourselves into all sorts of bother. Bulls**t written by Lord Invader, August 08, 2006
First of all, I am black, very dark and proud I can not overlook to my people and claim for better education and treatment since we (not all but Most) love favela life, beers, prostitution, drugs, government support in all aspects, quotas at universities, we are major jail population, so complain about what?? We are not worse nor better than anybody but it seems like we prefer to live a miserable life, I am sorry for all anti racism activists but if you really think about "unfortunatelly" you eventually agree with me. Look at the U.S. however country offers all conditions for one to succeed actually most of any immigrant from anywhere get there and quickly build a better life than black community (of course leave out the exceptions). It is easy to say black people suffer, are persecuted, get nothing, look over Asians when they first get to a different country with nothing, in a short period he has his own small business, take over best positions at colleges and do not get involved in crimes, drugs, etc. Are they better than blacks which already live in the country, was born in the country, have all rights and opportunities??? NO!!! we blacks should stop complaining and begging for justice and start studying, stop glamurizing "pimps" and bitches and give right value to the books and education. there is a way..lets find it instead of blaming all other races who just want to live in peace!
First off, you are not black. You are a redneck white neo-con masquerading as one(or, at least, trapped inside the body ofa black). Enough of all this gibberish about Asian "success stories." The fact that you brought them up automatically pinpoints you as a f**king AMERICAN neo-con, because this is precisely the kind of s**t that American neo-cons do. Compare other ethnic groups favorably to the lazy, good-for-nothing, lying, stealing n****rs. As if to say, it's really our fault we were slaves, that we were held further down than any other group in the Western World, and that the white power structure was constructed to have us solely as slave labor, as non-persons. BULL, s**t.
Maria Valentine, my ass, you lying dumb bitch. Bulls**t, part two written by Lord Invader, August 08, 2006
If we ascribe the effect to the wrong cause, we can get into all sorts of problems. The Tutsi/Hamites were “superior” because their culture was less pagan than those of the surrounding cultures. Tutsis, for example, were monogamous, whereas most traditional African cultures were polygamous. They were Apollonian, whereas Africans, particularly the Bantu, tended to be Dionysian. And so on and so forth. It is important to interpret cause and effect correctly; otherwise we can get ourselves into all sorts of bother.
Stop generalizing. Few people are more Dionysian than Greeks, Slavs, Italians, Germans, Brits(of all classes), white Americans, Frogs, Czechs, and other Europeans. It's just that Europeans are wealthier than Africans and can afford to put their garbage away where people can't see or smell it. Re: Brazil is a Success written by Maximus IV, August 08, 2006
Brazil is a massive failure of generational proportions. The so called Whites who are in power have created a society that promotes segregation and economic aparthied. Black Brazilians are probably vacinated at birth to put up with these atrosities. The reality is--is--is--is--is that most of the poor are Black, most of the Favela dwellers are Black, most of the Rich are White, most of the educated are White. Whatever White is Black is not! And whatever Black is White is not! So stop promoting this utopian view of Brazilian society--as those who control all the resources have FAILED in their duty to use the resources entrusted in their care for the good of all those under their stewardship. The "LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES" now comes into affect. Whites who have stood idly by and watched this travesty unfold will soon have the same conditions forced on them! "ONE WOULD THINK THAT AFTER ALL OF THE UPHEAVAL OF TWO WORLD WARS IN EUROPE, THE DEATHS OF 100 MILLION EUROPEANS IN THOSE WORLD WARS, EUROPEANS WOULD HAVE SOME PERSPECTIVE--AND COMPASSION FOR HUMAN SUFFERING, AND INDIGNITY, NO! NOT THEM! THEY RUN FROM ONE CONTINENT TO THE NEXT IN SEARCH OF SOME PEACEFUL UNWARY GROUP OF PEOPLE TO DOMINATE! Once they accomplish this they set themselves up as role models for the World. MISERABLE PEOPLE--WHO LOVE COMPANY! ... written by Abriu, August 08, 2006
Maximus that was racist. Lord Invader you say don't generalize and immediately go on to make a generalization about whites. Let me clarify that Dionysian does not necessarily mean decadent, lazy, or barbaric. I use it to mean creative-intuitive. By the way neither I nor Brazuca sees anything wrong with being Dionysian. It's far from perfect but it has its positives or else no one would care about Brazil. Also I don't see anything wrong with pagan cultures, like Afro-Brazilian culture. So LV I don't know why you don't embrace that about Black culture and Brazilian culture instead of letting Greeks take the credit. Also blacks weren't held down worse than Jews or Native Americans. And slavery was not a "white power structure". Indian Americans, black Americans, mulatto Americans, and Africans all owned the same black people that are today African American. But I agree that it shouldn't be a black people are lazy tirade a la Maria Valentine. Those people have little hope of getting out of those favelas. Even their SOCCER GODS LIKE DIDA the goal keeper are still LIVING IN SHACKS. The guy who played Ze Pequinho (Lil Ze) in Cidade de Deus is a drug addict who wasn't paid to be the movie because the director said it would just go towards his coke habit. Few of actors in the movie, who are REALLY FAVELADOS, made it out. That's how hard it is to get out of the favelas in Brazil. So if they want to be positive and happy-go-lucky, or try to escape through their musical traditions then this is why they are an inspiration to me as a black.
There is a huge double standard of laziness. Actually, one of the reasons that Brazil, although it had more slaves is backwards in comparison to the US is that the gentile upper class slaveholding families became a leisure class that developed a disdain for labor. To this day in Latin America, upper class people say things like "oh I have a business, but I much prefer to spend my time reading books". It's the same with the American South. That's why Andrew Jackson won. That's why George W. Bush won, and why he shows footage of himself playing golf and hunting. He's supposed to be a modern day Tom Sawyer. So blacks don't have a patent on laziness. Only really in America is laziness seen as plebian instead of aristocratic.
In any case, I'm still going with the cultural explanation for civilizational advancement. I don't think racism has anything whatsoever to do with it. Anything whatsoever. It's impossible that the same pattern of black behavior could be taking place all over the world, strong musical tradition, lagging on standardized testing, poverty, crime, AIDS in black women, strong religio-spiritual traditions, "soul", etc based on completely different levels and forms of racism not to mention different class levels and environments, if racism were the reason. ... written by e harmony, August 08, 2006
Re: Brazil is a Success written by Maximus IV on August 8, 2006, 2:14 pm
Brazil is a massive failure of generational proportions. The so called Whites who are in power have created a society that promotes segregation and economic aparthied. Black Brazilians are probably vacinated at birth to put up with these atrosities. The reality is--is--is--is--is that most of the poor are Black, most of the Favela dwellers are Black, most of the Rich are White,
If it's true that most the poor in Brazil are Black as you say, then since most the country is not Black it would be fair to assume most Brazilians actually are middle class or better. However if most Brazilians aren't middle class and better and most Brazilians aren't Black, then numerically speaking it would not follow that most the poor in Brazil are Black.
Anyways being Black and calling ones self Black politically or otherwise has not changed the poverty issues in Nigeria. If all Mexicans called themselves Black tommorrow it would not change their poverty issues.
That's not to say nothing needs to be done in Brazil but if the average White Brazilian has 28% Black in them per DNA test, then they are already Black by U.S. definition. Hence they qualify for any Black entitlments. Americans can't even fix Iraq, can't help Lebanon, can't even change Haiti the poorest country in the Western hemisphere around (and Brazilian UN peace keepers are there), hell Americans can't even stop Black men from slaughtering one another or filling up the prisons... so I don't know how they think they are going to change Brazil around to be some grand place of peace and prosperity. ... written by Lord Invader, August 09, 2006
In any case, I'm still going with the cultural explanation for civilizational advancement. I don't think racism has anything whatsoever to do with it. Anything whatsoever. It's impossible that the same pattern of black behavior could be taking place all over the world, strong musical tradition, lagging on standardized testing, poverty, crime, AIDS in black women, strong religio-spiritual traditions, "soul", etc based on completely different levels and forms of racism not to mention different class levels and environments, if racism were the reason.
Please don't pretend that the Western World is so great, dynamic, and super-civilized because SO much of it isn't.
And your whole arguement about African culture being Dionysiac and Western culture being Apollonian is just warmed over 19th century rhetoric--rhetoric which has been largely discredited.
The fact remains that EUROPEAN COLONIALISM UNDERMINED AFRICA. That is a fact. All this rubbish about Apollo and Dionysus doesn't gloss over historical facts. ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 10, 2006
European colonialism undermined Africa? America was a European colony, remember? Why didn't "the legacy of colonialism" negatively affect it? Liberia and Ethiopia were never colonized. Why are they just as poor and atrasado? Africans come to America and WANT to integrate and succeed, they don't go along with the excuse-making and grudge-holding so prevalent in the African-American community. Blacks could turn colonialism and slavery into a positive thing by cultural diffusion and copying Western achievements, without losing their musical traditions. ... written by Bart, August 10, 2006
"Observations of Africans as being particularly rhythmic date back to ancient Greece and ancient Ethiopia." --Wow, talk about a proudly ignorant, racist comment! Hello, what people aren't "musical"? I'm sure the people who gave us Bach or Beetoven might like to think of themselves as "musical" as would those who gave us Johnny Cash or the Clash.
A stereotype does not reflect truth. By definition it is an unfair generalization that reflects mental and moral laziness to determine the truth. White Europeans have held a stereotype that Jews would eat Christian children. If you think this is true, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn for you at a very low price.
To revel in your ignorance and bigotry, to cling to delusions of superiority and reject facts to validate your prejudices is horrific.
First, as scientist have shown repeatedly, there is no genetic basis for race. There is more genetic diversity between two people of the same race than any two of different races. What we see as race reflects environmental adaptations: black skin protects against solar radiation; and white skin allows sunlight to penetrate the skin to produce vitamin D.
Discrimination based on color and race are a fact of life in the United States and other countries. Making generalizations about all African-Americans is, by definition, racist. To do so, denies an African-American her/his humanity and individuality.
I'm embarrased for many of you. DON\'T WASTE YOUR TIME written by adrianerik, August 11, 2006
I really think that Cristaldo's article opens the door for a discussion with REAL Brazilians (whether you disagree with Janer´s points or not) and there is no need to waste time with 1) A blatant tribalist who (IF his views are held by any number of Tutsis) has explained the rage and the slaughter of almost a million in 1994 and 2) a blatant racist, masquerading as an internet intellect, but whose logic (and clear illogic and gross generalizations) places him in the ranks of spittle-dribbling bigot. They exist. s**t happens. Mosquitos bite. Just slap them away and move on with more serious things.
Living here in Brazil I am very, very interested in CONSTRUCTIVE comments from Brazilians about what they define as THE problem(s) and more so, what they define as the solutions. I've asked this question many times of friends here and on Brazilians forums and I've repeatedly run into a wall of silence. This sentiment is not my sentiment, but that expressed by many Brazilian activists who bemoan a (I can´t use the word apathy) but a more like a general compliance with the status quo. Not an acceptance of the status quo or a rejection, but as is said in the American South "go along to get along". ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 11, 2006
Jesus, I don't see how what I'm saying is racist. I'm black! And I'm proud of my culture even if it's not perfect! And I don't need that white liberal pity party raining on my hard work and personal struggle, or on my carnival. Bulls**t, part three written by Richard V., August 11, 2006
Why oh why do so many people sprout lies and myths directly refuted by facts? The notion that black americans are this almost hugely disfunctional underclass has no basis in reality anymore folks. We are still in 1965; do you all want to go out and buy the latest Beatles record and some hula-hoops? Go to www.psychcentral.com/psypsych/African_American and the section titled "Current Demographics". It is all laid out: black americans have the same living standards as most of the world's white folks (who are the population of most of the world's developed nations). I quote some of the relevant stats:
....black american workers had the second-highest median eranings of american minority groups (after Asians, whom the U.S. government selectively choose from among the college educated types so not too much third world poverty is imported into this country)...only Asian Americans were more likely to hold white collar occupations (management, professional, and related fields)....African American women had a lower fertlilty rate than the national average... Although overepresented among the nations poor, this was directly related to the disproportionate number of AA families headed by single women; such families are collectively poorer, regardless of ethnicity...AA men are more likely to complete highschool and some college than white american men...African Americans continue to attain higher levels of education than immigrants to the United States, [refuting] conventional discourse that suggests 'fresh off the boat arrivals put a higher value on education than African Americans...Although the AA rate of unemployment typically has been twice the rate among american whites (11% vs. 5%), it is still below rates found in France and Spain...When compared to populations outside the U.S., the collective affluence of African Americans is even more striking. Based on worker income alone, (they) produced 586 billion in goods, slightly smaller than the GDP of Brazil (even though Brazil's population is 5 times the size of the African American one) and (close) to the size of Russia's GDP (even though Russia's population is nearly four times the size of the African American one...in 2005 the populations of Poland and Russia were roughly equal, but the 2004 earnings of the latter group were nearly 2.5 times the size of the former's GDP in 2005. In 2005 the Ukraine's population was approximately 10% larger than the AA one...but it's GDP was 8 times smaller than the 2004 earnings of the [AA] group. In Argentina, arguably the most developed Latin American country with a population predominantly of European orgin, the unemployment rate was slightly higher than that of African Americans as a group, [yet Argentina's] poverty rate was twice as high as the AA rate and the 2004 earnings of African American workers were 3.5 times the size of Argentina's 2005 GDP, even though Argentina's population is slightly larger than the African American population.....
And so forth. Too many of these discussions proceed from a premise that the story of blacks in the U.S. is nothing but a story of continuing failure...far from it. Of course there are some problems, but there are also many successes. Getting back to the mulatto discussion, if all of Brazil's nonwhites could manage to force policies of the sort that have benefitted black americans since circa 1945, they and their society would be better off. And I think abolishing skin color shade distinctions would help this process. Sadly, from reading this discussion some black and part black brazilians have accepted the lie that they are responsible for all of their poverty....we do not help their cause if we can't point to examples of success that other blacks in the world have had. Correction written by Richard V., August 11, 2006
Damn, did not spell "dysfunctional" correctly. A stupid way to spell that word. TAKE CONTROL OF YOUR IMAGE written by adrianerik, August 11, 2006
Richard, your post is one of the reason that we African-Americans have to intensely join the international community and take control of what image of African-Americans is being spread around the world. I've spent considerable time in Europe and am all to aware of distorted image of African-Americans that is presented there. Fortunately, a lot of Europeans travel and many of them, particularly the students, who visit America, are amazed when they have a more contextual understanding of the various African-American movements. For instance, Janer states in his article that 'black' Brazilians are 'only' about 6% of the Brazilian population. Let's, for the sake of argument, say that is true. JUST for the sake of arguement. Well, many are shocked to find that the massive civil rights and black conscience movement in America was representing a black population that, at the time, was 'only' 7% of the American population. So what! Racism against one is still too much racism. And those of us who have accumulated the power to more direclty confront racism should not turn our backs on those of our people who do not have the power to overcome racist hurdles. (the redlining of black neighborhoods, the allowed decay of urban schools, the still historical lies taught in the majority of America's school system that justify lthe european extermination of indigenous peoples in the name of manifest destiny, etc). Janer's implication that racist deconstruction in Brazil is not that big a priority because 'only' 6% are black is really more of an attempt to divide and conquer, given the number of so-called pardos who also join the statistics of those excluded from advancement in Brazilian society. people who are being f**ked over are 'only' 6% of the population is untelligent. And continual comparing of African-Americans with 'black' Brazilians will continually produce harsh reactions when only distorted and incorrect images of African-Americans are in the minds of Brazilians who, for many reasons, are not a well-read population and whose perceptions are based on movies, music and television. A good friend in Rio (a military policeman) insisted that he knew more about Brooklyn (which has NO whites, according to him) and he based his knowledge on the movies that he saw. Regardless of what Brazilians think, here is a lesson that has been learned by African-Americans and poor whites, indians and hispanics, that is directly transferable to black Brazilians - do not let others speak for you! Do not let others determine how the world will see you, do not let others control the image of your people. Janer mocks the attempts to dictate that mass media in Brazil, particularly television, have a 30% black representation but chooses to ignore any response to the general whitewash of Brazilian media and the sociological and psychological this whitewash has on the self-image of huge majority of Brazilian citizens who do not see 'themselves' in these shows. On controlling your image written by Richard V., August 11, 2006
Yes Adrianerik, as I have gotten older I have come to really appreciate the importance of controlling your images and how only people themselves are best equipped to do it. Who is Janer trying to kid? I work at a nonprofit in California that helps folks find jobs (I am an ex-Navy JAG lawyer). Several months ago I helped a young Brazilian woman (there are a growing number in California's San Fernando Valley) find work and we got on the topic (through her effort, not mine) of race. She had a kind of Mariah Carey type look, albeit with darker hair and would be assumed by most in the U.S. to be a Latina and thus had slight evidence of African ancestry. Anyway, she told me about how upset she was with a white woman in Mississippi (from a government agency) who insisted she be considered Latina/Hispanic as opposed to simply "White". Now I would ask Janer, if your system works so well, why do Brazilians like this woman feel it is necessary to be considered White? Any person who insists they be identified as white, but then claims race does not matter in their society is like a woman who tells you she places no value on her looks but insists that you constantly tell her she is pretty. Anyway you are right, target number one is a VAST IMPROVEMENT OF THE BRAZILIAN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM, with a prerequisite being a clamp down on the system of corruption and cronyism that undermines the functioning of the government and (the people's) faith in the rule of law. I assume you either live in or have recently been in Brazil. Have you had the chance to view the new black brazilian T.V. channel? If so, what do you think of it? I heard the reaction from some White or "light" Brazilians was rather intense at times. Imagine that, people in a majority black/mixed race country thinking they were entitled to see themselves on T.V. for more than ten minutes per week. ... written by Lord Invader, August 12, 2006
European colonialism undermined Africa? America was a European colony, remember? Why didn't "the legacy of colonialism" negatively affect it? Liberia and Ethiopia were never colonized. Why are they just as poor and atrasado? Africans come to America and WANT to integrate and succeed, they don't go along with the excuse-making and grudge-holding so prevalent in the African-American community. Blacks could turn colonialism and slavery into a positive thing by cultural diffusion and copying Western achievements, without losing their musical traditions.
I don't think you are. Then again, you might be.
1. First generation immigrants are almost always less apathetic than the second, third, or fourth generations--they are new arrivals in a country and aren't as jaded as succeeding generations.
2. Africa was undermined by a massive slave trade, WHILE WHITE NORTH AMERICANS WERE NOT SENT TO ENGLAND EN MASSE TO WORK AS FIELD HANDS. That arguement is so dumb it's not worth repeating.
3. Liberia was indeed colonized--by Firestone!! Of all European colonies, the African ones were the most brutally colonized and exploited. The Congo is a perfect example of what I mean: between 1885 and 1905, the Belgians killed at least 13 million Congolese. For rubber.
4. Copying Western achievements--dumbf**k, a lot of those so-called Western achievements were actually done by blacks. LOOK IT UP.
Stop bulls**tting and stereotyping--and yes, you are a f**king white boy. Sowell #1 written by Brazuca, August 12, 2006
There is no question that Africans and their descendants faced the additional barrier of color prejudice, but can we measure its effects by assuming that black people would have had the same income and wealth as white people in the absence of this factor--especially in view of the large disparities among different groups of white immigrants, not to mention the rise of some non-white groups such as Chinese Americans and Japanese Americans to incomes above the national average?
Put differently, geography has not only cheated many peoples of equal cultural opportunities [even Sowell is prone to a little excuse-making -- but I'll let him off: Brazuca], it has also cheated all of us today of a simple criterion for measuring the economic and social effects of other variables, such as prejudice and discrimination. Nothing has been more common in human history than discrimination against different groups [not here in fair-go Australia -- but I'll let you off: Brazuca], whether different by race, religion, caste or in innumerable other ways. Moreover, this discrimination has itself been unequal--more fierce against some groups than others and more pervasive at some periods of history than in others. If there were not so many other powerful factors creating disparities in income and wealth, it might be possible to measure the degree of discrimination by the degree of differences in economic outcomes. Even so, the temptation to do so is seductive, especially as a means of reducing the complexities of life to the simplicities of politics. But the facts will not fit that vision.
Anyone familiar with the history of race relations in the Western Hemisphere would find it virtually impossible to deny that blacks in the United States have faced more hostility and discrimination than blacks in Latin America. As just one example, 161 blacks were lynched in one year in the United States, but racial lynching was unknown south of the Rio Grande. People may debate whether race relations in Brazil, for example, have ever been quite as good as sometimes represented, but there is little or no debate that they have been better than in the United States.
If discrimination were as all-purpose an explanation of economic differences as is often supposed, we might reasonably expect blacks in Brazil to have come closer to economic parity with whites there than blacks in the United States have come to achieving parity with white Americans. In fact, however, Brazil has larger black-white disparities in income than does the United States. As inconsistent as this may be with discrimination as a dominant explanatory factor, it is perfectly consistent with cultural explanations. Sowell #2 written by Brazuca, August 12, 2006
Blacks in the United States have had more centuries of acculturation to Western civilization than blacks in Brazil. Brazil continuously imported Africans in large numbers up through the middle of the nineteenth century, while most people of African ancestry on American soil were born on American soil as far back as colonial times. Perhaps an even stronger case against the predominance of discrimination as an explanation of economic disparities would be a comparison of blacks in Haiti with blacks in the United States. Since Haiti became independent two centuries ago, Haitian blacks should be the most prosperous blacks in the hemisphere and American blacks the poorest, if discrimination is the overwhelming factor, but in fact the direct opposite is the case. It is Haitians who are the poorest and American blacks who are the most prosperous in the hemisphere--and in the world. [answer that one, Macca! ]
None of this should be surprising. The fact that discrimination deserves moral condemnation does not automatically make it causally crucial [his emphasis]. Whether it is or is not in a given time and place is an empirical question, not a foregone conclusion. A confusion of morality with causation may be politically convenient but that does not make the two things one.
We rightly condemn a history of gross racial discrimination in American education, for example, but when we make that the causal explanation of educational differences, we go beyond what the facts will support. Everyone is aware of times and places when the amount of money spent educating a black child was a fraction of what was spent educating a white child, when the two groups were educated in separate systems, hermetically sealed off from one another, and when worn-out textbooks from the white schools were then sent over to the black schools to be used, while new and more up-to-date textbooks were bought for the white children. The number of days in a school sometimes differed so much that a black child with 9 years of schooling would have been in class the same number of days as a white child with only 6 years of schooling. It seems so obvious that such things would account for disparities in test scores, for example.
But is it true?
There are other groups to whom none of these factors apply--and who still have had test score differences as great as those between black and white children in the Jim Crow South. Japanese and Mexican immigrants began arriving in California at about the same time and initially worked in very similar occupations as agricultural laborers. Yet a study of a school district in which their children attended the same schools and sat side-by-side in the same classrooms found IQ differences as great as those between blacks and whites attending schools on opposite sides of town in the Jim Crow South [not that I subscribe to that silly "IQ" business, since there are some mighty big epistemological problems with such an idea]. International studies have found different groups of illiterates--people with no educational differences because they had no education--with mental test differences larger than those between blacks and whites in the United States. Nor is this necessarily a matter of genetics. During the First World War, black soldiers from Ohio, Illinois, New York, and Pennsylvania scored higher on mental tests than did white soldiers from Georgia, Arkansas, Kentucky, and Mississippi.(5) Sowell #3 written by Brazuca, August 12, 2006
What is "the" reason? There may not be any such thing as "the" reason. There are so many cultural, social, economic, and other factors interacting that there was never any reason to expect equal results in the first place. That is why plausible simplicities must be subjected to factual scrutiny.
Back in 1899, when the schools of Washington, D.C. were racially segregated and discrimination was rampant, there were four academic high schools in the city--three white and one black. When standardized tests were given that year, the black academic high school scored higher than two of the three white academic high schools.(6) Today, nearly a century later, even setting such a goal would be considered hopelessly utopian. Nor was this a fluke. That same high school was scoring at or above the national average on IQ tests during the 1930s and 1940s.(7) Yet its physical plant was inadequate and its average class size was higher than that in the city's white high schools.
Today, that same school has a much better physical plant and per-pupil expenditures in the District of Columbia are among the highest in the nation. But the students' test scores are among the lowest. Nor was this school unique in having had higher academic achievements during a period when it seemingly lacked the prerequisites of achievement and yet fell far behind in a later period when these supposed prerequisites were more plentiful.
This is obviously not an argument for segregation and discrimination, nor does it deny that counter-examples might be found of schools that languished in the first period and did better in the second. The point here is much more specific--that resources have had little or nothing to do with educational quality. Numerous studies of schools in general have shown that, both within the United States and in international comparisons. It should be no surprise that the same applies to black schools.
Politically, however, the disbursement of resources is by no means inconsequential. The ability to dispense largess from the public treasury has for centuries been one of the signs and prerogatives of power in countries around the world. In electoral politics, it is vital as an element in re-election. But the ultimate question is: Does it in fact make people better off? How that question is answered is much less important than that it be asked--that we not succumb to social dogmas, even when they are intellectually fashionable and politically convenient.
It is also important that economic and other disparities be confronted, not evaded. Best-selling author Shelby Steele says that whites in America today are fearful of being considered racists, while blacks are fearful of being considered inferior [why "blacks" insist on living in the US, I don't know :? ]. Social dogmas may be accepted because they relieve both groups of their fears, even if these dogmas neither explain the past nor prepare for the future. Sowell #4 written by Brazuca, August 12, 2006
It should be axiomatic that there is not unlimited time, unlimited resources, or unlimited good will among peoples--anywhere in the world. If we are serious about wanting to enlarge opportunities and advance those who are less fortunate, then we cannot fritter away the limited means at our disposal in quixotic quests. We must decide whether our top priority is to smite the wicked or to advance the less fortunate, whether we are looking for visions and rhetoric that make us feel good for the moment or whether we are seeking methods with a proven track record of success in advancing whole peoples from poverty to prosperity.
In an era when esoteric theories can be readily turned into hard cash from the public treasury, our criteria must be higher than what can get government grants for middle-class professionals. It must instead be what will rescue that youngster imprisoned, not only in poverty, but also in a social and cultural isolation that has doomed whole peoples for centuries in countries around the world. When we promote cultural provincialism under glittering labels, we must confront the hard question whether we are throwing him a lifeline or an anchor.
History, geography, and cultures are influences but they are not predestination. Not only individuals but whole peoples have moved from the backwaters of the world to the forefront of civilization. The late Italian author Luigi Barzini asked of Britain: "How, in the first place, did a peripheral island rise from primitive squalor to world domination?" The story of Japan's rise from a backward country in the mid-nineteenth century to one of today's leading economic powers has been at least equally as dramatic. Scotland was for centuries known for its illiteracy, poverty, and lack of elementary cleanliness. Yet, from the mid-eighteenth to the mid-nineteenth century, most of the leading intellectual pioneers of Britain were Scots, and Scots also become prominent in business, banking, medicine, and engineering--not only in Britain but around the world.
These and other dramatic and heartening rises of whole peoples came from doing things that were often directly the opposite of what is being urged upon less fortunate groups in the United States today. Far from painting themselves into their own little cultural corner and celebrating their "identity," these peoples sought the knowledge and insights of other peoples more advanced than themselves in particular skills, technologies, or organizational experience. It took centuries for the English to absorb the cultural advances brought by such conquerors as the Romans and the Normans and by such immigrants as the Huguenots, Germans, Jews, and others who played a major role in developing the British economy. Their early dependence on outsiders was painfully demonstrated when the Romans pulled out of Britain in the fifth century, in order to go defend their threatened empire on the continent, and the British economy and political structure both collapsed. Yet ultimately--more than a thousand years later--the British rose to lead the world into the industrial revolution and controlled an empire containing one-fourth of the land area of the earth and one-fourth of the human race. Sowell #5 written by Brazuca, August 12, 2006
Japan's economic rise began from a stage of technological backwardness that was demonstrated when Commodore Perry presented them with a gift of a train. Here was their reaction:
At first the Japanese watched the train fearfully from a safe distance, and when the engine began to move they uttered cries of astonishment and drew in their breath. Before long they were inspecting it closely, stroking it, and riding on it, and they kept this up throughout the day.
A century later, the Japanese "bullet train" would be one of the technological wonders of the world, surpassing anything available in the United States. But, before this happened, a major cultural transformation had to take place among the Japanese people. A painful awareness of their own backwardness spread through Japan. Western nations in general and the United States in particular were held up as models to their children. Japanese textbooks urged imitation of Abraham Lincoln and Benjamin Franklin, even more so than Japanese heroes. Many laments about their own shortcomings by the Japanese of that era would today be called "self-hate." But there were no cultural relativists then to tell them that what they had achieved was just as good, in its own way, as what others had. Instead, the Japanese overcame their backwardness, through generations of dedicated work and study, rather than redefining it out of existence.
Both the British and the Japanese became renowned for their ability to absorb the ideas and the technology of others and to carry them forward to higher levels. So did the Scots. At one time, it was common for Scots to blindly imitate the English, even using an English plow that proved to be unsuitable for the soil of Scotland. Yet, once they had absorbed what the English had to offer, the Scots then surpassed the English in some fields, notably medicine and engineering.
History does not offer blueprints for the present but it does offer examples and insights. If nothing else, it can warn us against becoming mesmerized by the heady visions and soaring rhetoric of the moment. ... written by e harmony, August 12, 2006
Simply, if one goes by the "One Drop Rule" of the United States - meaning a drop of Black blood constitutes you as Black - then Brazil by matter that most her White "looking" people have on average supposedly 28% Black ancestry in them, has by U.S. "One Drope Rule" less disparity in wealth between Blacks and Whites in Brazil than the United States does.
What's happening in this discussion is that people are arguing Brazil needs to adopt the U.S. "One Drop Rule" yet they are judging disparity in wealth not by the "One Drop Rule" but by the Brazilian system looks rather than blood quantum. Which mean per oder of thought people are creating errors in logic.
Furthermore... to judge the progress of Blacks in the United States it is better to judge that in relation to the United States overall wealth, numbers in prison, homicide, rates of HIV/AIDS infection, numbers with health coverage et cetera. Its a smoke screen to judge Black Americans progress within the United States against the combined buying power of groups in France or Brazil. The United States has a GDP of $11 trillion. No nation on earth has a GDP that comes close to that. ------ written by casey, August 12, 2006
but white brazilians love SNOOP DOGG !!!!!!!! eharmony give it a rest. written by Salsassin, August 12, 2006
I don't know what you mean by "one drop rule" but obviously if someone looks like, say, "Paris Hilton" and has some Black ancestry she is not Black. Brazil's Whites have an average of 28% Black ancestry? I bet you pulled that out of your ass. Common sense would dictate they are still not Black anyway. There is no way someone is Black if he has predominate nonblack ancestry. If anything, one could be considered black if he or she has atleast 50% black ancestry - that's when things start to get interesting. One is definitely black if he has predominate black ancestry or 51%>. ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 12, 2006
Lord Invader I was starting to think you were intelligent. Anyway I am black. Ask me anything about being black and I can tell. I am medium brown, bottom-heavy yet petite, have shoulder length black hair and very dark brown eyes. Both my parents are Liberian. Maybe that's why I'm not prone to excuse making because I'm an immigrant. I don't see how blaming whitey will get us anywhere. You are so sexist you can't even imagine that I might have been a white GIRL either. And racist, that's why you call white guys BOYS and think anyone doesn't agree with you is white.
Anyway no Liberia was never colonized. What the f**k are you talking about when you say Africa was hurt by the massive slave trade? That's not the argument you originally put forth "dumbf**k" (hmm...are you sure YOU'RE not the one who's white?). You were talking about colonialism. It's only when I mentioned the fact that America was a colony, that you felt the need to change geers completely and cry slavery.
Well Mr. Massive Slave Trade. Guess what? That's AFRICAN"S FAULT TOO. Slave TRADE: Get it? That means Africans sold other Africans into slavery. They weren't kidnapped.
Oh I'm sure many Western achievements were the work of blacks...rrrright. How can they have made Western achievements if they were at first slaves who weren't allowed to read and then segregated? Western achievements are the product of Chinese, Islamic, and Indian sub-continental civilizations, along with Roman conquest. You are the one who needs to look it up. If West got good by copying the Chinese, and the Japanese got good by copying America, why the hell is it any skin off our backs as black people to copy the West too?? It's not like we're not allowed to!
: : : : : ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 12, 2006
Richard I agree with you, the situation in black America is not that bad, which is why I don't see what the use is in crying racism. Adrianerik, I agree Canal da Gente is LONG overdue. I can't believe those light-skinned sell-outs and those hypocritical whites have the nerve to complain about it. And yes 6% is a bold-faced lie. The reason the ISBE lists Brazil as being 6% black is because they use the word Preto, which blacks there find insulting: it connotes poverty and may connote bad character. When you use the term Negro, you get a figure closer to 45%. It's very disgusting how Brazil will not acknowledge her black population. They say race doesn't matter and that they mix because they want to, but really they are deliberately trying to whiten their family trees and are very conscious of being white once they become such. But I guess there's not much anyone can do about it. :-\ Good thing for that chanel though. ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 12, 2006
channel ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 12, 2006
Brazuca thank you for posting that. I wish black people around the world would pay attention and start working towards a better tomorrow by copying the West or Asian civilization in stead of sitting around feeling sorry for themselves and making themselves feeling all warm and fuzzy by pointing fingers. But why did you say you don't understand why blacks insist on living in the US? Aren't we the most successful blacks in the world? Separatism works very badly here in Australia written by Leon Brooks, August 13, 2006
We now have "whites", people with suntans (mostly) who are basically paid to exist (what a culture!) and people with suntans who don't take those rules seriously.
The children of the paid-to-exist are effectively taught to take the situation for granted and so not do too much for themselves, which limits the number of possible Aboriginals available to keep their culture alive.
One day Dad talked to a pair of well-dressed TIs (Torres Straight Islanders) in a park here in Perth, as they were walking past a group of paid-to-exists in a public park. Over Mum's objections (both Anglo Australians, I was born in Canada), Dad asked the TIs what made the difference between them and the payees. The TIs' collective opinion was "they won't work." As simple as that. I guess because they don't need to and aren't really expected to.
Don't get me wrong -- there's no shortage of work ethic amongst Aboriginals... until you persistently pay them to do nothing. Have to add... written by Leon Brooks, August 13, 2006
...that your average white Australia, Pom, Yank, Canuck, Brasiliano, whoever would react to that training in pretty much the same way.
Race isn't the issue, the treatment is. Oh, and again... written by Leon Brooks, August 13, 2006
...some of the paid-to-exist have lighter skins, hair & eyes than I do. Makes the idea of racism go kind of wonky, yes? Youre Not Salsassin written by e harmony, August 13, 2006
eharmony give it a rest. written by Salsassin on August 12, 2006, 3:50 pm
I don't know what you mean by "one drop rule" but obviously if someone looks like, say, "Paris Hilton" and has some Black ancestry she is not Black. Brazil's Whites have an average of 28% Black ancestry? I bet you pulled that out of your ass. Common sense would dictate they are still not Black anyway. There is no way someone is Black if he has predominate nonblack ancestry. If anything, one could be considered black if he or she has atleast 50% black ancestry - that's when things start to get interesting. One is definitely black if he has predominate black ancestry or 51%>.
Here is a BBC news link on Brazilian DNA finds: http://news.bbc.uk/2/low/science/nature/258553.stm You'll note the findings say that those Brazilians that would be considered "Black" were found to have 48% non-European ancestry.
I think it's fairly evident you a person that posts on mulatto.org and another forum I and some others go to. Judging by your tone, syntax, and use of smilies. Correct BBC News Link on White Brazilian DNA ancestry written by e harmony, August 13, 2006
Since the links for BBC don't seem to be working I'll just post what it says. From BBC News:
Quote Wednesday, 18 December, 2002, 01:20 GMT
Colour 'no guide to ancestry'
Physical characteristics associated with race - such as skin or hair colour - do not necessarily reflect a person's genetic ancestry, a new study suggests.
" Our study makes clear the hazards of equating colour or race with geographical ancestry "
A group of scientists - writing in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - have found that people who appear white may genetically be mainly African, while people who look black may genetically be European or Amerindian.
The scientists, from the University of Minas Gerais in Brazil and the University of Porto in Portugal, said their data indicated that, in Brazil, colour was a weak predictor of African ancestry.
"There is wide agreement among anthropologists and human geneticists that, from a biological standpoint, human races do not exist," said one of the researchers, Sergio Pena.
"Yet races do exist as social constructs," Dr Pena and his colleagues said.
Colour roots
The research took place in Brazil and on the island of Sao Tome, a former Portuguese colony off the African coast.
" Races do exist as social constructs "
Brazil's population comes from three separate ethnic groups: the original Amerindians, Europeans, and Africans.
These groups have inter-married and inter-bred, yet some Brazilians are popularly regarded as white, others as black.
The researchers found 10 gene variations that could reliably tell apart - genetically - 20 men from northern Portugal and 20 men from Sao Tome.
But the genetic differences did not have anything to do with physical characteristics such as skin or hair colour, the researchers found.
Poor guide
They next tested two groups - 173 Brazilians "classified" as white, black, or intermediate based on arm skin colour, hair colour, and nose and lip shape, and 200 men living in major metropolitan areas who classified themselves as white.
The results threw up some surprises: maternal DNA suggested that even the "white" people had about 33% of genes that were of Amerindian ancestry and 28% African - indicating that European men often fathered children with black and Indian women.
"It is interesting to note that the group of individuals classified as blacks had a very high proportion of non-African ancestry (48%)," they wrote.
"Our study makes clear the hazards of equating colour or race with geographical ancestry and using interchangeably terms such as white, Caucasian and European on one hand, and black, Negro or African on the other, as is often done in scientific and medical literature," the scientists' report said. Quote AFROBRAZILIAN, NOT EUROPEAN! written by Thaďs Nicoletti, August 13, 2006
We want a mulatto president, no whites. And we want our language to be called Brazilian. We can't even understand (Continental) Portuguese. :-\ ... written by Abriu, August 13, 2006
Brazuca can you tell me what book you found the Sowell quotes with page numbers from or what link? I am a gay afrocentric written by Lord Invader, August 13, 2006
I just like whining about life because my life is pathetic. Afrocentric rules!!! written by King Baby, August 13, 2006
We don't have a clue but we feel good about ourselves Re: AfroBrazilian not European written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 13, 2006
glad to hear it. Black Conservatives.... written by The Real Lord Invader, August 14, 2006
....don't get it. They just don't. They think that if you mimic so-called "European culture," then they will be accepted as equals in the world and racism will disappear. Dumbasses.
Thomas Sowell is one of them--another discredited black neo-con and Zionist shill, like Stanley Crouch. ... written by The Real Lord Invader, August 14, 2006
Back in 1899, when the schools of Washington, D.C. were racially segregated and discrimination was rampant, there were four academic high schools in the city--three white and one black. When standardized tests were given that year, the black academic high school scored higher than two of the three white academic high schools.(6) Today, nearly a century later, even setting such a goal would be considered hopelessly utopian. Nor was this a fluke. That same high school was scoring at or above the national average on IQ tests during the 1930s and 1940s.(7) Yet its physical plant was inadequate and its average class size was higher than that in the city's white high schools.
This is what happens when you integrate with white people--you get brain rot!! Thomas Sowell & Stanley Crouch written by Maximus IV, August 14, 2006
I thought I was the only one who recognized these "colored men" for the slithering jackals that they are! Add Armstrong Williams to this list and you could fill house negro positions in three plantations. These men should be stripped of their clothes and paraded down Black Mainstreet America for all to gaze upon their true selves. Take special note of the shameful looks that appear on their faces as they are debased for their cowardice. ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 14, 2006
What could you have against Thomas Sowell, he's an amazing writer. I'm not that conservative, but I respect conservative ideas. I don't think black people should be whites in blackface, but I think they should exchange ideas with them and advance on their own merits, not on begging and whining. I hope we're not so pessimistic that we think nothing else works but being in "black rage". If I walked around in middle America being upset all day I would think life itself was SERIOUSLY overrated. : Abriu, get real written by The Real Lord Invader, August 14, 2006
Most white Americans are failures or mediocrities. Stop trying to con us into thinking that white boys have everything on the ball. I hear white guys complaining all the time about their lousy jobs, that they can't get laid by frigid white bitches, that the city they live in sucks, their apartment is half-ass, etc., etc. etc. Who the hell do you think you're fooling???
BTW, who needs "black rage" when there are so many Angry White Males? ... written by The Real Lord Invader, August 14, 2006
Also, please note that ordinary whites rarely exchange ideas with anyone, not even themselves. Those of us who have white friends know this very well. They exchange bodily fluids, not ideas. It is not a Smokescreen written by Richard V., August 14, 2006
"Furthermore...to judge the progress of blacks in the United States it is better to judge that in relation to the United States' overall wealth, numbers in prison, homicide, rates of HIV/AIDS infection, numbers with health coverage, etc...It's a smoke screen to judge Black American's progress within the United States against the combined buying power of groups in France or Brazil. The United States has a GDP of 11 trillion. No nation on earth has a GDP that comes close to that."
True, there is nothing wrong with comparing the status of black americans with that of white americans and always understanding that parity with them is the long term goal, but be realistic. White americans are collectively by far the wealthiest group in the history of the world. Plus, they have had almost 400 years of combined defacto and dejure preferential treatment over us as an advantage; also they outnumber us by 7 to 1. So yes, on paper they are doing better than us, but they are doing better than everybody else in the world too. It might be better to measure our progress against others in this world who did not have some of the advantages white americans have had (i.e., living on a continent with vast natural resources, militarily weak neighbors, a British Navy that protected them from more powerful Old World Empires, a Common Law tradition and British precedents that provided them with a hell of a lot of case studies from which to learn, not having to pay slaves for work for about 200 years, etc...) And it is important sometimes to focus on the progress. How can you expect Black Americans, not to mention blacks in other countries like Brazil to listen to our suggestions when they mistakenly think Black America is nothing but a bastion of pathologies and failure. At this blog site and elsewhere I have already witnessed folks responding to Black American bloggers by saying, in short "how can you offer solutions when Black America only has problems and NOTHING ever seems to work. In addition to demorilizing other blacks you also create "donor fatigue" with non-blacks who could be your allies. Yes, remember the problems, but point out the successes to inspire your own while (also) discrediting the racists. ... written by Salsassin, August 15, 2006
Dear e harmony,
"You'll note the findings say that those Brazilians that would be considered "Black" were found to have 48% non-African ancestry." That is still within the accepted definition of black which I already stated. 48% nonblack still means said person is 52% black which indicates conclusively that said person is predominately black. Like I said, black is 50% or more black ancestry.
So take your droppings and stuff them up your ass. You want to be "one dropped"? How about I drop kick you with one of my feet. ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 15, 2006
Lord Invader what do you mean by whites rarely exchange ideas?
Richard I agree people need to be more positive and optimistic about black America. While people should focus on black progress, especially conservatives, they should also focus on racial progress, especially liberals who should admit that racism has greatly abated. Continually looking for new racial slights also creates "donor fatigue" because non-black allies start to A) feel like there's nothing they can do B) feel like black people are whining C) feel like black people are bulls**tting and just saying that to corroborate either themselves being racist or themselves failing.
Also what about Asians? But I agree we need to get over the whole black/white thing. Whites had a HUGE environmental advantage and cultural advantage. Blacks will not be on par with whites completely, we need to be glad it's not worse and move on. Belated answers to Abriu written by Brazuca, August 16, 2006
By the way neither I nor Brazuca sees anything wrong with being Dionysian. It's far from perfect but it has its positives or else no one would care about Brazil. Also I don't see anything wrong with pagan cultures, like Afro-Brazilian culture.
Quite, Abriu. The question is, where does one strike the right balance between alluring and captivating coolness on the one hand and prosaic temperance and continence on the other? How does one achieve an equilibrium between Dionysian joie de vivre and Apollonian self-restraint? The same New Orleans culture (the powerful confluence of Latin and African cultures) that produced jazz -- perhaps the US's most significant cultural contributions to the world -- and the general ineffable coolness of the town is the same one responsible for creating a population disproportionately consisting of people with low character. The character deficiencies of all too many of the people of New Orleans became all too apparent to the word during Katrina.
But why did you say you don't understand why blacks insist on living in the US? Aren't we the most successful blacks in the world?
They say race doesn't matter and that they mix because they want to, but really they are deliberately trying to whiten their family trees and are very conscious of being white once they become such.
Abriu, the problem with that claim is that those wishing to "whiten" themselves obviously have to find light-skinned people wishing to "darken" themselves. Clearly this is self-contradictory. If "whitening up" is such an ideal, then those already dark would be unable to find anybody light-skinned who would wish to darken their progeny by joining in union with them. The situation in Brazil, rather than the reality of a gente bronzeada that we all see, would have been one of Jim Crow racial segregation a la USA.
Brazuca can you tell me what book you found the Sowell quotes with page numbers from or what link?
I'm sorry, Abriu, I don't remember where I got that passage from, except to say that it was from the Net somewhere. I think it may come from his book Race and Culture: A World View. ( http://www.amazon.com/gp/produ...5?n=283155 ) ... written by Brazuca, August 16, 2006
By the way neither I nor Brazuca sees anything wrong with being Dionysian. It's far from perfect but it has its positives or else no one would care about Brazil. Also I don't see anything wrong with pagan cultures, like Afro-Brazilian culture.
Quite, Abriu. The question is, where does one strike the right balance between alluring and captivating coolness on the one hand and prosaic temperance and continence on the other? How does one achieve an equilibrium between Dionysian joie de vivre and Apollonian self-restraint? The same New Orleans culture (the powerful confluence of Latin and African cultures) that produced jazz -- perhaps the US's most significant cultural contributions to the world -- and the general ineffable coolness of the town is the same one responsible for creating a population disproportionately consisting of people with low character. The character deficiencies of all too many of the people of New Orleans became all too apparent to the word during Katrina.
But why did you say you don't understand why blacks insist on living in the US? Aren't we the most successful blacks in the world?
They say race doesn't matter and that they mix because they want to, but really they are deliberately trying to whiten their family trees and are very conscious of being white once they become such.
Abriu, the problem with that claim is that those wishing to "whiten" themselves obviously have to find light-skinned people wishing to "darken" themselves. Clearly this is self-contradictory. If "whitening up" is such an ideal, then those already dark would be unable to find anybody light-skinned who would wish to darken their progeny by joining in union with them. The situation in Brazil, rather than the reality of a gente bronzeada that we all see, would have been one of Jim Crow racial segregation a la USA.
Brazuca can you tell me what book you found the Sowell quotes with page numbers from or what link?
I'm sorry, Abriu, I don't remember where I got that passage from, except to say that it was from the Net somewhere. I think it may come from his book Race and Culture: A World View. ( http://www.amazon.com/gp/produ...5?n=283155 ) Para Brazu written by Abriu, August 16, 2006
Good point about the whitening situation. But I hear read on a Brazilian forum called mundonegro.com.br that negras brasileiras have a hard time finding mates, as every man has blond ambition. What do you make of this? Also there are so many different words for dark skinned Brazilians but whites don't hesitate to call themselves white. Do you think that there is something to that, or that American intellectuals read too much into nothing? By the way, I really respect your opinions and I wish you were a professional writer. ... written by e harmony, August 16, 2006
Dear e harmony,
"You'll note the findings say that those Brazilians that would be considered "Black" were found to have 48% non-African ancestry." That is still within the accepted definition of black which I already stated. 48% nonblack still means said person is 52% black which indicates conclusively that said person is predominately black. Like I said, black is 50% or more black ancestry.
So take your droppings and stuff them up your ass. You want to be "one dropped"? How about I drop kick you with one of my feet.
Are we angry because I disagreed with you?
You see as the article pointed out tests demonstrate the average White Brazilian has 28% Black in them. Which means they would be Black by USA definition of what consitutes Black. ... written by e harmony, August 16, 2006
It is not a Smokescreen written by Richard V. on August 14, 2006, 6:59 pm
"Furthermore...to judge the progress of blacks in the United States it is better to judge that in relation to the United States' overall wealth, numbers in prison, homicide, rates of HIV/AIDS infection, numbers with health coverage, etc...It's a smoke screen to judge Black American's progress within the United States against the combined buying power of groups in France or Brazil. The United States has a GDP of 11 trillion. No nation on earth has a GDP that comes close to that."
True, there is nothing wrong with comparing the status of black americans with that of white americans and always understanding that parity with them is the long term goal, but be realistic. White americans are collectively by far the wealthiest group in the history of the world. Plus, they have had almost 400 years of combined defacto and dejure preferential treatment over us as an advantage; also they outnumber us by 7 to 1. So yes, on paper they are doing better than us, but they are doing better than everybody else in the world too. It might be better to measure our progress against others in this world who did not have some of the advantages white americans have had (i.e., living on a continent with vast natural resources, militarily weak neighbors, a British Navy that protected them from more powerful Old World Empires, a Common Law tradition and British precedents that provided them with a hell of a lot of case studies from which to learn, not having to pay slaves for work for about 200 years, etc...) And it is important sometimes to focus on the progress. How can you expect Black Americans, not to mention blacks in other countries like Brazil to listen to our suggestions when they mistakenly think Black America is nothing but a bastion of pathologies and failure. At this blog site and elsewhere I have already witnessed folks responding to Black American bloggers by saying, in short "how can you offer solutions when Black America only has problems and NOTHING ever seems to work. In addition to demorilizing other blacks you also create "donor fatigue" with non-blacks who could be your allies. Yes, remember the problems, but point out the successes to inspire your own while (also) discrediting the racists.
Hey Richard,
You make some points in some ways I don't disagree with. And you are correct Black Americans ought feel good about their progress. No doubt about that it was hard fought and hard won.
But Brazil has been a place of great racial mixture and proud to sell it to the world. I personally like the Brazilian way of racial mixing. Her uniques in this regard is about to become beneficial to her in the 21st century if she holds out. Because the old racial ways of the U.S. 20th century is about to die out.
I wonder though... Haiti is majority Black. Does calling themselves, or will calling themselves Black erase their poverty? What about the Dominican Republic? Plenty of mixed-race peoples there that are supposedly notorious for disassociating themselves from Black peoples. Do you "evangelize" to them as much as you do to the Brazilians? Would all Dominicans calling themselves Black turn them into a finacially properous people? ... written by The Real Lord Invader, August 16, 2006
Abriu and Brazuca, please.
All this rhetoric you guys are throwing around is just that--rhetoric.
First off, Abriu, your average white Westerner isn't doing all that great. I mean your average middle-class white American or European. White middle America doesn't live in Paradise. Obviously when you mean "white people" you mean upper-class, or at best very upper-middle class.
And Brazuca, stop all this s**t about "Apollonian" culture and "Dionysiac" culture. Close examination of European cultures historically will find plenty of Dionysiac elements. Your gibberish will go down well in Karl Rove's office or in the hallways of the American Enterprise Institute, but not with us who can actually think. African Ancestry written by Salsassin, August 16, 2006
"You see as the article pointed out tests demonstrate the average White Brazilian has 28% Black in them. Which means they would be Black by USA definition of what consitutes Black."
Where can I look up this US Definition of Black? Or did you just pull this out of your ass, too? And no I won't go to any biased "multi-racial" site you provide. Give me an official US .gov or or like address. Can you do this? No? Didn't think so. Hence, one can't be Black and have predominate nonblack ancestry. That's an impossibilty for all intents and purposes. That's like saying someone is White even though he is 90% Black. The Blacks in Brazil are 50&#xor;> Black. I will repeat one more time: A person can be considered racially Black if and only if that person has 50% or more African ancestry. ... written by e harmony, August 17, 2006
African Ancestry written by Salsassin on August 16, 2006, 9:49 pm
"You see as the article pointed out tests demonstrate the average White Brazilian has 28% Black in them. Which means they would be Black by USA definition of what consitutes Black."
Where can I look up this US Definition of Black? Or did you just pull this out of your ass, too? And no I won't go to any biased "multi-racial" site you provide. Give me an official US .gov or or like address. Can you do this? No? Didn't think so. Hence, one can't be Black and have predominate nonblack ancestry. That's an impossibilty for all intents and purposes. That's like saying someone is White even though he is 90% Black. The Blacks in Brazil are 50&#xor;> Black. I will repeat one more time: A person can be considered racially Black if and only if that person has 50% or more African ancestry.
A person can be considered many things if they are 50% Black. They can be considered Mulatto. If they like they can be considered White. All these things are mere social constructs. And by the way African does equal = Black. Africa is quite diverse a place.
And it rests, that the history of the United States is for the most part one of the 'One Drop Rule.' End. written by Salsassin, August 17, 2006
Dear Eharmony,
Someone with 50%> African ancestry explicitly has more than "one drop", a drop, of Black blood so I don't know who you're trying to fool. Surmising that you aren't blind there is no way someone with 50% Afican ancestry would or could call himself White, unless of course this person has more non-black blood; i.e., a quadroon or octoroon masquerading as someone with 50% African ancestry. And Yes I know Africa = Black just as Europe = White. What is your point? Or did you mean African Black? Which is interesting because it seems to me the label Black is under an implied attack with your statement. Whereas the Arabs and Whites somehow designate Africa as "a diverse place" and hence Africa not being Black, Europe composes not only parts of the Middle East but Russia and in the strictest sense Asia as well yet no mentions of Europe being "a diverse place." In fact, if you look at a map, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia are all one giant landmass, yet people know racially what to call each division. It's apparent our "multi-racial" friend here has forgotten the definition of Black or African as opposed to Arab or White. correc. written by Salsassin, August 17, 2006
"African != Black", "African notequal Black" Rwanda article written by Brazuca, August 17, 2006
An article buttressing what I said earlier about Rwanda. I disagree with the author, however, in his not acknowledging the cultural capital of the Rwandans when explaining their relative success. Corruption is looked down upon by Rwandans, especially those of the Tutsi social class, as it is seen to be undignified. Without this cultural standard of behaviour, the Rwandans would have little compunction in being as corrupt as their Ugandan and other African neighbours.
So why on earth didn't these so-called 'dignified' people have enough dignity to refuse to participate in a tribalist 'affirmative action' structure where they were given (not earned) postions by the Belgians? Why couldn't they insist that it is more dignified to prove your qualifications in an equitable system that includes everyone (such as the spittle that emits from the lips of neo-conservatives) than a racist system that selected individuals for leadership based upon the width of their nose.
Shameful behaviour, shameful legacy for a 'dignified' people, don't you think!!! Boo-hoo! written by Brazuca, August 19, 2006
You're getting desperate, uber-engineer. Face it, your excuse-making is losing its persuasiveness with people -- except for a handful of poor, impressionable baianos. More and more people are becoming acquianted with the likes of Sowell. As a country like Rwanda progresses, people are gonna stop depending on the excuses imaginative people like you peddle. "Hey, how come this country's succeeding?" they'll ask? And when they see that it's due to the character of the people and not some crazy conspiracy theory, they'll chuck your offerings in the same bin as they chuck that of devotees of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Enjoy the time when people will actually listen to you while it lasts. The market of people likely to believe your piffle is rapidly shrinking! Different strokes for different folks written by Brazuca, August 19, 2006
Good point about the whitening situation. But I hear read on a Brazilian forum called mundonegro.com.br that negras brasileiras have a hard time finding mates, as every man has blond ambition. What do you make of this?
I know blondes enjoy a great advantage over other girls in South America, but that's just a matter of taste. In some societies, females with large breasts are fetted over. In others it's the bunda that's all-important! The men of some societies prefer slim women while with in others they prefer their women more voluptuous. Here in Australia when Asians marry/date Aussies (quite common), it is almost always the case that it is the male who is Aussie and the female Asian. Aussie males have no problem dating or marrying Asian girls, but Aussie girls seem to have very little interest in dating or marrying Asian males. Just a harmless matter of taste. No “hate” involved.
Also there are so many different words for dark skinned Brazilians but whites don't hesitate to call themselves white. Do you think that there is something to that, or that American intellectuals read too much into nothing?
There seem to be many different words for "white" people that Brazilians use in the list below:
Acastanhada (cashewlike tint; caramel colored) Agalegada Alva (pure white) Alva-escura (dark or off-white) Alverenta (or aliviero, "shadow in the water") Alvarinta (tinted or bleached white) Alva-rosada (or jamote, roseate, white with pink highlights) Alvinha (bleached; white-washed) Amarela (yellow) Amarelada (yellowish) Amarela-quemada (burnt yellow or ochre) Amarelosa (yellowed) Amorenada (tannish) Avermelhada (reddish, with blood vessels showing through the skin) Azul (bluish) Azul-marinho (deep bluish) Baiano (ebony) Bem-branca (very white) Bem-clara (translucent) Bem-morena (very dusky) Branca (white) Branca-avermelhada (peach white) Branca-melada (honey toned) Branca-morena (darkish white) Branca-pálida (pallid) Branca-queimada (sunburned white) List continued... written by Brazuca, August 19, 2006
Malaia (from Malabar) Marinheira (dark greyish) Marrom (brown) Meio-amerela (mid-yellow) Meio-branca (mid-white) Meio-morena (mid-tan) Meio-preta (mid-Negro) Melada (honey colored) Mestiça (mixture of white and Indian) Miscigenação (mixed --- literally "miscegenated") Mista (mixed) Morena (tan) Morena-bem-chegada (very tan) Morena-bronzeada (bronzed tan) Morena-canelada (cinnamonlike brunette) Morena-castanha (cashewlike tan) Morena clara (light tan) Morena-cor-de-canela (cinnamon-hued brunette) Morena-jambo (dark red) Morenada (mocha) Morena-escura (dark tan) Morena-fechada (very dark, almost mulatta) MorenĂŁo (very dusky tan) Morena-parda (brown-hued tan) Morena-roxa (purplish-tan) Morena-ruiva (reddish-tan) Morena-trigueira (wheat colored) Moreninha (toffeelike) Mulatta (mixture of white and Negro) Mulatinha (lighter-skinned white-Negro) Negra (negro) Negrota (Negro with a corpulent vody) Pálida (pale) ParaĂba (like the color of marupa wood) Parda (dark brown) Parda-clara (lighter-skinned person of mixed race) Polaca (Polish features; prostitute) Pouco-clara (not very clear) Pouco-morena (dusky) Preta (black) Pretinha (black of a lighter hue) Puxa-para-branca (more like a white than a mulatta) Quase-negra (almost Negro) Queimada (burnt) Queimada-de-praia (suntanned) Queimada-de-sol (sunburned) And ... finally! written by Brazuca, August 19, 2006
Regular (regular; nondescript) Retinta ("layered" dark skin) Rosa (roseate) Rosada (high pink) Rosa-queimada (burnished rose) Roxa (purplish) Ruiva (strawberry blond) Russo (Russian; see also polaca) Sapecada (burnished red) Sarará (mulatta with reddish kinky hair, aquiline nose) Saraúba (or saraiva: like a white meringue) Tostada (toasted) Trigueira (wheat colored) Turva (opaque) Verde (greenish) Vermelha (reddish)
By the way, I really respect your opinions and I wish you were a professional writer.
Why, thank you. A friend recently suggested to me that I write a blog, and a writer whom I read a lot and respect has urged his readers to start blogs. So I've finally relented and am in the process of writing the first few posts of my blog. I might link you to it later.
By the way, with one of the two links I gave before explaining why I don't understand why Masochist-Americans choose to live in the US, it may be best to start on this page, as it was quite a few pages before I gave a better explanation:
Also, if you wanna read my explanation for why the US is unable to assimilate its population of African descent, even after 400 years, see below. Scroll down a bit to see my posts starting from Tue Apr 08, 2003:
Come fella, your childish culture theory was severely derruado on the forum and once again, clear contradictions on so-called dignified behaviour can't be handled by you.
And for your lackey...Abriu...quite a joke. Doesn't she know that Liberians are Bantus!!!!! And you are spitting in her face. Pathetic written by Brazuca, August 19, 2006
LOL Really Part III written by adrianerik, August 19, 2006
I agree. It's always pathetic when a little FACTS have to ruin such long-winded spittle. But I'll never have to worry about you, kiddo. You're just a fan on the sidelines trying to find a life...a way onto the playing field. BEM FEITO E MELHOR DO BEM DITO. Us players...doers!... never worry about the pathetic wannabees, waving their flags of whatever persuasion, sitting in the galley. You've never been to the U.S., spent negligble time in Brazil, and have spent a life living off of the white man's dole -- your schooling and military. So when you're finally tired of posting other people's thoughts and are mature enough to think of your own, let me know. (and please don't begin to post half of the Bible here to justify your warped definition of 'culture'...been there, done that).
Back to Brazil. Few Brazilians have any ideas what the above color terms mean. Few use them. Few use them? written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 19, 2006
Adriano, Brasileiros definitely use these. Especially branco, amarelo, negro, preto, mulatto, cabloco 1/2 white 1/2 indian, and cafuso half black half indian. I've also come across azul, verde, cor-de-rosa, pretinha, and neguinho.
Now Brazil is definitely racist. The TV doesn't reflect the races, not because nonwhites are too poor to establish demand but because of lack of interest on the part of the stations. Some adds are placed that say the person must have boa aparencia which means they have to be white. And blacks in Rio are routinely told to go around the backs of buildings.
The question is about mixture though. It is just natural, we are the world miscegenation or whitening? Brazuca you brought up a good point about Asian men in Australian culture. But I read in a book called Racism in Racial Democracy by Francis Twine that paulistas don't consider baianas "mesmas brasileiras" really Brazilian. What do you make of that? Also, out of curiousity, do you think the US is very racist, somewhat racist, mildly racist, or not really racist? ... written by adrianerik, August 19, 2006
If you say so. I live here and rarely hear one twentieth of the terms. And 'educated' question. How do you define degrees of racism? And Brazuca has never been to America, and is clearly a tribalist bigot. What qualifications does he have to judge the so-called degrees of racism in America. It would be better to read from the same books that he will have to use, or google Race written by adrianerik, August 19, 2006
"AN educated question"
Now, since race is a social construct then those 'racial groups' who develop systems of racism are also social constructs. Racism is not limited to the social construct of 'black' and 'white'. And since racism is a system (not just a group of people who don't like another group of people because of racial bigotry) then you don't even need the presence of white people to have white racism. You need systems (economic, media, education, political) that are structured with the proposition that whiteness and all things 'white-like' are superior to to all things that are not white (whether the oppressed at the moment are yellow, red, black, brown, big feet, big nose, short hair, crooked nose, or whatever is defined as being NOT-US. And those defining themselves as being white-like (whatever the social system of that society allows white-like to be) are perfectly capable of maintaining and propagating a system of white racism. (ie the Franco-phone islands in the Caribbean) and english islands, such as Barbados, and, though they know longer have the influence, the light-skinned society in the United States.
Frantz Fanon points this out in Black Skin, White Mask as does Dubois.
So, it is no surprise to find such virulent racism in a so-called racial democracy. As Dubois says of Brazil, the color spectrum of Brazil was pulled down into the depths of white racism rather than the color spectrum pulling whites into the light of a true acceptance of people as human beings. ... written by adrianerik, August 19, 2006
"NO longer" I type fast.
Based upon research done by a professor at UFBA (The Federal University of Bahia) this fraud of a multi-racial Brazilian society has horrible consequences for those crushed by the elite of Brazilian society. First of all, Brazilians don't rally to the defense of the weak in Brazilian society. Therefore, to say that WE ALL ARE BRAZILIANS means very little outside of rooting for the same national football team. Secondly, there is no such thing as a pardo RACE, nor a MULATTO race, nor a CABOCLO race nor a MORENO race. Therefore, there is no natural protection of being identified with a group that can address a person's needs in Brazilian society. (this doesn't include many of the remaining group of Indians).
On the other hand, by using these labels, this does hinder Brazilians of different hues from uniting to battle agaisnt discriminatory systems in Brazil that affect all of them. (The research in Rio says that pardos AND blacks face the same economic and social exclusion). Add to this the regional separation between similar groups (Rio, SĂŁo Paulo, Bahia, Rio Grande de Sul) and the acceptance that discrimination in one area does not affect the people in another area and you have the perfect recipe for the PERFECT OPPRESSION. A system that operates for the general benefit of one small elite group in that society and can effectively co-opt any members not of group so that they do not align themselves with those socially excluded. This is similar to what the Nazis did in Hitler's Germany to the extent that minority groups were applauding the early Nazi attempts to rid their society of the 'bad elements' who did not portray proper 'Aryan' behavior.
Here in Brazil there has been a general acceptance of the extermination of young blacks and pardos and poor whites by business-sanctioned police death squads. There's not enough space to give a proper context to this since, because of the lack of policing in many communities, it is not uncommon for many citizens, of all colors, to take matters directly into their own hands.
The danger of the neo-cons is that they now disguise racism, tribalism, ethnic bigotry and sexism under a cultural facade. Victims of oppression are blamed for their oppression, despite the weight of history that proves the contrary. You see this manifested in neo-cons support for dictatorial systems which they see as the 'superior' cultural group taking the necessary controls over the inferior majority.
The roots of the dictatorships in Haiti (where the Duvalier regime was installed with the support of the United States and the Trujillo regime was installed with support from the Unites States). Both of these countries were occupied by the United States in the 1920's. The seeds of the murderous Ton-Ton Macoutes were planted by the Haitian military that was created by the United States (Haiti didn't have a military prior to this).
Neo-Cons of the regligious right such as Pat Robertson was an ardent supporter of Mobotu as he killed almost 30,000 of the citizens of the Congo and looted its treasury. There's not enough space to explain the volatile mixture of religion and the belief in cultural superiority.
Back to Brazil, it is in clear in reading Cristaldo's article (and most works by him) that the code words he uses are all an example of his belief in the cultural superiority of white people (why aren't white people being 'blackened' and not the other way around). Because Cristaldo is not referring to color, he is referring to culture. Infer meaning written by Brazuca, August 20, 2006
Now Brazil is definitely racist.
My understanding of the word “racist” is the belief that one “race” is biologically superior to another. Why people who believe this would then go and miscegenate with untermenschen is beyond me. I should think that people who are racist would engage in segregation, Jim Crow, Apartheid, the Final Solution, etc. I shouldn’t think they would engage in dysgenic miscegenation. Trends show that the Brazilian population is set to continue miscegenating, heading inexorably toward the mean of a gente bronzeada.
The TV doesn't reflect the races, not because nonwhites are too poor to establish demand but because of lack of interest on the part of the stations.
Not for lack of demand? I’m sure that were there demand, and were this demand to require “black” faces, then the law of supply and demand would seek to reach an equilibrium. The only way such could be stopped were if the government were to somehow stand in the way.
Also, it ought to be remembered that what is patently obvious to, say, US Americans may not be all that obvious to Brazilians, being something they just don’t notice until a foreigner comes and helpfully points it out. At the beginning of Joseph Page’s The Brazilians, the author relates an anecdote that serves to highlight the uniqueness of Brazil, at least when contrasted to a country like the US. He recounts a story, full of human emotion and drama, which was played out in the country’s media over a number of weeks. The story involved two couples who’d accidentally had their babies swapped at birth.
The drama began when the babies had grown into toddlers and one set of parents decided that they wanted to swap toddlers and have their real child back. But of course both sets of parents had grown attached to the young children, and the issues that arose from this was what brought the emotion and drama to a crescendo.
But the thing Page means to point out in his anecdote, which stood out to him precisely because he was viewing things through the eyes of a US American, is that throughout this whole drama, with the media obsessing over the event and milking the story for all it’s worth, nobody – no journalists, no commentators, nobody – ever thought to point out or make mention of something that would have stood out to a US American like ... Osama bin Laden giving the 2007 State of the Union Address in Congress. What would have so astoundingly stood out for a US American like Page is that it never occurred to the Brazilians throughout all this to point out the fact that one set of parents was “white” and the other “black”, and so one child “white” with “black” parents and the other child “black” with “white” parents.
Now, can anyone even begin to imagine – go on, try, stretch your imaginations – anything even remotely like this happening in the US? Can anyone believe, even for a millisecond, that were the same thing to happen – a “black” couple’s baby accidentally swapped at birth with that of a “white” couple – the matter of the race of the respective couples and children would go unmentioned and essentially unnoticed? Can anybody in his right mind suggest that the US could come anywhere near – even if “near” meant the distance between Earth and the star furthest away from us – showing such a disregard for race as this anecdote revealed?
Obviously, no. See, this story serves to illustrate how differently the Brazilians view the matter of race when compared to US Americans. Whenever somebody wishes to talk about race issues with you, Abriu, but conducts the discussion in the same language, understanding and perspective of the US, as if there’s barely a difference, remember this story. Remember this story and think about what it says, what it says about a people who can think so differently about something without giving it a second thought. Infer meaning continued written by Brazuca, August 20, 2006
I’ll give you another example. Here in Australia when I relate to both Australians and New Zealanders the historical fact that the second-in-command of New Zealand’s armed forces in the First World War was a Maori, they look at me as if to say, “And?” You see, this fact isn’t a big deal in this part of the world. Why not? Well, why should it be? What possible significance does it carry?
But in the United States, the occasion of Colin Powell becoming the Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and then the Secretary of State (and the possibility that existed for a while of his becoming president) carries huge significance. Why? Well, because this is in the US, and, given the country’s history, the idea of having a “black” (or, strictly speaking, mulatto), general, secretary of state or president carries enormous significance.
However, the same sort of things happening over in New Zealand back in the nineteenth century (as was in fact the case) carries nary a significance. Mention these facts to a New Zealander and he shrugs. So what New Zealand’s government had “black” cabinet ministers around the time the US was fighting its bitter Civil War – its costliest war ever – over the matter of whether a “black” man would enjoy equal rights before the law. It carries no significance to a New Zealander, so much so, in fact, that he may not even think to mention it to you if you happen to come across one, even if you’re conducting a discussion about race with him.
See, Abriu, people think very differently from each other. And we have to be very carefully that we’re not impulsively and recklessly imposing our perspective and understanding of things – which, remember, may be very different – on others. Just think about that story about the kids swapped at birth, and think about the volumes it speaks.
Think about such when attempting to analyses situations and phenomena and draw conclusions from them. People are different. And they think different, too. As that story showed. Jus\' different strokes for different folks written by Brazuca, August 20, 2006
Some adds are placed that say the person must have boa aparencia which means they have to be white.
Sure, but that doesn’t mean that they’re racist, which is to say, that they believe that one race is biologically superior to another. It just means that that’s the look they’re after. In a country with such historically good race relations as Brazil, we can be comfortable in concluding that there’s no malice involved. Indeed, were we not to take into account the exemplary race relations Brazilians have had over the last 500 years, what would we make of the racial jokes at the expense of their fellow countrymen that Brazilians tell all the time? Personally for me, were I to put out such an ad, boa aparencia would for me mean the type of morena Julio Iglesias sings of in this song.
JULIO IGLESIAS
BAILA, MORENA
Descendo a ladeira pelo caminho ela vem dançando, arrastra a sandália, e a poeira vai levantando, mexe com a cintura e as cadeiras como nenhuma.
Pele cor de canela, sorriso claro, beleza pura
Ela parece branca Ela parece negra Ela parece Ăndia... Mistura linda que dá essa terra!
Baila morena, baila que você dança como nenhuma Remexe as cadeiras, requebra a cintura.
Baila morena, baila que você dança como nenhuma Arrasta a sandália provoque essa loucura. Baila morena, baila que você dança como nenhuma.
Ela parece branca Ela parece negra Ela parece Ăndia... Mistura linda que dá essa terra!
Baila morena, baila que você dança como nenhuma Remexe as cadeiras, requebra a cintura.
ALBUM: JULIO (1995) BRASIL "A ESTRADA"
Here in Australia there are hardly any “blacks”. (Okay, we’ve had a number of Somali refugees since the Nineties and we’re getting a significant influx of Sudanese refugees, but neither of these is a proper “black”.) Anyway, there are many more Asians than there are “blacks”. And yet ad agencies, until very recently, have overwhelmingly preferred using “blacks” over Asians. Actually, they’ve moved on from “blacks” somewhat. They’re absolutely crazy for mulattoes (they had to bide their time before they came along). Why? That’s just the look they prefer. No malice involved. My brother does some modeling and extra work. When doing extra work, the person responsible for organising who stands or pretends to interact with whom always has him coupled with an attractive blonde. Always. Why? Because here, the beau ideal coupling is often seen to be one between a Sudanese Negroid man and blonde woman. In the US, of course, the same thing would be taboo, and anybody continuously arranging such couplings would justifiably be seen as being deliberately and gratuitously provocative – in the same way that Madonna in her music video for “Like a Prayer” wished to compound her iconoclasm by not only (apparently) copulating with Jesus but by copulating with a “black” Jesus specifically. In Australia the same thing is seen as beau ideal, in the US as taboo. Different strokes for different folks. Preconceito versus Racismo written by Brazuca, August 20, 2006
And blacks in Rio are routinely told to go around the backs of buildings.
I think you’ll find that that’s the case with all poor people. It’s just that pretty much all “blacks” in Rio are poor, hence the mistaken correlation with their skin colour.
Read this article which I’ll post here in full, as the original link to it doesn’t work, and I can’t remember who the author was. Anyway, the guy explains the difference between pre-judging and racism. For example, Jesse Jackson said that if he were walking down a dark alleyway, say, in New York, and some young men, whose appearance couldn’t be made out in the dark, were following him, he’d be praying that they weren’t “black”! Now, was Jesse Jackson saying this because he’s racist, or was he saying it because he was making a pre-judgment borne of experience? Anyway, here’s the article:
Preconceito versus Racismo
Numa recente argumentação por e-mail com uma colunista de um grande jornal sobre as cotas raciais, fiz a alegação de que racismo e preconceito são coisas distintas. A colunista ficou espantada com a minha alegação e eu, por preguiça ou desinteresse, resolvi não dar reply no e-mail. Agora a preguiça acabou.
Brazuca you brought up a good point about Asian men in Australian culture. But I read in a book called Racism in Racial Democracy by Francis Twine that paulistas don't consider baianas "mesmas brasileiras" really Brazilian. What do you make of that?
My understanding is that the traditional notion in Brazil of the person who constitutes the "truest" Brazilian, or Brazilian in purest form, is the one who has African, European and Indian hereditry.
My understanding is that the African contribution to creating Brazilian culture is considered fundamental. The national dish, feijoda, is essentially African, for example. The musical forms unique to Brazil are, as you may very well imagine, extremely heavily influenced by the African contribution. If you watch the Brazilian national soccer team play a match where there is a large number of Brazilians in the audience, you'll hear the African drums playing throughout the match. The African element in Brazilian culture is considered fundamental.
As to Francis Twine, well, people disagree. I disagree with people here as well as in the forum to which I've posted a few links. People disagree with Sowell, even though people like you and me tend to agree with him. Heck, people disagree about who they think was responsible for 9/11 -- Al Qaida, CIA, the Jews, the Bush junta, Halliburton? All I can say is that people say all sort of stuff, including this Francis Twine, and he may have misunderstood stuff or may even just be making it up, who knows? Intellectuals have been known to make up stuff (http://www.newcriterion.com/ar.../keith.htm)
Also, out of curiousity, do you think the US is very racist, somewhat racist, mildly racist, or not really racist?
Depends what you mean by "racist". If you mean maliciously hateful for no other reason than mere skin colour or physical appearance, then I would have to say, No. That would be a gross slander of the US Americans.
If you mean belief in a hierarchy of races in terms of biological “development”, then I’m not entirely sure. What I’m definitely sure about is that there are barely any US Americans today who support the idea of bringing back Jim Crow or any other type of enforced racial segregation; US Americans feel extremely guilty about this part of their history. But the fact that there is very little miscegenation in the US suggests that mainstream US Americans may quietly consider the prospect of mixing with “blacks” dysgenic. This does not mean that they are motivated by hate; it may just be the way they think and may otherwise act in a very kindly, pleasant manner towards someone like you.
To give a contrast, Maori in New Zealand, the indigenes, constitute 15% of the population, the rest of it being of predominantly of European descent. However, due to the miscegenation that has been occurring between Maori and Pakeha (non-Maori) since around the mid-1800s – encouraged both by the Europeans and Maori, officially until the 1960s – there is today not a single full-blooded Maori. I don’t think “white” New Zealanders are like this because they are any nicer than “white” US Americans. I think they’re like this because they think differently. They’re different people.
If you mean by racist that they are unable to assimilate populations not of northern-European descent, then they’re definitely racist. (Although I don’t subscribe to this definition of racist.) See my reasons why here: http://www.brazzilbrief.com/vi...68ecae1e7 ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 20, 2006
Adriano and Brazu you have both given me a lot to think about. Very compelling. You have completely different definitions of racism. Adri's is any system that implies that white is right. So I guess the IQ tests would be racist because they use white definitions of intelligence. Right? Can you provide another example? Brazu's is a hierarchy of biological superiority. So if people believed that nonwhites were less and less intelligent depending on their race.
"How do you define degrees of racism" By how many racial incidents or situations take place and how many people are racist.
I agree with what you said Adrinha about the issue of solidarity. If they all identify as negro they will more easily gain access into their society, as they will elect negro leaders and try to pass laws for negros. They can't do that as cablocos, cafuzos, mulatta claras, and all these other different things.
That is pretty gross that the US backed Trujillo, who was very racist towards the Haitians. But I'm not sure what that has to do with racism in the US or Brazil. I"m also not sure how neoconservative thinking relates to sexism. ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 20, 2006
Adrian:
-I don't see how neoconservatives could be disguising racism as cultural superiority when a number of neoconservatives are not white, including Dinesh D'Souza and Thomas Sowell, and would therefore be racist against themselves.
Brazuca:
-I understand your point. Why would you mix with someone you consider genetically inferior. But do Brazilians mix as much as people tend to think? Maybe the white elite really doesn't mix with anyone nonwhite. Maybe only very poor whites mix with blacks because they can't find anyone white to mate with. What do you make of the class dimensions?
-Blacks who are rich are also told to go around the backs of buildings. They are mistaken for servants.
-I was ok with the article you posted until the writer tried to make quotas sound like they were racist. I disagree with that. I think quotas are exactly what Brazil needs to make their country truly multiracial in every sector.
-What do you think the US should do about this inability to assimilate blacks? (They have assimilated the Chinese) People marry those with whom they hang around written by Brazuca, August 21, 2006
But do Brazilians mix as much as people tend to think? Maybe the white elite really doesn't mix with anyone nonwhite.
The elite mix with whomever they hang around. They don't hang around poor people. Most "black" people in Brazil are poor. Therefore the elite tend not to marry "black" people, that is, tend not to marry people with whom they do not associate.
I lived in England as a kid for five years. I never came across those English people with posh, upper-class accents, only ever seeing them on TV. This is because England has a class system, and the classes don’t associate with each other, almost being hermetically sealed from each other. The irony is, it's only in Australia that I've come across these people. This is because there's no real class system here, and so when these posh, upper-class English come here, they are forced to interact with a wider range of people. Because of the lack of a class system here, people from wealthy and modest backgrounds interact much more regularly and therefore marry much more regularly.
For example, my sister has been pursuing for a while a handsome guy who'd be considered to belong to the Australian elite par excellence. He's the son of a powerful, wealthy banker who's only one degree of seperation from anyone of power, influence or note in the world. (This banker, at the last Davos World Economic Forum, casually persuaded Brad Pitt to drop into Rwanda, which he duly did.) This son attended one of the most prestigious schools in Australia, studied law at one of the most prestigious universities in the southern hemisphere, and lives in a swanky apartment downtown. Our family and his are friends, even though we're modest people who live in the outer-eastern suburbs and they live in the establishment suburb of Kew in a big mansion. My mother and his are friends who regularly meet up for a chat.
The point is, because of the lack of a class structure or class division in Australia, it's pretty easy for people from different stations in life to interact and so marry. My sister, however, is probably too boring and nerdy for this guy, as he's a thinker and philosopher, so I think she's giving up on the hunt (they've been out to dinner, but that's about it).
As you may be aware, Brazil is a very class-based society. I'm friends with a "white" Brazilian couple (although the wife is of Italian descent, but she could easily pass for "white") who'd be considered very much to belong to the Brazilian elite. But because I know him, my access into the Brazilian elite would be a fait accompli. He showed me a rolodex he had, full of hundreds of cards of all sorts of people of note and influence in Brazil. In Brazil, it seems, it really matters whom you know! As a result of our friendship, if I went to Brazil, it would be the Brazilian elite I would be socialising with, even though I'm a preto safado. Naturally, I'd be socialising with all sorts of people, but I wouldn't be excluded from the elite because I have access to it. Organised theft written by Brazuca, August 21, 2006
If they all identify as negro they will more easily gain access into their society, as they will elect negro leaders and try to pass laws for negros. They can't do that as cablocos, cafuzos, mulatta claras, and all these other different things.
Abriu, you’re now advocating for passing laws to change people’s circumstances over building the right character in them? I hope you’re not becoming a Great Society supporter, a policy that destroyed character rather than built it. Sowell talks about cultures that focus on politics to solve their problems and contrasts them with cultures that, for example, that save up, set up small businesses, study hard, etc., instead. The guiding principle of people who focus on politics to solve character problems is the maxim that, “He who steals from Peter to give to Paul can always count on the active support of Paul.”
People who think like this are only advocating for organised theft. “Let’s not bother developing the necessary character,” they say. “Let’s just organise ourself properly so that we can use the democratic process to steal from the more productive members of society by using the state to stick â€em up.” It’s sad that there are so many people offering such an immoral “solution” to people’s character deficiencies. And the bizarre thing is, they seem to think that if you shoot the horse, you’re gonna make the cart go faster! I know, go figure. Capacity to assimilate written by Brazuca, August 21, 2006
Blacks who are rich are also told to go around the backs of buildings. They are mistaken for servants.
The key word there is "mistaken", and I think that is the point the author of that article I posted was trying to make. He would say that such a mistake is evidence of pre-judging as a result of experience rather than racism proper. Jesse Jacskon was making a pre-judging comment rather than a racist one when he admitted that if he were being followed by a couple of young men in a dark alley in a major city, he'd be praying that they were "white". I'm sure you would think the same was as Jesse did, not because you're racist, but because you're sensible and realistic.
I was ok with the article you posted until the writer tried to make quotas sound like they were racist. I disagree with that. I think quotas are exactly what Brazil needs to make their country truly multiracial in every sector.
I think lack of character is the problem. I guess we disagree on this.
What do you think the US should do about this inability to assimilate blacks? (They have assimilated the Chinese)
They've assimilated the Chinese? Well, if they have, it's certainly not natural and it's contrived, that is, something that can only occur when the society becomes more liberal and adopts more of an anything-goes mentality.
I think they've only been able to naturally assimilate people of northern-European descent. If they stretch, they can assimilate southern Europeans and eastern Europeans, but otherwise they're stuck. As an example, there are about 70 million US Americans of German descent. They are fully assimilated into the mainstream, so much so that when Eisenhower became president, the media didn't make a big song and dance about his being the first German-American president and what have you. The reason the media would make a big hullabaloo over having a "black" president is because such an occurrence would be so extraordinary, given the fact that "blacks" are not US Americans proper but rather tolerated outsiders who the mainstream is uncomfortably trying to accommodate. They need hyphens because to just consider them US Americans sans hyphen would be dishonest and constitute a refusal to acknowledge the reality.
The only way the US Americans can assimilate its population of African descent is for them to become a people who have the natural capacity to assimilate all and sundry. They have to become Latin. I don’t know exactly how they would go about doing this, but they have to, they have no other option.
I’ll post some of my old posts from the old forum (slightly edited) that explains and deals with these problems. I was at the time conversing with a poster called Jose, who’s comments I will place in bold lettering. Conversations with Jose written by Brazuca, August 21, 2006
So what you are telling me is that races in America won't mix, right? Ghetto life forever. That’s sad. I believe the more mixture you have in your blood, the better. I don’t have a problem with melanin, for instance.
You don't have a problem with miscegenation because you base your identity on culture. Imagine being required to abdicate your Brazilian identity all of a sudden, loose the language, the culture, everything that marks you out as Brazilian. Would you find that easy to do? Of course not. In the same way, US Americans find the idea of what you're suggesting quite obnoxious and unpalatable. You are basically asking them to give up on their identity, which, as you should now be aware, is race-based. They consider the so-called "African-Americans" to be a different ethnic group to them, which is why they insist on calling marriages between US Americans and these "Afro-Americans" "intermarriage", since there's something very "inter" to them about such marriages. This is also why that "African-American" academic, Cornell West, could not for the life of him understand how he could be considered an Anglo-Saxon by that latino academic, and the mediator, Earl Shorris, who's "white", no doubt didn't understand this either.
If they can't do what you suggest after 400 years, then I don't think they can ever do it. Don't mistake today's "tolerance" for anything other than a thin veneer sprayed over this deep division. If someone had a forced, fixed smile, would you mistake that for a real smile? Even if it appeared real, it wouldn't be real in reality. And after a while, a forced, fixed smile starts to ache, as anyone who's had to stand there waiting for a slow-acting relative to take a photo would be able to testify. Conversations with Jose continued... written by Brazuca, August 21, 2006
That's what I call ghetto living. Maybe race, in country's where ghetto living is promoted, is equivalent to the Berlin Wall. Hollywood could help a little by promoting biracial romantic couples.
Such couplings are completely natural in Brazil. The same thing in the United States is completely unnatural. Not because the people are bad or anything like that but because they base their identity on race and are therefore limited in the amount of assimilation they can do. By attempting to do something that's completely unnatural to them, US Americans unfortunately have to become very liberal -- that forced smile. But liberalism entails moral decadence. The only way US Americans can attempt to assimilate "blacks" is if they adopt an anything-goes mentality. It is no coincidence that homosexual activists in the United States view the civil-rights movement as their inspiration. Their implicit reasoning is that if "blacks" can be accepted by mainstream US America, then anything can, including behaviour that has for millennia been considered to represent the culmination of reprobation and apostacy. And most US Americans, it seems, agree with them in this implicit assumption.
After a while, that forced smile begins to ache. The supposed principal beneficiaries of civil rights prior to the 1960s had a reasonably strong family unit, but today the so-called "black" family is in tatters and that race-based community is in disarray, dragging the rest of US America down with it, with the world following in close pursuit. How long will it be, I wonder, till the rest of us are referring to our women as bitches and hoes? Maybe Eminem represents the crack in the dyke.
As I said, Jose, you can't hold a forced smile for very long. And if you try to force it even more and turn that smile into a grin, it's gonna ache even more. If Hollywood starts promoting such as you've suggested, I'd hate to see what comes next. You say that homosexuals are sick. Mate, if Hollywood did what you suggest it'd open the floodgates and you, Jose, would never be able to bring yourself to watch another Hollywood movie again. It is indeed instructive that the sort of couplings you recommend seem to preponderate amongst the sort of people who make up the guests on such shows as Jerry Springer and Ricky Lake. In middle US America, such couplings remain thoroughly rare and are mostly limited to the freakshow circuit. Brazil is looking pretty good right about now written by Abriu, August 21, 2006
Brazuca you make the US sound very unpalatable. It's true. That's why Africans have a very difficult time fitting in here. Because we base our identities on culture, not race. We see black Americans as 100% American not as an ethnic group. Before I came to the US I didn't even know these brown people were called black. We're completely different from them, but because American society is race-driven, we are expected to be the same as black Americans. That's why Africans end up remaing outsiders too, twice over.
But are you sure Brazil is not also race-based? Maybe to be a real Brazilian is to be racially mixed or white, and blacks are the outsiders there too.
Also, your thoughts on machismo. The Expected Degeneration written by adrianerik, August 21, 2006
Similar to what happened to the Brazzilforum this has quickly become one hand clapping against itself. The original posts between Jose, a person completely ignorant of African-Americans and Brazuca, a tribalist also completely ignorant of America was banal then, and banal now. Neither speaks from any base of EXPERIENCE. (78% of African-Americans do not live in ghettos!!!!!! duhhhh)
Ja fui! (though I will highlight some terms being thrown about that any intelligent persons need to define and perhaps raise the level of discussive discourse (always wanted to use that term since a friend, working on his Ph.D threw it on me).
De novo......ja fui!!! Yes Black America is ghetto life written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 22, 2006
They didn't mean a literal ghetto. They meant that being black in America means being part of a landlocked country with an invisible wall that surrounds you, keeping you from becoming a real American. Nothing will change that. In fact I get the feeling that black Americans don't even want to change this because this is all they know. It's very depressing to be so socially isolated and I can't wait to move to Brazil. I will probably sooner become Brazilian than I could ever hope to become American.
Re: People marry those whom they hang around. Brazuca how do you know that rich white Brazilians are willing to associate with and marry rich black and mulatto Brazilians?
Re: character development of black Brazilians. I think this is true o black America because America is a place where anyone can succeed who is willing to work for it. But Brazil?? It is next to impossible to get out of the favelas no matter what you do. And like you said it's all about who you know. yeah some favelados have a degenerate culture but regardless they live in a very class based society.
Re: Cornel West as AngloSaxon. I don't see what that man's point was. Anglo Saxons are an ethnic tribe of Europeans. Cornel West is not a WASP (White Anglo Saxon Protestant). He is Western. That's why we have the word Western. So Latinos can be Latino/Hispanic, blacks and whites can be Western.
Have you ever heard the proverb pretas para o trabalho, mulattas para o sexo, brancas para o casamento? What do you make of that? Boa aparencia written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 22, 2006
Not just for modeling. For regular jobs, like as maids (I think), they would say must have boa aparencia i.e. must be white or must live close to the job i.e. must be white. ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 23, 2006
Brazuca how come you don't post on the Brazzilforum anymore? Time waits for no man! written by Brazuca, August 24, 2006
Hi Abriu, I had to stop posting because of the amount of time it took. It was pretty addictive! So when the whole forum went down as a result of malicious action by hackers (they either didn't like what was being said on the site in general or in the forums in particular) I took the opportunity to go cold turkey. I mean, I'm even finding it hard enough find the time to respond to your questions above, even though I have a bit more time than most people. I'm hoping to respond in a few hours' time. Watch this space! written by Brazuca, August 25, 2006
It was a gripping human-interest story tailor-made for television: the inadvertent switching of newborn babies by hospital employees, whose carelessness came to light by pure chance three years later. Both families involved in the incident had grown attached to their babies, and the little boys themselves were by now happily and securely settled in their homes. During the legal proceeding to determine custody, a judge heard testimony from the two sets of parents, who agonized over their predicament, and from neighbours who supported the status quo. The judge ruled that each youngster be turned over to his natural parents, who would have the right to visit the child they had given up only after a six-month period of adjustment. TV news programs milked every dollop of pathos from the exchange, as those touched by the incident expressed their unrestrained dismay.
In the course of the reportage, no one saw fit to remark on the evident fact that one of the boys was black and had been accepted at birth without question by white parents; while the other was white and had been raised unhesitatingly by dark-skinned parents.
Joseph Page, The Brazilians, Perseus Books (Reading, Massachussetts) p.57 ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), August 28, 2006
Brazuca, what's your email address? ... written by adrianerik, August 29, 2006
It was a gripping human-interest story tailor-made for television: the inadvertent switching of newborn babies by hospital employees, whose carelessness came to light by pure chance three years later. Both families involved in the incident had grown attached to their babies, and the little boys themselves were by now happily and securely settled in their homes. During the legal proceeding to determine custody, a judge heard testimony from the two sets of parents, who agonized over their predicament, and from neighbours who supported the status quo. The judge ruled that each youngster be turned over to his natural parents, who would have the right to visit the child they had given up only after a six-month period of adjustment. TV news programs milked every dollop of pathos from the exchange, as those touched by the incident expressed their unrestrained dismay.
In the course of the reportage, no one saw fit to remark on the evident fact that one of the boys was black and had been accepted at birth without question by white parents; while the other was white and had been raised unhesitatingly by dark-skinned parents.
Joseph Page, The Brazilians, Perseus Books (Reading, Massachussetts) p.57
Absolutely ridiculous. I read THE BRAZILIANS and while it does provide insight into events into Brazil and I respect the number of years J Page has lived in Brazil, many of his observations are unstudies, conjectural and fall into the category of "white gringo romanticization of the colorless(?) society.
Well, I´ve worked with several orphanages for years in Brazil and, among their many problems, they all bemoan the tendency of Brazilians to adopt WHITE babies. Not just white Brazilians...all Brazilians, which would be expected in a society where racism permeates the social soul of the country. As a matter of fact, in a story in A TARDE last year, a baby was left abandoned and after pictures of the baby was shown, there were hundreds of calls by Brazilians to adopt the baby. The nurse commented that she wished it was a simple as the publicity because they have had many other darker-skinned babies with photos published and NO ONE had an interest in adopting those babies. There was another article about the number of couples in Brazil who were unable to have children who wanted to adopt but the number of WHITE (emphasis in the article) newborns were in limited supply.
Sorry to put a little facts into the vacuous bobagem being spewed. Brazil want to ban maulattos and give blacks an Id written by Robert l Birt, August 29, 2006
I am an American of Cherokee Indian,Yourba African and British European heriage with active experience in the survey guided intervention called affarmative action. First the intervention is a business management tool with guidelines like accounting. As you know accounting is not a science it is an art that depends on generally accepted rules of how moneys are accounted for. The author seems to be a part of the not take action to adress the raceism i saw in my visit to Brazil.The intervention was not approved by everyone in the black actavist momvement in the United States and I had to take a position opposit some leaders I respected more than Martin Luther King to support this intervention. My undergraduate degree is in business amd this intervention is understood by the masses to include the writer of this article about as well as most people understand where the gross national product of a nation comes from. The black people who oppose this intervention have a history for that behavior. The behavior is called the idetnification complex and the ruleing group use those with this behavior in appointed positions to oppose the growth of black people. The United States Department of Justice in 1968 let me know that my efforts to advance affarmative action in Los Angeles California cause rogue elements of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Los Anteles Police Department to place my picture on the wall in the glass house along with Clifford Alexander and Angelia Davis as persons to be eleminated. It is unfortunate that you have chosen an author for this article with so little understanding of the business management science and evident opposition to the advancement of black persons in the nation of Brazil. The clear evidence is that black citizens of Brazil are not and historically have not been treated fairly while white citizens have been brought to the country given preference in work and allowed to concentrate in areas where the government fund better investments in the development of the land and people. At this point my exposure to the issue outragous raceism in Brazil and this article with comments on this webb site cause me to see little hope for serious imorovement of the race issue in Brazil. ... written by Bri7, August 30, 2006
"active experience in the survey guided intervention called affarmative action" "action to adress the raceism i saw in my visit to Brazil" "At this point my exposure to the issue outragous raceism in Brazil and this article"
With all of your qualifications on this subject, why can't you even spell "racism" correctly? I dont necessarily disagree with your point of view, but I doubt your level of knowledge on the subject matter.
I do think its foolish to point out spelling errors in posts, since my spelling is not so great either, but the fact that you misspelled racism multiple times and are supposedly someone who works in the field of combating racism is very odd.
: : : E-mail written by Brazuca, September 01, 2006
i[]Brazuca, what's your email address?
Hi Abriu, sorry I haven't replied to your earlier posts, but I've been trying to find posts in the old forum that would cater most specifically to your questions, but unfortunately I'm often finding that I either can't open this page we're on right now, or find/open the old forums I'm looking for.
Anyway, my e-mail is: \n This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it '> brazucawannabe@migente.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
After you've sent to that address (which I don't really use), I'll reply with my normal, regular one. With what the hackers were able to do with this whole site, I guess I'm a bit paranoid about what people could do if they knew my regular e-mail address (maybe I don't understand enough about computers). Latin and Germanic Men written by Brazuca, September 03, 2006
Also, your thoughts on machismo.
Entertaining the idea of a Brazilian guy, eh? Be warned!
(Sorry for the delay in answering your previous questions, but I've only just discovered that if I use Mozzilla Firefox instead of Windows Internet Explorer, I'm able to open the pages, both this one and the old forum, successfully. Wait, out.) Stereotypes written by Abriu, September 04, 2006
In the link you sent me, incidentally, one Asian girl said : "I understand this is more of a cultural tendency for Brazilians to be in the present, where as Asians tend to be a lot more pragmatic with their emotions". Can you believe it? This girl just found a politically correct moment to say what you 've been saying all along. That Asian achievement has to do with an Apollonian culture that thinks in terms of the future and suppresses emotions, compared to a Dionysian culture like Brazil that is more epicurean, insouciant, and thinks in terms of the present.
Also all of them were saying what Brazilian men are like. Typical Latin machos, who do not believe in fidelity. But wait a minute isn't that a stereotype? If someone said that about us blacks, it would be a huge problem, but not if it's said about white Hispanics. It just goes to show that political correctness and wanting to feel like a good person can get one into some serious trouble. Getting heartbroken is just one of the many possibilities. It could cost you your life. Re: Brazil wants to Ban Mulattos written by Abriu, September 04, 2006
"allowed to concentrate in areas where the government fund better investments in the development of land and people"
Oh yes, I'm sure black Brazilians are completely helpless and hapless :. And for your info, the Brazilian government built a state-of-the art city near Rio just for Angolan immigrants who love Brazil so much. ... written by adrianerik, September 06, 2006
Stereotypes are realities in the PERCEPTIONS of OTHER people which often have little basis in the realities of the lives of the actual people. Just because a huge majority of the OTHER people have the same stereotype doesn't make the stereotype true. It just makes it more ignorant. Political correctness, good or bad, was an attempt to break the language of stereotypes. The neo-cons, as shown in Brazuca's ridiculous articles, strive to mask stereotpyes (fact challengend perceptions) behind the guise of studien research. Research which falls apart at the slightest touch. ... written by Thomas, September 07, 2006
I am a afro-american. I hope that people of color in Brazil do NOT repeat the mistakes that we (Black Americans) made over the last 40 years. The MOST important thing that can be done for people of color in Brazil is to VASTLY improve PRIMARY and SECONDARY education. THAT will be far more productive than quotas in universities and corporations. A SOLD fundamental education will produce people who can COMPETE for university and job slots.
Indeed, in America, most new jobs are created by small entrepreneurs --- most of whom are NOT college graduates. A solid egalitarian education system, which includes good TECHNICAL education, will be the best ticket out of poverty in ANY society.
The largely "top down" approach that was pursued in the USA was doomed to fail --- after ALL the things that happened over the last forty years, young Black American males are an endangered species. If we had persued a SOLID "bottom up" approach --- that is to say, if we had focused on making our NEIGHBORHOOD schools as SOLD as possible, we would have been so much better off as a people, rather than focusing on a handfull of "show piece" achievers. The best thing that BRAZILIANS can do for afro-brazilians is to focus on IMPROVING BASIC EDUCATION FOR ALL BRAZILIANS --- not just for the university-bound elites. An educated population --- a FUNDAMENTALLY educated population ---- benefits the WHOLE SOCIETY. Correction written by adrianerik, September 07, 2006
This was NOT a mistake made by African-Americans. If you study your history you would know that there was a major focus and empahsis on primary education in the African-American community. Quotas was not THE strategy, it was A strategy and it was applied in many instances where there did not exist equitable competition (becoming New York city firemen, for example). Having been a manager at three of the largest Fortune 500 firms in America I can tell you that this idea of equitable competition is a myth. Hiring decisions are relative, and very personal. The idea of a new employee being a 'best fit' has little to do with their educational achievements. (I say that with 15 years of experience being among those who hire). It has to do with the subjective opinions and perspectives of the mostly white, mostly males making the hiring decisions. Quotas, whether you like them or not, was an attempt to confront that bias.
Secondly, in Brazil, the issue of fairness has to be looked at regionally. In Bahia, at shopping centers like Shopping Barra and Shopping Iguatemi, the lack of ANY black people working there has little to do with their intellectual capacity. I have lighter- skinned friends working there who have infintely less education than many unemployed black people in Salvador. RE: Stereotypes written by Abriu (Aprelle), September 08, 2006
Stereotypes are more or less true and are empirically verifiable. If stereotypes are not true then why do they always apply to the same groups and why are they the same all over the world? Some of the ones that are completely true are that Jews are entrepreneurial, Asians are mathematical, and blacks are rhythmic. It's strange how black Americans will call themselves African-American (an ethnicity) but want to be seen as individuals instead of being seen as an ethnicity. ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), September 08, 2006
I agree with adrianerik on the issue of quotas, both the Booker T. Washington bottom up approach and the WEB Du Bois top down approach are necessary. Improve the schools, yes, but what will the smart, hardworking indviduals among them do in the meantime? Wait another 500 years for the race to elevate? They need the opportunity now. That's why I support affirmative action, although for different reasons than most people. I think blacks need it because no one chooses what culture to be a part of. No black person chose to be a part of a culture that at this point in history happens to be backwards. Character written by Brazuca, September 08, 2006
I say it's character what does it! RE: Stereotypes written by adrianerik, September 08, 2006
Aprelle - you should be careful with any defense of stereotypes. While there is such a thing as 'good' stereotypes, ALL stereotypes generally SIMPLIFY a very complicated and complex thing such as a group of human beings. They support racism by ascribing to 'nature' aspects of a society that usually are (and Brazuca will love this), cultural and environmental. Jews are no more entrepreneurial than Ibos or southern African-Americans or Gikuyus or Chinese. There is a circumstance that fuels the entrepreneur. (I'll let you guess what that is). None of it has anything to do with that people as a group.
Jews were killed in Germany because the 'entrepreneur' stereotype you use was stereotyped as 'bloodsuckers'. African-American so-called rhythms was used by a Harvard sociologist in the early 20th century to blame black women for the violence of black men. Indians were refused jobs in American films because they did not look like 'real' Indians - as portrayed on the face of the United States nickel coin.
In Liberia indigenous Liberians were portrayed as more ignorant and incapable than Americo-Liberians with American surnames (actually one of the sources of the first civil war there).
Stereotypes! That allowed for an emotional reaction to a complicated social order rather than a studied analysis!
Back to Cristaldo. Stereotyping was strewn throughout his article. Nazis! Apartheid! Labels that did nothing to explain the near 100% white domination of Brazilian media and images and the attempts to recitify this situation. Character written by Brazuca, September 09, 2006
I say it's character what does it! Defense of stereotypes written by Abriu (Aprelle), September 09, 2006
Argumentum ad Hitlerum. That's a logical fallacy where an argument is deemed untrue simple because it leads to dangerous consequences.
Interesting you mentioned Ibos, Chinese, and Kikuyus, because they are also entrepreneurial groups, along wth the Lebanese and Palestinians. Stereotypes don't ascribe this to nature, but to culture.
I'm curious though. What's the story behind blaming women for male violence and what did this have to do with the rhythmic culture?
Brazuca, you should read this article. He says there's no racism in Brazil only performance differences and classism. He cites Thomas Sowell later:
Brazuca do you think there's a lot of racism in the United States or do you think it's the same as Brazil? And out of curiousity what do YOU do for a living? ... written by Biblia, September 10, 2006
Since when has Brazil 5,6 % of Blacks ?????? Are you referring only to your securitized community in SP where domestics, nurses are blacks ??????
Shameful your desire to minimize the simple truth as to the race mix of Brazilian society !!!!!!!
Was your father or grand father a German Nazi who escaped to Brazil to avoid jail for the attrocities commited during W.W.II ??????? http://biblia.nalewka.info ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), September 10, 2006
Here is another article about culture: "Even though blacks in the United States have been subject to far more discrimination than blacks in Brazil, the black-white difference in income is greater in Brazil. This would be inexplicable if discrimination were the overwhelming factor that it is claimed to be. But such differences are readily explainable in terms of the different cultural histories of blacks in the two countries.
If discrimination were the key factor, then blacks in the United States would be among the poorest blacks in the hemisphere and blacks in Haiti would be the most prosperous, since Haitians have been free of white rule for two centuries. Yet it is Haitian blacks who are the poorest in the hemisphere and American blacks who are the most prosperous in world."
"Even though blacks in the United States have been subject to far more discrimination than blacks in Brazil, the black-white difference in income is greater in Brazil. This would be inexplicable if discrimination were the overwhelming factor that it is claimed to be. But such differences are readily explainable in terms of the different cultural histories of blacks in the two countries. If discrimination were the key factor, then blacks in the United States would be among the poorest blacks in the hemisphere and blacks in Haiti would be the most prosperous, since Haitians have been free of white rule for two centuries. Yet it is Haitian blacks who are the poorest in the hemisphere and American blacks who are the most prosperous in world."
Thomas Sowell is so dumb. Brazilian discrimination against blacks has always been far worse than anything in the States. It simply is less obvious....hence, more successful. This has been discussed repeatedly in many a forum. As for Haiti, the West has maintained various economic blockades against it for centuries; on top of that, the French never REALLY left Haiti--they quietly left their mulattos in charge of the country. ... written by Abriu (Aprelle), September 15, 2006
How is discrimination worse in Brazil? Fraudulent post in the comment section written by Dave, October 20, 2006
Interesting fraudulent pos in the comment sectiont. It seems that someone is very hostile to mulatto identity as an option, and they've taken to weirdly impersonating me and distorting my views and narrative. The fraudulent post is quoted below:
"Mulatto.org is not "racist" but, yes, we have racists on our website written by Dave, 2006-07-23 18:23:45
I strongly disagree with "Afrobrazilian." Yes, mulatto.org has its fair share of racist members, but that doesn't mean everyone at our forum is racist. There is space for everyone at our site. We try to see all view points. If you have a positive black identity, then we'd like to hear from you. Yes even racists, be they mulatto racists, are welcome at our site. Everyone is racist. I could be "considered" racist against blacks (or whites) but hey, my current girlfriend is full black. So, it really matters what perspective you see things through. Visit mulatto.org - Everyone is welcome. " BULLs**t written by CARLO ROLANDO, December 11, 2006
IF THEY BAN MULATOS AND BLACK THEY WILL HAVE TO BAD 89 PERCENT OF THIER POPULATION WHY THEY RECENT LY DID DNA STUDY PROVEN THAT AT LEAST 89 PERCENT OF ALL BRAZILIANS HAVE 2 TO 11 AFRICAN ANCESTORS AND THEY CHECK THE DNA OF BLONDE HAIR BRAZILIANS I THINK THICK WAS ABOUT 600 PEOPLE.. AND THIS IS WHAT THEY FOUND Are there race issues in the latin culture? written by Alicia, December 27, 2006
Thing that gets me is how many people say no, but when you look at the whole picture it states other wise. Most of the poor in your countries are black why is that? If everyone is equal?. In your own language you have words to separate blacks from everyone else. Black in you country don't want to be black, why is that?. Here in america be black be proud, but we are still american. Here if they won't let us in their schools we build our own what is wrong with that. We get ours no matter what anyone else says. If your system dose not work for you change it. That is what Afro Americans are doing, we are proud of our heritage because it is something to be proud of. We are not submitting and people don't like this I wonder why?. The only people who worry about our progress are the ones who are helping and the one who don't want to see it happen. If you are not of african decent you should not worry about what is happening. The world is not going to except us for what we are, but we don't need them to. When need to worry about ourselves and our future generations. You can either join us or get the hell out of the way!!! Here's an idea: "Affirmative Action" for mulatos or near whites written by Insight, January 27, 2007
Why don't you Brazilians take advantage of the fact that your congress has the issue of "balancing the power" question on the table --that is, since your population is said to be 45% mixed racial ancestry shouldn't you have 45% of your civil trial court judges be of mixed racial ancestry? The power of who has civil rights and who has not civil rights is enforced by the trial judges. That's the position of power that the mixed race Brazilians should be after --that is, if you don't want to be discriminated against or eliminated altogether. This way you are not denied your civil rights by Black judges or white judges; you need judges of your own to prevent your cases from being thrown out of court when you have been wrong and the evidence shows it to be so....
Taken from another blog from this site and repeated here: Brazilian friends, what you are really missing in the comments from the United States is the central point: "the extinction of the mulato ". The Black American posters here don't particulary like that in your country people of mixed racial ansestry can gain postions of power such as your two term president Fernando Enrique Cardoza who openly admits that he has a black ancestor and was still elected president of Brazil twice (200-200 --insipte of having a black ancestor. This would never happen in the United States: a person of mixed racial ancestry becoming president of the country --particulary where the "white" phenotype is appareant such as in the case of president Fernando Enrique Cardoza. Brazilian friends, you really don't appreciate North American hatred: "the extinction of the mulato ". It is your policy of protecting and allowing mulatos or near whites to advance that is at the heart of their issues with Brazil: They hate your mulatos and near whites, which make up about 70% of your 185 million Brazilions. With this you should have some insight into Mark Wells comment:"the extinction of the mulato ". This is what they are really after, and why the "black" activist forces her mulato child to identify as "black". Here's some advice: make shore you continue to have in brazil mulato's and near whites in postions of power: president, judges, and all professions for without them you have no civil rights --and that's the point.
eye opener written by Insight, January 27, 2007
Why don't you Brazilians take advantage of the fact that your congress has the issue of "balancing the power" question on the table --that is, since your population is said to be 45% mixed racial ancestry shouldn't you have 45% of your civil trial court judges be of mixed racial ancestry? The power of who has civil rights and who hasn’t civil rights is enforced by the civil trial court judges: This is the guy/gal who has the power to throw your case out of court or allow you to proceed to trial on the merits. The civil trial court judge's position is the “position of power” that the mixed race Brazilians should be after --that is, if you don't want to be discriminated against or eliminated altogether. This way you aren’t denied your civil rights by Black judges or White judges (American standard of White “one drop” rule); you need judges of your own to prevent your cases from being thrown out of court when you have been wrong and the evidence shows it to be so or when you need your civil rights enforced because you have been discriminated against....
Taken from another blog from this site and repeated here:
Brazilian friends, what you are really missing in the comments from the United States are the central point: "the extinction of the mulato". The Black American posters here don't particularly like that in your country people of mixed racial ancestry can gain positions of power such as your two terms President Fernando Enrique Cardoza; who openly admits that he has a black ancestor and was still elected president of Brazil twice (2000-200 in spite of having a black ancestor. This would never happen in the United States: a person of mixed racial ancestry becomes president of the country --particularly where the "white" phenotype is apparent such as in the case of President Fernando Enrique Cardoza. Brazilian friends, you really don't appreciate North American hatred: "the extinction of the mulato ". It is your policy of protecting and allowing mulatos or near whites to advance that is at the heart of their issues with Brazil: They hate your mulatos and near whites, which make up about 70% of your 185 million Brazilians. With this you should have some insight into Mark Wells comment:” the extinction of the mulato". This is what they are really after, and why the "black" activist forces her mulato child to identify as "black". Here's some advice: make shore you continue to have in brazil mulato's and near whites in “positions of power”: president, judges, and all professions for without them you have no civil rights --and that's the point. Brazil is referred to as the “mulato escape hatch”, because in your country “mulatos” are not shutout of society the way they are in the United States. Those who seek to deny you your identity would not want their own identity denied them. What they don’t want is you to exist at all; they want you eliminated or reduced to someone with no political identity and by defacto no political standing or rights to accompany a political standing. Ask them to give up their racial identity and any political or affirmative action that would benefit them in mass, and observe whether or not they give up their racial identity the way they won’t you to give up yours.
Remember President Fernando Enrique Cardoza famous quote: “I have a foot in the kitchen” referring to scant Negro ancestry?
... written by janessa1, March 15, 2007
people running brazil are stupid to that naming ur race on a pieve of paper thats retarded whats wrong with the world its like were going backwards each day and year not forward i am a dark skin from the caribbeans that lives in canada i do not think your govenment should do it brazil and the rest of latin countries that means the french ones to should not take an easy way out they should show people how multiracial country can be instead of labeling someone i have a qustion also what about the people in you country that are very multi mix that have 1/8 black in them and same with the dark skin people what the hell are they going to call them i have friends that pass for white they look nothing mixs some have blond hair blue eyes and they have black in them or other race people need to get it together we lived in a world where every race f**ks another making kids and familie many people can pass for soo many other races like my friends what are they supposed to call themselves one race only like in north america anyone who has one drop african blood is labled black and same with our first nations most of them don't even look black what your people just state the facts people are getting married out of they race all the time to people that have many other race in them give me a break thats stupid what your govenment is doing just like canada with the first nations and the usa with blacks and natives people can't lable someone of many backgrounds whos to say what people are. i read about brazils history etc don't majoirty of your govenments have black or native blood in them but they look white common people get real i can't belive people are like this i hate being labled am black thats why i do that blacks can dance sing and can do everything thats s**t everyone is equal stop making each other turned against each other i say noo to your govenment as a black person am sick of the american well north american way of putting everyone thats has one race in a box people that am friends with have many race in them and some are pround of what they are and others aren't thats another issue please don't let someone choose your childrens future dr king would not want what the blacks are doing and alos other races that are puttin themselves into a box i guess most ppl did not learn from dr king his way was good unite every race together don't seperate ppl that creats problems for the future lol thats all i have so say don't let your govenement but your ppl into a box thanx DEATH YOU ALL SAVAGE WHITES written by HITLER PILGRIM, December 09, 2007
f**k THOSE MURDERING NEANDERTHALS! ... written by Elio, November 13, 2008
one question. why mulattos are called black and it seems ok while their are descendent of white too?! That means that thei can be "called" white's too?! their are mullatos, black white=/=black/white because its a misture of races. change "ur" mindes, i think that giving some one a race its racist, everyone is what he is.
Write comment Name
Email
Website
Title
Comment
smaller | bigger
Subscribe via email (Registered users only)
Write the displayed characters
Add Comment
Powered by Azrul's Jom Comment for Joomla!
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
A CORRECTION: THE SMALL PORTRAIT IS OF THE SON, HE IS THE 3RD EARL OF ESSEX. THE LARGE WHITENED PORTRAIT SHOWS THE 2ND EARL OF ESSEX.
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
Robert Deveraux: When one is familiar with the concept, its easy to recognize black portraits.
I have introduced a new approach to looking at portraits, where the personal description leads to the identification of true and false portraits.
I have introduced the concept of 'Whitened' portraits of persons who are described as coloured: Black, brown, basané, chimney sweep, not the white hands, swarthy, etc
I have stated that some authentic portraits are repainted to hide black or brown skin colour, they are over paints.
I have said that some authentic portraits were copied to make the person appear White.
Then I have found that persons ordered White portraits themselves for propagandistic reasons, because of a fashion for the Greek Ideal, connected with the white-makeup and blond wig fashion, or because the black looks of the elite which signalled Blue blood, came under fire. ==================================================
Robert Deveraux, a lover of Elizabeth I.
His grandmother was Mary Boleyn, the sister of Anna Boleyn, who was Elizabeth I's mother. Anna Boleyn is described as 'swarthy complexion,' and 'very dark skin.'
This looks to me like an over paint of an authentic Black painting, which showed his black complexion. Its a whitened fake, of a authentic portrait. The visible dark under painting would in this case not be the legitimate technique, but a complete detailed face. This is how the revisionist concept of a White dominated Europe and White supremacy was created. ===========================================================
Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex (10 November 1566 – 25 February 1601), a favourite of Queen Elizabeth I of England, is the best-known of the many holders of the title "Earl of Essex." He was a military hero and royal favourite, but following a poor campaign against Irish rebels during the Nine Years War in 1599, he defied the Queen and was executed for treason.
posted
I HAVE NOTICED THAT NO ONE OF THESE MOLECULAR BIOLOGY PERSONS ON ES TRIES TO MERGE AND APPROACH RACE AS A BIOLOGICAL AS WELL AS A SOCIAL CONCEPT. WHY IS THAT?
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: I HAVE NOTICED THAT NO ONE OF THESE MOLECULAR BIOLOGY PERSONS ON ES TRIES TO MERGE AND APPROACH RACE AS A BIOLOGICAL AS WELL AS A SOCIAL CONCEPT. WHY IS THAT?
posted
All well and good, but what does it have to do with Egypt? Not to be rude or anything but there seem to be more threads lately about race than about Egypt. The Egyptians probably had some black African genetics, but they also appear to have had a substantial amount of Asiatic genetics. That's probably why the people in that part of Africa were called "Afro-asians".
Posts: 59 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oknaw10: All well and good, but what does it have to do with Egypt? Not to be rude or anything but there seem to be more threads lately about race than about Egypt. The Egyptians probably had some black African genetics, but they also appear to have had a substantial amount of Asiatic genetics. That's probably why the people in that part of Africa were called "Afro-asians".
I posted this in that other forum because the regular forum was again under some shutdown which does not seem to affect the other forums. Nice to see that some order is established. Could you guys find out if Djehuti is using forty nicks at the same time. There are more people who indulge in this, can't you just use your technology to weed this out?
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oknaw10: All well and good, but what does it have to do with Egypt? Not to be rude or anything but there seem to be more threads lately about race than about Egypt. The Egyptians probably had some black African genetics, but they also appear to have had a substantial amount of Asiatic genetics. That's probably why the people in that part of Africa were called "Afro-asians".
Recently read that in classical times all peoples living along the Indian Ocean were called 'Indians.' Snowden mentions 'Frizzy' haired 'Indians' and Long haired Indians (from India) with some classical writers. Perhaps Snowden did not know why these Africans were also called Indians, and that this does not mean the old folks were confused about where India lies.
The reason why I started this thread about a scientific work is has to do with the confusion about who is black and who is white. Some sources regard ancient Egyptians as 'African Caucasians': whites!
But its really mostly blacks who take interest in ancient Egypt today, not whites.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why do you suppose Diop's melanin tests were suppressed and not refined and widely utilized. Because then the truth would be readily known and this "Afro-Asiatic BS would become obsolete.
WHites are funding most ALL of the digs in Africa/Egypt, while blacks virtually fund none.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because of the goddamn infighting and self-hate and not accepting each other differences. The French Revolution could only take off after all the groups who suffered from the nobility realised they had to make a coalition. They had to accept and liberate each other first before they could destroy the common enemy. Blacks cannot wage war on white supremacy if not all the blacks stand behind each other.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic