PDA

View Full Version : Anglosphere vs Latin America?



cyberlorian
06-23-2018, 04:41 PM
Why are States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand significantly more developed than Latin American countires such as Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Bolivia, etc?

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcShYyvC0Rpwbcxfo9wzLBW4yJvHuenA2 deqh9oVfktwUAVElqA_eg

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQOu3UzoUwDht2qVoLpxs5jt8DU1-VmybMzvaQvjPaZnt1Z1yGb3JqzP5pogQ

Smaug
06-23-2018, 04:46 PM
Because of whites.

Smaug
06-23-2018, 04:49 PM
I am trolling.

Joso
06-23-2018, 04:50 PM
Because of capitalism

Odin
06-25-2018, 10:23 AM
https://i.imgur.com/KSSPGgB.png
https://i.imgur.com/ATaxtCC.png

KMack
06-25-2018, 02:15 PM
Why are States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand significantly more developed than Latin American countires such as Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Bolivia, etc?

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcShYyvC0Rpwbcxfo9wzLBW4yJvHuenA2 deqh9oVfktwUAVElqA_eg

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQOu3UzoUwDht2qVoLpxs5jt8DU1-VmybMzvaQvjPaZnt1Z1yGb3JqzP5pogQ

Historically much less political corruption with the former British colonies, USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

Alvorada Potente
06-25-2018, 02:18 PM
Why are States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand significantly more developed than Latin American countires such as Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Bolivia, etc?

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcShYyvC0Rpwbcxfo9wzLBW4yJvHuenA2 deqh9oVfktwUAVElqA_eg

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQOu3UzoUwDht2qVoLpxs5jt8DU1-VmybMzvaQvjPaZnt1Z1yGb3JqzP5pogQ

Because of Ghanans and nigerians which helped a lot to develop USA. We dont have those in Latam.

KMack
06-25-2018, 02:46 PM
Because of Ghanans and nigerians which helped a lot to develop USA. We dont have those in Latam.

LOL. It really doesn't matter where the slaves came from. They worked some in the construction industry. USA was and is overwhelmingly built by people of European ancestry.

Rouxinol
06-25-2018, 02:54 PM
Because Europeans were outnumbered by non-Europeans in those countries.

renaissance12
06-25-2018, 02:56 PM
https://i.imgur.com/KSSPGgB.png
https://i.imgur.com/ATaxtCC.png


More people killed in Mexico than in Iraq ?...... ( war.. suicidal terrorist attack)

renaissance12
06-25-2018, 02:59 PM
Because North America weather is not so bad as South america weather...

lisarb
06-25-2018, 06:19 PM
Historically much less political corruption with the former British colonies, USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

Guyana is a British colony: very poor

KMack
06-25-2018, 06:24 PM
Guyana is a British colony: very poor

Berkan did not mention them. Hong Kong could be added to former British colony. A lot of wealth there, expensive city.

lisarb
06-25-2018, 06:33 PM
Berkan did not mention them. Hong Kong could be added to former British colony. A lot of wealth there, expensive city.

Guyana is the poorest country in South America

Dragoon
06-25-2018, 06:39 PM
For this post: The term refers to the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.
(Excludes: South Asia, and African countries)

-Some of the countries like USA and Canada were closer to Europe compared to Argentina or Brazil.
-The US was the first country in the Americas (?). They had the highest population.
-For many decades USA/Canada had large majorities of Europeans, less mixing.
-By the late 1800s the US was already the highest economy in West (China and India were higher).
-Elite Protestant and Jewish groups practices allowed them to become very wealthy.
-Would say America/Canada had higher IQ.
-More organization, numbers, better tech (progressive), connections to top banking families.

In 1900ad Population of Americas:
USA: 76 million
Brazil: 18 million
Mexico: 14 million
Canada: 5 million
Argentina: 5 million
Colombia: 4 million
Chile: 3 million
Peru: 3 million
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_in_1900

Australia/NZ were further but still managed to do okay. Cant comment on them.

lisarb
06-25-2018, 06:46 PM
For this post: The term refers to the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.
(Excludes: South Asia, and African countries)

-Some of the countries like USA and Canada were closer to Europe compared to Argentina or Brazil.
-The US was the first country in the Americas (?). They had the highest population.
-For many decades USA/Canada had large majorities of Europeans, less mixing.
-By 1870-1900 the US was already the highest economy in West.
-Elite Protestant and Jewish groups practices allowed them to become very wealthy.
-Would say America/Canada had higher IQ.
-More organization, numbers, better tech (progressive), connections to top banking families.

In 1900ad Population of Americas:
USA: 76 million
Brazil: 18 million
Mexico: 14 million
Canada: 5 million
Argentina: 5 million
Colombia: 4 million
Chile: 3 million
Peru: 3 million
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_in_1900

Australia/NZ were further but still managed to do okay. Cant comment on them.

lol guyana,jamaica,trinidad and tobago and belize rich and developed british colonies

KMack
06-25-2018, 06:49 PM
Guyana is the poorest country in South America

Guessing British subjects did not move there in any real numbers, same for other Euros.
It isn't an Anglo country. Indo and Afro Guyanese are 75% of the population, then the rest are various Natives.

KMack
06-25-2018, 06:50 PM
lol guyana,jamaica,trinidad and tobago and belize rich and developed british colonies

They are not Anglo countries. The colonies where British subjects moved to and other Euros they became First World.

Papastratosels26
06-25-2018, 06:53 PM
America>All.

Heather Duval
06-25-2018, 06:53 PM
There is no Iberian colony that is more successful than USA/Australia. And the US has more blacks than Mexico.
But everyone knows that Latin America was not a colony of settlement
They stole diamonds/golds and yet they are one of the worst countries in Europe. With so much that they stole could be today world-wide power.
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-JmZvHdceHj4/Ui1IrqC8H9I/AAAAAAAAAcs/I8KuSIOuujc/s150-no/gret21.gif

lisarb
06-25-2018, 06:53 PM
Guessing British subjects did not move there in any real numbers, same for other Euros.
It isn't an Anglo country. Indo and Afro Guyanese are 75% of the population, then the rest are various Natives.

bolivia and guatemala is a latin country?

KMack
06-25-2018, 06:56 PM
bolivia and guatemala is a latin country?

No idea what the demographics are. If you want to make a point or share the Demographics please do.

CYKA
06-25-2018, 06:57 PM
Why are States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand significantly more developed than Latin American countires such as Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Bolivia, etc?

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcShYyvC0Rpwbcxfo9wzLBW4yJvHuenA2 deqh9oVfktwUAVElqA_eg

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQOu3UzoUwDht2qVoLpxs5jt8DU1-VmybMzvaQvjPaZnt1Z1yGb3JqzP5pogQ

Your missing most of the anglosphere i.e the carribean

Dragoon
06-25-2018, 07:00 PM
Guessing people have their own definitions of Anglosphere (which is understandable).
Heck you can argue that Quebec is Latin. Same with other French colonies.

Was using the "core" population mostly..

https://s33.postimg.cc/48dtypqy7/1280px-_Anglosphere_Geometry.svg.png (https://postimages.org/)

lisarb
06-25-2018, 07:01 PM
No idea what the demographics are. If you want to make a point or share the Demographics please do.

native majority countries!

lisarb
06-25-2018, 07:02 PM
Guessing people have their own definitions of Anglosphere (which is understandable).
Heck you can argue that Quebec is Latin. Same with other French colonies.

Was using the "core" population...

https://s33.postimg.cc/48dtypqy7/1280px-_Anglosphere_Geometry.svg.png (https://postimages.org/)

most British colonies are poor

skain
06-25-2018, 07:10 PM
There is no Iberian colony that is more successful than USA/Australia. And the US has more blacks than Mexico.
But everyone knows that Latin America was not a colony of settlement
They stole diamonds/golds and yet they are one of the worst countries in Europe. With so much that they stole could be today world-wide power.
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-JmZvHdceHj4/Ui1IrqC8H9I/AAAAAAAAAcs/I8KuSIOuujc/s150-no/gret21.gif

And no white women. Thats the reason of mixing races.

KMack
06-25-2018, 07:11 PM
most British colonies are poor

The topic are the former colonies in the original post, Anglo colonies, where Brits and other Euros moved to.

KMack
06-25-2018, 07:12 PM
And no white women. Thats the reason of mixing races.
Especially early on.

lisarb
06-25-2018, 07:35 PM
The topic are the former colonies in the original post, Anglo colonies, where Brits and other Euros moved to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Empire

Zuh
06-25-2018, 09:21 PM
Mexico was part of the Portuguese empire dont believe history book Spain never discovered Mexico.

New Portugal.


https://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=77314&d=1529961912

OswaldMosley
06-25-2018, 09:49 PM
Why are States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand significantly more developed than Latin American countires such as Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Bolivia, etc?

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcShYyvC0Rpwbcxfo9wzLBW4yJvHuenA2 deqh9oVfktwUAVElqA_eg

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQOu3UzoUwDht2qVoLpxs5jt8DU1-VmybMzvaQvjPaZnt1Z1yGb3JqzP5pogQ

Ok, turn politically correct mode off : One might say that we British brought racism into the world but we were no where near as evil as the Nazis (no gas chambers in concentration camps for the Jews ! etc..). It is mostly racial but also cultural because if was just strictly racial than Asians would build the best societies on earth.

"The concept of envy -- the hatred of the superior -- has dropped out of our moral vocabulary ... The idea that white Christian civilization is hated more for its virtues than its sins doesn't occur to us, because it's not a nice idea. ... Western man towers over the rest of the world in ways so large as to be almost inexpressible. It's Western exploration, science, and conquest that have revealed the world to itself. Other races feel like subjects of Western power long after colonialism, imperialism, and slavery have disappeared. The charge of racism puzzles whites who feel not hostility, but only baffled good will, because they don't grasp what it really means: humiliation. The white man presents an image of superiority even when he isn't conscious of it. And, superiority excites envy. Destroying white civilization is the inmost desire of the league of designated victims we call minorities." --Joseph Sobran (Sobran's -- April 1997)

The inferior races hate the white race precisely because of its superiority. It is galling to the lower races to be reminded of their inferiority, and white superiority instills in them a burning desire to tear down whites and their creations in order to make themselves whites' 'equal'. This is not all, however, for tearing down whites removes a burr from their consciousness -- that of being reminded of their inferiority -- and indeed is an act of revenge for such reminding. Accordingly, when whites are so stupid as to treat the lower races as equals, this but whets the appetite of those races to see whites destroyed, for they see vulnerability in this stupidity, and thus an opportunity for inserting their grappling hooks into the edifice of white civilization.


There are least two things which in my view are at the core of Western civilization. The first is the white race which built that civilization -- a civilization which has never been equalled by other races, tho it has been copied by the Japanese and, to a lesser extent, other races. Yes, there are other races which have achieved a high degree of civilization on their own -- the Incas, the Chinese, the Indians (of India) and the Arabs come to mind, tho it may be that the latter two should be classed as white or part white -- and there seem to have been historical periods in which the achievements of these races exceeded those of whites of the same period -- but while these civilizations lasted for long periods, they were not able at their perigee to reach a level anywhere near the level which the white has reached, and their history during the flowering of white civilization has been to stall or retreat rather than advance, suggesting not only their inability to learn, but their culture's basic incompatibility with advancing civilization generally. Beyond this, white civilization shows a robustness or tendency to recur over widely-differing white populations, including ancient Greeks, Romans, and modern Europeans, to name the most obvious examples, thus strengthening the case for race rather than environment as the primary wellspring of civilization. This conclusion is reinforced by civilizational failures: Blacks have never had a civilization (the ancient Egyptians were not black -- check the bust of Queen Nefertiti, for example), and have never been able to sustain one, even when handed to them on a silver platter, as happened during the recent European colonial period in Africa. All this of course does not mean that other races are incapable of building or sustaining a Western-like civilization; but it does suggest that the civilization-building potential of Asians may be more limited than that of whites, and that the potential of the darker races, which have rarely if ever built civilizations or even sustained those built for them by whites, may well be severely limited. Now, whites build the best civilizations and Asians the second best and mestizos (Latin American) are more advanced than black civilizations but still not as good as white and asian : they are more corrupt and tenuous etc....


Now, just because I just praised all Western Euros, more or less, the fact is that in modern times (not ancient Roman and Greek) northern Euro Protestant nations are the most advanced. The Spanish and the French tended to mix with the natives and the French foolishly treated the native Americans as equals (they still manage to have Quebec, in the Anglosphere, though. So Spain and France failed because of religion, race-mixing and because NorthWest Euros are superior, although, French might be the only ones who can legitimately compete with NorthWest Anglos, historically, they tended to lose out to NorthWest Anglos overall. Basically, the Spanish and the French lost out because 1.) religion and 2.) race-mixing. Anglos tended not to race mix because we are more racially conscious and because we are not Catholic,


The second thing which I consider to be at the core of Western civilization is the unique nature of Western governments: First, a commitment to the rule of law rather than of men (this was a characteristic of the Roman empire which, tho ruled by kings and emperors, had an extensive system of laws which even today influence our own); second, a commitment to the security of property rights; and third, the development and sustenance of individual liberty, which may alternatively be thought of as limited government in the sense that the more 'liberty' the government has, the less its citizens do (Note: representative government and similar democratic institutions -- first developed to a high degree in ancient Greece -- constituted a limitation on rulers and hence supported individual liberty). I group these together as a single point because they are all interrelated and self-reinforcing: Each reduces the potential for caprice and whim among the ruling class, and hence reduces the uncertainty concerning the relationships of people with one another and their government, with the result that social stability is significantly increased. When people are secure, they are willing to make large investments of time and capital in long-term goals -- businesses, buildings, marriages, institutions, and the like -- and it is commitment to the long term rather than the short which creates and sustains a high level of civilization. In particular, social stability generated by property rights, the rule of law and limited government have allowed the free market and human creativity to flourish because people have been given the real possibility of a return on their investment of capital and time; and the result has been a flowering of commerce, technology, education, art, literature and all the rest of the things which we now think of as included in what we call Western civilization.

Jacques de Imbelloni
06-25-2018, 10:01 PM
For the same reason that the south of the USA is poorer than the north.
The spanish colonization model was based in a few spanish families taking all arable land, and bounding the natives that were 90% of the population as servants.
In that way you end up with a much more unequal society, with a small domestic market, were most of thepopulation is poor.

Kriptc06
06-25-2018, 10:13 PM
Mexico was part of the Portuguese empire dont believe history book Spain never discovered Mexico.

New Portugal.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0_dLCfCTJc


https://i.imgur.com/q3GGwDL.png

cyberlorian
06-25-2018, 11:11 PM
Ok, turn politically correct mode off : One might say that we British brought racism into the world but we were no where near as evil as the Nazis (no gas chambers in concentration camps for the Jews ! etc..). It is mostly racial but also cultural because if was just strictly racial than Asians would build the best societies on earth.

"The concept of envy -- the hatred of the superior -- has dropped out of our moral vocabulary ... The idea that white Christian civilization is hated more for its virtues than its sins doesn't occur to us, because it's not a nice idea. ... Western man towers over the rest of the world in ways so large as to be almost inexpressible. It's Western exploration, science, and conquest that have revealed the world to itself. Other races feel like subjects of Western power long after colonialism, imperialism, and slavery have disappeared. The charge of racism puzzles whites who feel not hostility, but only baffled good will, because they don't grasp what it really means: humiliation. The white man presents an image of superiority even when he isn't conscious of it. And, superiority excites envy. Destroying white civilization is the inmost desire of the league of designated victims we call minorities." --Joseph Sobran (Sobran's -- April 1997)

The inferior races hate the white race precisely because of its superiority. It is galling to the lower races to be reminded of their inferiority, and white superiority instills in them a burning desire to tear down whites and their creations in order to make themselves whites' 'equal'. This is not all, however, for tearing down whites removes a burr from their consciousness -- that of being reminded of their inferiority -- and indeed is an act of revenge for such reminding. Accordingly, when whites are so stupid as to treat the lower races as equals, this but whets the appetite of those races to see whites destroyed, for they see vulnerability in this stupidity, and thus an opportunity for inserting their grappling hooks into the edifice of white civilization.


There are least two things which in my view are at the core of Western civilization. The first is the white race which built that civilization -- a civilization which has never been equalled by other races, tho it has been copied by the Japanese and, to a lesser extent, other races. Yes, there are other races which have achieved a high degree of civilization on their own -- the Incas, the Chinese, the Indians (of India) and the Arabs come to mind, tho it may be that the latter two should be classed as white or part white -- and there seem to have been historical periods in which the achievements of these races exceeded those of whites of the same period -- but while these civilizations lasted for long periods, they were not able at their perigee to reach a level anywhere near the level which the white has reached, and their history during the flowering of white civilization has been to stall or retreat rather than advance, suggesting not only their inability to learn, but their culture's basic incompatibility with advancing civilization generally. Beyond this, white civilization shows a robustness or tendency to recur over widely-differing white populations, including ancient Greeks, Romans, and modern Europeans, to name the most obvious examples, thus strengthening the case for race rather than environment as the primary wellspring of civilization. This conclusion is reinforced by civilizational failures: Blacks have never had a civilization (the ancient Egyptians were not black -- check the bust of Queen Nefertiti, for example), and have never been able to sustain one, even when handed to them on a silver platter, as happened during the recent European colonial period in Africa. All this of course does not mean that other races are incapable of building or sustaining a Western-like civilization; but it does suggest that the civilization-building potential of Asians may be more limited than that of whites, and that the potential of the darker races, which have rarely if ever built civilizations or even sustained those built for them by whites, may well be severely limited. Now, whites build the best civilizations and Asians the second best and mestizos (Latin American) are more advanced than black civilizations but still not as good as white and asian : they are more corrupt and tenuous etc....


Now, just because I just praised all Western Euros, more or less, the fact is that in modern times (not ancient Roman and Greek) northern Euro Protestant nations are the most advanced. The Spanish and the French tended to mix with the natives and the French foolishly treated the native Americans as equals (they still manage to have Quebec, in the Anglosphere, though. So Spain and France failed because of religion, race-mixing and because NorthWest Euros are superior, although, French might be the only ones who can legitimately compete with NorthWest Anglos, historically, they tended to lose out to NorthWest Anglos overall. Basically, the Spanish and the French lost out because 1.) religion and 2.) race-mixing. Anglos tended not to race mix because we are more racially conscious and because we are not Catholic,


The second thing which I consider to be at the core of Western civilization is the unique nature of Western governments: First, a commitment to the rule of law rather than of men (this was a characteristic of the Roman empire which, tho ruled by kings and emperors, had an extensive system of laws which even today influence our own); second, a commitment to the security of property rights; and third, the development and sustenance of individual liberty, which may alternatively be thought of as limited government in the sense that the more 'liberty' the government has, the less its citizens do (Note: representative government and similar democratic institutions -- first developed to a high degree in ancient Greece -- constituted a limitation on rulers and hence supported individual liberty). I group these together as a single point because they are all interrelated and self-reinforcing: Each reduces the potential for caprice and whim among the ruling class, and hence reduces the uncertainty concerning the relationships of people with one another and their government, with the result that social stability is significantly increased. When people are secure, they are willing to make large investments of time and capital in long-term goals -- businesses, buildings, marriages, institutions, and the like -- and it is commitment to the long term rather than the short which creates and sustains a high level of civilization. In particular, social stability generated by property rights, the rule of law and limited government have allowed the free market and human creativity to flourish because people have been given the real possibility of a return on their investment of capital and time; and the result has been a flowering of commerce, technology, education, art, literature and all the rest of the things which we now think of as included in what we call Western civilization.

I don't think racial mixing would have a major effect because US is racially very mixed nowadays but they are still very strong. For example, Australia and New Zealand is less race mixed but United States is stronger.

Carlito's Way
06-25-2018, 11:18 PM
because America has ruined Latin America by supporting dictators, arming cartels, financing morons like Benito Juarez, causing civil wars, supporting Trujillo and the list can go on and on

OswaldMosley
06-26-2018, 12:02 AM
I don't think racial mixing would have a major effect because US is racially very mixed nowadays but they are still very strong. For example, Australia and New Zealand is less race mixed but United States is stronger.

What ? The only real Americans are the British e.g. English, Scotch-Irish so on and so forth but there are also Germans (who are not equal to Anglos but are no slouches themselves when it comes to the arts and the sciences), and there are Dutch and there are scandinavians etc.... even Obama was half Scottish and Donald Trump is half Scottish etc... you are not protestant and of British isles descent you are not American ! Australians aren't even racially British anymore they remind me of Frisians, Dutch, or Danes with Irish people running around too etc.. and New Zealand is too small to be very populated.

The entire reason South America is a shithole is because it is full of racially inferior mestizos. South Americans know this that is why they are is like a caste system of super rich white people , on top, and ton of poor race mixed people below (the 'American' are the British Scotch-Irish) and , yeah , Appalachia is poor but I don't want to get into that right now :

Accomplishments in the arts and sciences :

https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Farchive.4plebs.org%2Fdl%2Fpol%2Fi mage%2F1385%2F83%2F1385839439729.png&f=1




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M8sIzLNVT0

Heather Duval
06-26-2018, 12:06 AM
For the same reason that the south of the USA is poorer than the north.
The spanish colonization model was based in a few spanish families taking all arable land, and bounding the natives that were 90% of the population as servants.
In that way you end up with a much more unequal society, with a small domestic market, were most of thepopulation is poor.
Wrong. The South was rich during slavery/before civil war, they were elites but now white trashs

Jacques de Imbelloni
06-26-2018, 12:37 AM
Wrong. The South was rich during slavery/before civil war, they were elites but now white trashs

Only a minority was rich, the other part of the population were either slaves or white trash.

Heather Duval
06-26-2018, 12:43 AM
Only a minority was rich, the other part of the population were either slaves or white trash.
White trashes didnt had slave in US because they were poor. "GONE WITH THE WIND" Its a good movie about South plantations era vs civil wars.

Tietar
06-26-2018, 01:05 AM
Accomplishments in the arts and sciences :

https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Farchive.4plebs.org%2Fdl%2Fpol%2Fi mage%2F1385%2F83%2F1385839439729.png&f=1

These 4 countries had a large and concentrated population, largest cities, and except the Alps the orography allows good and fast communication, among other factors. But basically what happened is the creation of a hub or megalopolis (the blue banana), this accelerated development a lot.

1600

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XsYPeNLeYdU/UvqCBL8EZrI/AAAAAAAAAO0/QK03aDv_gYU/s1600/PopNdensity1600.gif

currently

https://img.posterlounge.co.uk/images/wbig/poster-europa-bei-nacht-1353900.jpg

Autrigón
06-26-2018, 01:14 AM
There is no Iberian colony that is more successful than USA/Australia. And the US has more blacks than Mexico.
But everyone knows that Latin America was not a colony of settlement
They stole diamonds/golds and yet they are one of the worst countries in Europe. With so much that they stole could be today world-wide power.
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-JmZvHdceHj4/Ui1IrqC8H9I/AAAAAAAAAcs/I8KuSIOuujc/s150-no/gret21.gifYes all the problems in Latin America are caused by Portuguese and Spaniards despite few Iberians migrated to Latin America.

Latin America is only "Latin" by language but not by genetic, 90% of the people there is full Amerindian, or black or mixed between black and Amerindian. Why its my fault if an Amerindian decide to shoot with a gun to his Black neighbour?

Meanwhile Portugal and Spain have one the lowest crime rates of the world. So why is my fault what is happening in Latin America?

Come on Latin America is independent since 1800s so you have had time enough to improve a little bit by yourselves and time to stop blame others.
You and nobody else are responsible of what happens in your countries, so try to solve it by yourselves.

I suppose that according to your arguments if India is a big shithole is thanks to the British, right?

Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin
06-26-2018, 01:15 AM
Iberian admixture. Spain gets handouts from the eu.

Tietar
06-26-2018, 01:45 AM
Iberian admixture. Spain gets handouts from the eu.

after a war that devastated everything, without marshal plan, isolated from Europe and the world politically and economically, and without natural resources, two decades later....

"Spain enjoyed the second highest growth rate in the world, only slightly behind Japan and became the ninth largest economy in the world, just after Canada"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_miracle

Are you sure this is due to the iberian admixture?

Lucas Rodrigues
06-26-2018, 01:48 AM
Historically much less political corruption with the former British colonies, USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.Yup. Just Brazil alone is more corrupt than all Anglo countries together

Gesendet von meinem XT1032 mit Tapatalk

Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin
06-26-2018, 01:51 AM
after a war that devastated everything, without marshal plan, isolated from Europe and the world politically and economically, and without natural resources, two decades later....

"Spain enjoyed the second highest growth rate in the world, only slightly behind Japan and became the ninth largest economy in the world, just after Canada"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_miracle

Are you sure this is due to the iberian admixture?Yes, the EU is mega rich.
Also japan owes like 6-7 trillion dollars to the US. its actually in debt. But runs off a imaginary growing economy

KMack
06-26-2018, 01:54 AM
Yup. Just Brazil alone is more corrupt than all Anglo countries together

Gesendet von meinem XT1032 mit Tapatalk

History would agree

dperucca
06-26-2018, 01:56 AM
I would love to see Latin America in general become more wealthy. It would be better for our hemisphere. I think it will happen one day.

Lucas Rodrigues
06-26-2018, 02:00 AM
Yep, it will. Chile will be probably the first country in Latin America to be considered " a developed country "
I would love to see Latin America in general become more wealthy. It would be better for our hemisphere. I think it will happen one day.

Gesendet von meinem XT1032 mit Tapatalk

KMack
06-26-2018, 02:01 AM
Welp I am planning my next vacation. Any ideas?

Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin
06-26-2018, 02:02 AM
Welp I am planning my next vacation. Any ideas?Germany

cyberlorian
06-26-2018, 04:27 PM
What ? The only real Americans are the British e.g. English, Scotch-Irish so on and so forth but there are also Germans (who are not equal to Anglos but are no slouches themselves when it comes to the arts and the sciences), and there are Dutch and there are scandinavians etc.... even Obama was half Scottish and Donald Trump is half Scottish etc... you are not protestant and of British isles descent you are not American ! Australians aren't even racially British anymore they remind me of Frisians, Dutch, or Danes with Irish people running around too etc.. and New Zealand is too small to be very populated.

The entire reason South America is a shithole is because it is full of racially inferior mestizos. South Americans know this that is why they are is like a caste system of super rich white people , on top, and ton of poor race mixed people below (the 'American' are the British Scotch-Irish) and , yeah , Appalachia is poor but I don't want to get into that right now :

Accomplishments in the arts and sciences :

https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Farchive.4plebs.org%2Fdl%2Fpol%2Fi mage%2F1385%2F83%2F1385839439729.png&f=1




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M8sIzLNVT0

Actually I don't think only real Americans are the ones who are ethnically British because most of the Afro Americans or Hispanic Americans identify themselves as "American" rather than "Hispanic" or "African".

Bobby Martnen
06-26-2018, 05:39 PM
Because of Anglo-Protestant culture.

Zuh
06-26-2018, 05:42 PM
Because of Anglo-Protestant culture.

The English empire was no doubt the best of empires something i truly admired just look at New Zealand is still doing better than any latin american country despite having a population small as Uruguay New Zealand whites still of colonial stock , NZ is a colony of predominantly English stock :thumb001:

HoboJim
06-26-2018, 11:17 PM
The Vatican didn't have a stake in our affairs for one thing.

Joso
06-26-2018, 11:25 PM
There is no Iberian colony that is more successful than USA/Australia. And the US has more blacks than Mexico.
But everyone knows that Latin America was not a colony of settlement
They stole diamonds/golds and yet they are one of the worst countries in Europe. With so much that they stole could be today world-wide power.
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-JmZvHdceHj4/Ui1IrqC8H9I/AAAAAAAAAcs/I8KuSIOuujc/s150-no/gret21.gif

That is fault of the blacks, not fault of Iberians.

Livin
06-26-2018, 11:29 PM
Anglosphere has by far better industry and they apply capitalism in the best way(low taxes,good welfare state(usa not inclunding),low level of regulation etc).

Another reason is latin america has the highest percentage of corruption while anglo-saxon countries have low.

Black Panther
06-26-2018, 11:42 PM
Welp I am planning my next vacation. Any ideas?

Rocinha.

Joso
06-26-2018, 11:46 PM
Welp I am planning my next vacation. Any ideas?

You can go to Saudi Arabia, it should be very cool see with your own eyes their cool exotic dances

Joso
06-26-2018, 11:47 PM
Rocinha.

He said he want vacation, he didn't said he want to die

KMack
06-27-2018, 12:15 AM
Rocinha.

Excellent plotting my death.

Heather Duval
06-27-2018, 12:42 AM
That is fault of the blacks, not fault of Iberians.

What does black people has to do with it? They come here as slaves and nothing more. Who steal our goldens and runs the governmemt are and were whites.There are more blacks in USA than in Brazil. Black population in Mexico is also minimum and in many third world countries in latam negroes arent even 0.3% of its population. If anything I think youre just trying to get my attention as usual. LatinbAmer8ca was just a colony of explorations, they just came here to stole and no family came to this pseud9 colony. Reasoning they mixed with non white women.

Odin
06-27-2018, 02:15 AM
More people killed in Mexico than in Iraq ?

Yup. (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/mexico-deaths-conflict-zone-war-syria-gangs-study-a7759936.html)

Carlito's Way
06-27-2018, 06:20 AM
More people killed in Mexico than in Iraq ?...... ( war.. suicidal terrorist attack)

since 2007, yes, that was when the american government decided to arm cartels in Mexico with American weapons, that was when the deaths in Mexico skyrocketed very high since its illegal to bare a weapon in Mexico, thus creating tons of deaths of innocent people dying without fighting back


"Obama-administration scandals never resolve. They just vanish — usually, under a new scandal.

So it was with one of this president’s earliest embarrassments, “Operation Fast and Furious,” designed to help the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) dismantle drug cartels operating inside the United States and disrupt drug-trafficking routes. Instead, it put into the hands of criminals south of the border some 2,000 weapons, which have been used to kill hundreds of Mexicans and at least one American, U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry."


"Now, Fast and Furious is back in the news. Earlier this month, a raid on the hidey-hole of drug kingpin Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman recovered not only the notorious drug lord, but a (“massive”) .50-caliber rifle, capable of stopping a car or shooting down a helicopter, that originated with the ATF program. Rest easy, though: Only 34 such rifles were sold through the program."


"In March 2010, a few ATF agents voiced an obvious concern: Couldn’t the guns end up being used in crimes? Seven months later, that’s exactly what happened. The brother of the former attorney general of the state of Chihuahua was murdered, and Fast and Furious weapons were found at the scene."


"The development raises further doubts about the now-shuttered program, which was created in November 2009 in an effort to track guns across the border and unravel the cartels' gun smuggling networks. The gun tracing largely failed, however, and hundreds of weapons purchased in U.S. shops later were found at crime scenes in Mexico.

The scandal has angered Mexican officials and some members of Congress. Investigators say nearly 2,500 guns were allowed to flow illegally into Mexico under the ATF program, fueling the drug violence ravaging that country and leading to the shooting death of a U.S. border agent."

Before America decided to arm cartels with weapons, Mexico has a low drug related murders, after they were given weapons, the death toll went up
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Drug-War_Related_Murders_in_Mexico_2006-2011.png

renaissance12
06-27-2018, 06:31 AM
Yes all the problems in Latin America are caused by Portuguese and Spaniards despite few Iberians migrated to Latin America.

Latin America is only "Latin" by language but not by genetic, 90% of the people there is full Amerindian, or black or mixed between black and Amerindian. Why its my fault if an Amerindian decide to shoot with a gun to his Black neighbour?

Meanwhile Portugal and Spain have one the lowest crime rates of the world. So why is my fault what is happening in Latin America?

Come on Latin America is independent since 1800s so you have had time enough to improve a little bit by yourselves and time to stop blame others.
You and nobody else are responsible of what happens in your countries, so try to solve it by yourselves.

I suppose that according to your arguments if India is a big shithole is thanks to the British, right?

Argentina is full of "Italians".. But Argentina was one of the richest country in the world till WW2...

renaissance12
06-27-2018, 06:35 AM
Yup. Just Brazil alone is more corrupt than all Anglo countries together

Gesendet von meinem XT1032 mit Tapatalk

Because there are too many comunist... like in Italy...

renaissance12
06-27-2018, 06:39 AM
Germany

Bavaria, Trier, Rhine area..No Berlin no North no east..

renaissance12
06-27-2018, 06:45 AM
What does black people has to do with it? They come here as slaves and nothing more. Who steal our goldens and runs the governmemt are and were whites.There are more blacks in USA than in Brazil. Black population in Mexico is also minimum and in many third world countries in latam negroes arent even 0.3% of its population. If anything I think youre just trying to get my attention as usual. LatinbAmer8ca was just a colony of explorations, they just came here to stole and no family came to this pseud9 colony. Reasoning they mixed with non white women.

According to the census, 7.6% of Brazilians said they were black, compared with 6.2% in 2000, and 43.1% said they were mixed race, up from 38.5%.


50% of Brasil popolation is black...(mixed race is considered black )

renaissance12
06-27-2018, 06:47 AM
Yup. (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/mexico-deaths-conflict-zone-war-syria-gangs-study-a7759936.html)

Trump could be understood if he wants to built a long wall between US and Mexico.. There is a war in Mexico..

Heather Duval
06-27-2018, 12:07 PM
According to the census, 7.6% of Brazilians said they were black, compared with 6.2% in 2000, and 43.1% said they were mixed race, up from 38.5%.


50% of Brasil popolation is black...(mixed race is considered black )
Mixed races aint considered black in latam/Brazil
Most mixed folks here are tri racials and they look nothing black
Brazilian simger "Anitta" its our typical mixed race and only in your land she would be black. Sonia Braga is also tri racial and hollywood potrays her as exotic Brazilian.

KMack
06-27-2018, 03:48 PM
Bavaria, Trier, Rhine area..No Berlin no North no east..

We have a low cost Euro Airline operating out of my airport now. They funnel everything through Iceland, then a bunch of Euro cities.
They go to Frankfort and Dusseldorf. The Rhine river cruises are popular with Americans. Where I live we have area called Over the Rhine
because it reminded immigrants of Rhineland.

Black Panther
06-27-2018, 08:51 PM
He said he want vacation, he didn't said he want to die

Rocinha is safer than a lot of places in Brazil, from North to South.

Joso
06-27-2018, 08:53 PM
Rocinha is safer than a lot of places in Brazil, from North to South.

Go live there, go ahead, believe it.

Black Panther
06-27-2018, 08:55 PM
Go live there, go ahead, believe it.

I'd visit, but not live there.

Black Panther
06-27-2018, 09:01 PM
Excellent plotting my death.

Many Americans visit Rocinha and aren't killed. In fact, it is a very rare occasion, usually happening only when gringos are driving motor bikes and cross the wrong path through the city. The gangs will think you're a police informant or spy. Most thugs in Brazil know that killing tourists is bad business because the more tourists come to Brazil, the more money they can make by robbing them and selling drugs to gringo potheads/coke sniffers. If too many tourists are killed, people will avoid traveling to Brazil even more than they already do.

Lucas Rodrigues
06-27-2018, 09:03 PM
They have courage, I would never step in those favelas, I value my life.

Enviado de meu XT1032 usando o Tapatalk

KMack
06-27-2018, 09:19 PM
Many Americans visit Rocinha and aren't killed. In fact, it is a very rare occasion, usually happening only when gringos are driving motor bikes and cross the wrong path through the city. The gangs will think you're a police informant or spy. Most thugs in Brazil know that killing tourists is bad business because the more tourists come to Brazil, the more money they can make by robbing them and selling drugs to gringo potheads/coke sniffers. If too many tourists are killed, people will avoid traveling to Brazil even more than they already do.

No kidding?

Black Panther
06-27-2018, 09:23 PM
No kidding?

No kidding. While you are more likely to be robbed in Rocinha than someone like me, for example, you are less likely to be murdered.

Black Panther
06-27-2018, 09:24 PM
They have courage, I would never step in those favelas, I value my life.

Enviado de meu XT1032 usando o Tapatalk

Gringos are safer than locals in favelas. But they are targeted for quick robberies more often.

Lucas Rodrigues
06-27-2018, 09:27 PM
Have you ever entered in one of those slums?
Rio is a rich state, I think they should break those slums down and build proper houses for its inhabitants.
Gringos are safer than locals in favelas. But they are targeted for quick robberies more often.

Enviado de meu XT1032 usando o Tapatalk

Black Panther
06-27-2018, 09:34 PM
Have you ever entered in one of those slums?
Rio is a rich state, I think they should break those slums down and build proper houses for its inhabitants.

Enviado de meu XT1032 usando o Tapatalk

Lol. I even have relatives who still live in those places. Now, sure, they don't live in slums where there are open shoot outs every fucking day, but there are lots of executions going on in certain spots of neighborhood they live in.
As for the second part of your comment, not just Rio, all of Brazil has enough money to build decent housing for its poorest inhabitants. There are several countries with economies decades behind Brazil's who do not have favelas. But corruption and income/racial inequality are subjects often too ignored by Brazilians, unfortunately.

Odin
06-27-2018, 09:55 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3NTUJVwTIw

lisarb
06-27-2018, 10:29 PM
Lol. I even have relatives who still live in those places. Now, sure, they don't live in slums where there are open shoot outs every fucking day, but there are lots of executions going on in certain spots of neighborhood they live in.
As for the second part of your comment, not just Rio, all of Brazil has enough money to build decent housing for its poorest inhabitants. There are several countries with economies decades behind Brazil's who do not have favelas. But corruption and income/racial inequality are subjects often too ignored by Brazilians, unfortunately.

"racial inequality" is a gringo theme not brazilian!

lisarb
06-27-2018, 10:30 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3NTUJVwTIw
violence and crimes in Brazil: drug trafficking

Black Panther
06-27-2018, 10:31 PM
"racial inequality" is a gringo theme not brazilian!

You're exactly the type of person I am talking about.

lisarb
06-27-2018, 10:33 PM
You're exactly the type of person I am talking about.

brasileiros não se preocupam com isso somente gringos

Isleño
06-27-2018, 10:47 PM
Historically much less political corruption with the former British colonies, USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
I live in Louisiana in the USA and it was never a British colony. It was a colony of France and Spain. People assume the current USA was a British colony but that’s not true. Only the East Coast was a British colony and some parts of the south. The rest of the country was either a colony of France or Spain.

Heather Duval
06-27-2018, 10:52 PM
I live in Louisiana in the USA and it was never a British colony. It was a colony of France and Spain. People assume the current USA was a British colony but that’s not true. Only the East Coast was a British colony and some parts of the south. The rest of the country was either a colony of France or Spain.

Yet everyone in Louisiana speaks English with some minority groups doesnt

Lucas Rodrigues
06-27-2018, 11:01 PM
I studied about it at school. We study the history of the USA here.
Most parts of the current USA were bought from Spaniards and French
I live in Louisiana in the USA and it was never a British colony. It was a colony of France and Spain. People assume the current USA was a British colony but that’s not true. Only the East Coast was a British colony and some parts of the south. The rest of the country was either a colony of France or Spain.

Gesendet von meinem XT1032 mit Tapatalk

KMack
06-27-2018, 11:04 PM
I live in Louisiana in the USA and it was never a British colony. It was a colony of France and Spain. People assume the current USA was a British colony but that’s not true. Only the East Coast was a British colony and some parts of the south. The rest of the country was either a colony of France or Spain.

Thus the relationships of Spanish/French men with black women and mulattoes. Similar to S. America due to lack of Euro women. Nonetheless, and as you know, it became art of the USA after the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. The USA laws and constitution were based on British laws. The legacy is still overwhelmingly British, Anglo Saxon.

Isleño
06-27-2018, 11:09 PM
I studied about it at school. We study the history of the USA here.
Most parts of the current USA were bought from Spaniards and French

Gesendet von meinem XT1032 mit Tapatalk
Correct. However, many Americans of the USA think that the US was a British colony when only one section of it was. Like I said, my state was never a British colony. My whole reason for existence was born out of trying to keep the British out. I’m a descendant of Spaniards from the Canary Islands that we’re strategically placed to keep the British from invading the area of Louisiana I live in. If the families in my community that came here to protect Louisiana from the British in the name of Spain would have never came here, I would not have been born.

Dominicanese
06-27-2018, 11:13 PM
Correct. However, many Americans of the USA think that the US was a British colony when only one section of it was. Like I said, my state was never a British colony. My whole reason for existence was born out of trying to keep the British out. I’m a descendant of Spaniards from the Canary Islands that we’re strategically placed to keep the British from invading the area of Louisiana I live in. If the families in my community that came here to protect Louisiana from the British in the name of Spain would have never came here, I would not have been born.

wow same reason here as well

canarians were brought to DR in order to prevent french occupation in the later 1600s and early 1700s

i predominantly descend from that

Lucas Rodrigues
06-27-2018, 11:13 PM
Interesting, but why do people there stopped speaking their native language to speak English?
Southern Brazil received loads of Europeans, they used to speak more their native language rather than Portuguese, until the day that Getúlio Vargas ( a president who came from southern Brazil) prohibited them to speak their languages, they should speak Portuguese otherwise they would be arrested.
Correct. However, many Americans of the USA think that the US was a British colony when only one section of it was. Like I said, my state was never a British colony. My whole reason for existence was born out of trying to keep the British out. I’m a descendant of Spaniards from the Canary Islands that we’re strategically placed to keep the British from invading the area of Louisiana I live in. If the families in my community that came here to protect Louisiana from the British in the name of Spain would have never came here, I would not have been born.

Gesendet von meinem XT1032 mit Tapatalk

Isleño
06-27-2018, 11:20 PM
Thus the relationships of Spanish/French men with black women and mulattoes. Similar to S. America due to lack of Euro women. Nonetheless, and as you know, it became art of the USA after the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. The USA laws and constitution were based on British laws. The legacy is still overwhelmingly British, Anglo Saxon.
I think your view of Louisiana is biased. French and Spanish men only with black women and mulattoes? Did you think we had no white women here? My entire community came here with women and whole families. Also, the French and Spanish imported women here from France and Spain. The Ursuline convent in New Orleans was responsible for receiving them and teaching them. Also, the French Quarter in New Orleans was where whites lived, there were white French women and Spanish women among them. The richest woman in New Orleans was Spanish descent named Micaela Pontalba. One of the most famous writers was a woman of French and Irish descent named Kate Chopin. There was even a red light district called Storyville in New Orleans where men went to get with prostitutes and there were white prostitutes among them. The French and Spanish had French and Spanish wives. The white Creoles had white families from white women. I think your idea of Louisiana is biased. We have Caribbean character, but we are not the Caribbean.

Isleño
06-27-2018, 11:22 PM
wow same reason here as well

canarians were brought to DR in order to prevent french occupation in the later 1600s and early 1700s

i predominantly descend from thatYou and I and many others share similar histories.

Isleño
06-27-2018, 11:25 PM
Yet everyone in Louisiana speaks English with some minority groups doesnt

Because we are part of the United States and the language of the United States is English. However, Louisiana is one of the few States if not the only state where people that came here 250-300 years ago still are speaking their ancestral language. Both the French and the Spanish language exists here in Louisiana until this day, spoken here continuously unbroken for up to 300 years.

Heather Duval
06-27-2018, 11:27 PM
Thus the relationships of Spanish/French men with black women and mulattoes. Similar to S. America due to lack of Euro women. Nonetheless, and as you know, it became art of the USA after the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. The USA laws and constitution were based on British laws. The legacy is still overwhelmingly British, Anglo Saxon.

Plus there are more Anglos there than creoles which according to census aint even 30k of population

KMack
06-27-2018, 11:30 PM
I think your view of Louisiana is biased. French and Spanish men only with black women and mulattoes? Did you think we had no white women here? My entire community came here with women and whole families. Also, the French and Spanish imported women here from France and Spain. The Ursuline convent in New Orleans was responsible for receiving them and teaching them. Also, the French Quarter in New Orleans was where whites lived, there were white French women and Spanish women among them. The richest woman in New Orleans was Spanish descent named Micaela Pontalba. One of the most famous writers was a woman of French and Irish descent named Kate Chopin. There was even a red light district called Storyville in New Orleans where men went to get with prostitutes and there were white prostitutes among them. The French and Spanish had French and Spanish wives. The white Creoles had white families from white women. I think your idea of Louisiana is biased. We have Caribbean character, but we are not the Caribbean.
Plaçage was a recognized extralegal system in French and Spanish slave colonies of North America (including the Caribbean) by which ethnic European men entered into civil unions with non-Europeans of African, Native American and mixed-race descent. The term comes from the French placer meaning "to place with". The women were not legally recognized as wives but were known as placées; their relationships were recognized among the free people of color as mariages de la main gauche or left-handed marriages. They became institutionalized with contracts or negotiations that settled property on the woman and her children, and in some cases gave them freedom if enslaved. The system flourished throughout the French and Spanish colonial periods, reaching its zenith during the latter, between 1769 and 1803.

It was widely practiced in New Orleans, where planter society had created enough wealth to support the system. It also took place in the Latin-influenced cities of Natchez and Biloxi, Mississippi; Mobile, Alabama; St. Augustine and Pensacola, Florida;[1] as well as Saint-Domingue (now the Republic of Haiti). Plaçage became associated with New Orleans as part of its cosmopolitan society.

The plaçage system developed from the predominance of men among early colonial populations, who took women as consorts from Native Americans, current free women of color that came to America from places such as Saint-Domingue and some enslaved Africans. Adding to what was known as free people of color in Louisiana, and especially New Orleans, during the colonial years, from whom wealthy men would choose. In this period there was a shortage of European women, as the colonies were dominated in the early day by male explorers and colonists. Given the harsh conditions in Louisiana, persuading women to follow the men was not easy. France recruited willing farm- and city-dwelling women, known as casket or casquette girls, because they brought all their possessions to the colonies in a small trunk or casket. France also sent women convicted along with their debtor husbands, and in 1719, deported 209 women felons "who were of a character to be sent to the French settlement in Louisiana."[4] (France also relocated young women orphans known as King's Daughters (French: filles du roi) to their colonies for marriage: to both Canada and Louisiana.)

White male colonists, often the younger sons of noblemen, military men, and planters, who needed to accumulate some wealth before they could marry, took women of color as consorts before marriage or in some cases after their first wives died. Merchants and administrators also followed this practice if they were wealthy enough. When the women bore children, they were sometimes emancipated along with their children. Both the woman and her children might take the surnames of the man. When Creole men reached an age when they were expected to marry, some also kept their relationships with their placées, but this was less common. A wealthy white man could have two (or more) families: one legal, and the other not. Their mixed-race children became the nucleus of the class of free people of color or gens de couleur libres in Louisiana and Saint-Domingue. After the Haitian Revolution in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, many refugees came to New Orleans, adding a new wave of French-speaking free people of color.

During the period of French and Spanish rule, the gens de couleur came to constitute a third class in New Orleans and other former French cities - between the white Creoles and the mass of black slaves. They had certain status and rights, and often acquired education and property. Later their descendants became leaders in New Orleans, holding political office in the city and state, and becoming part of what developed as the African-American middle class in the United States............................................ .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ................................................
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pla%C3%A7age

Isleño
06-27-2018, 11:31 PM
Interesting, but why do people there stopped speaking their native language to speak English?
Southern Brazil received loads of Europeans, they used to speak more their native language rather than Portuguese, until the day that Getúlio Vargas ( a president who came from southern Brazil) prohibited them to speak their languages, they should speak Portuguese otherwise they would be arrested.

Gesendet von meinem XT1032 mit TapatalkOur ancestral languages are still spoken here, but not to the capacity that it once was. The reason for this is in the 1920’s, the US government forced us all to stop speaking our native languages in public and would punish us in school and whip out hands with sticks if caught speaking our languages. But until the early 20th century, everyone spoke their native languages freely, which for most was either French or Spanish. I speak Spanish and so does my family. My community is the last colonial Spanish community in Louisiana that still speaks Spanish. There are several French speaking colonial communities in Louisiana here also.

Lucas Rodrigues
06-27-2018, 11:35 PM
Very interesting. I hope you guys preserve your language and culture.
Our ancestral languages are still spoken here, but not to the capacity that it once was. The reason for this is in the 1920’s, the US government forced us all to stop speaking our native languages in public and would punish us in school and whip out hands with sticks if caught speaking our languages. But until the early 20th century, everyone spoke their native languages freely, which for most was either French or Spanish. I speak Spanish and so does my family. My community is the last colonial Spanish community in Louisiana that still speaks Spanish. There are several French speaking colonial communities in Louisiana here also.

Gesendet von meinem XT1032 mit Tapatalk

Isleño
06-27-2018, 11:43 PM
Plaçage was a recognized extralegal system in French and Spanish slave colonies of North America (including the Caribbean) by which ethnic European men entered into civil unions with non-Europeans of African, Native American and mixed-race descent. The term comes from the French placer meaning "to place with". The women were not legally recognized as wives but were known as placées; their relationships were recognized among the free people of color as mariages de la main gauche or left-handed marriages. They became institutionalized with contracts or negotiations that settled property on the woman and her children, and in some cases gave them freedom if enslaved. The system flourished throughout the French and Spanish colonial periods, reaching its zenith during the latter, between 1769 and 1803.

It was widely practiced in New Orleans, where planter society had created enough wealth to support the system. It also took place in the Latin-influenced cities of Natchez and Biloxi, Mississippi; Mobile, Alabama; St. Augustine and Pensacola, Florida;[1] as well as Saint-Domingue (now the Republic of Haiti). Plaçage became associated with New Orleans as part of its cosmopolitan society.

The plaçage system developed from the predominance of men among early colonial populations, who took women as consorts from Native Americans, current free women of color that came to America from places such as Saint-Domingue and some enslaved Africans. Adding to what was known as free people of color in Louisiana, and especially New Orleans, during the colonial years, from whom wealthy men would choose. In this period there was a shortage of European women, as the colonies were dominated in the early day by male explorers and colonists. Given the harsh conditions in Louisiana, persuading women to follow the men was not easy. France recruited willing farm- and city-dwelling women, known as casket or casquette girls, because they brought all their possessions to the colonies in a small trunk or casket. France also sent women convicted along with their debtor husbands, and in 1719, deported 209 women felons "who were of a character to be sent to the French settlement in Louisiana."[4] (France also relocated young women orphans known as King's Daughters (French: filles du roi) to their colonies for marriage: to both Canada and Louisiana.)

White male colonists, often the younger sons of noblemen, military men, and planters, who needed to accumulate some wealth before they could marry, took women of color as consorts before marriage or in some cases after their first wives died. Merchants and administrators also followed this practice if they were wealthy enough. When the women bore children, they were sometimes emancipated along with their children. Both the woman and her children might take the surnames of the man. When Creole men reached an age when they were expected to marry, some also kept their relationships with their placées, but this was less common. A wealthy white man could have two (or more) families: one legal, and the other not. Their mixed-race children became the nucleus of the class of free people of color or gens de couleur libres in Louisiana and Saint-Domingue. After the Haitian Revolution in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, many refugees came to New Orleans, adding a new wave of French-speaking free people of color.

During the period of French and Spanish rule, the gens de couleur came to constitute a third class in New Orleans and other former French cities - between the white Creoles and the mass of black slaves. They had certain status and rights, and often acquired education and property. Later their descendants became leaders in New Orleans, holding political office in the city and state, and becoming part of what developed as the African-American middle class in the United States............................................ .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ................................................
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pla%C3%A7age
Plaçage was mostly voluntary and it was mostly practiced among the wealthy people. Most folks had wives of their own racial type, including the wealthy people. It was more practiced among the French. They had white wives and mulatto or black mistresses. That’s how we have a sizable mulatto community here. But there are more whites here of colonial descent that descend from white women. Some things online stress plaçage as if it was the only thing happening, but that’s nonsense. There were tons of women here in Louisiana. There were ships of families and single men and women here. There was a particular ship that France sent that was entirely made up of women passengers to be wives for the colonists. I’m born and raised in Louisiana, there are tons of whites here with colonial surnames and have family trees to the colony. Plaçage was a practice, it wasn’t the only thing going. Most white men that practiced plaçage had white wives. I can post ship passenger lists of whole families coming to Louisiana. My entire community came here from the Canary Islands of Spain as families. I can post our ship passenger lists. I’m an Isleño of Louisiana, you can google us. We are not mulattoes and we’ve been in Louisiana since 1777-1778. Many white women were sent to Louisiana. White Creoles descend from white men and women. Most Louisianians with colonial surnames are whites.

Isleño
06-27-2018, 11:46 PM
Very interesting. I hope you guys preserve your language and culture.

Gesendet von meinem XT1032 mit TapatalkWe are trying to preserve it the best we can. The French speaking communities are trying to also.

Dominicanese
06-27-2018, 11:47 PM
We are trying to preserve it the best we can. The French speaking communities are trying to also.

yo lo apoyo a ustedes

isleños unidos

Isleño
06-27-2018, 11:49 PM
Plus there are more Anglos there than creoles which according to census aint even 30k of population

That’s a bullshit census. It’s a census of Creoles of color and did not count white Creoles or even black Creoles. Most people in south Louisiana are of colonial ancestry and probably half the people in North Louisiana have colonial ancestry. I live here, there are more colonial surnames here than you know. There are more than 30k of my own people here in Louisiana, so that’s bullshit.

Heather Duval
06-27-2018, 11:50 PM
There are more Anglos in Louisiana than creoles

Heather Duval
06-27-2018, 11:53 PM
That’s a bullshit census. It’s a census of Creoles of color and did not count white Creoles or even black Creoles. Most people in south Louisiana are of colonial ancestry and probably half the people in North Louisiana have colonial ancestry. I live here, there are more colonial surnames here than you know. There are more than 30k of my own people here in Louisiana, so that’s bullshit.

Nigga most whites in louisiana claims to be German/British. You guys are a very minority group living in isolates communities. Same reason u never found creole celebs coz u guys are like almost non existent. All louisiana stars i know we have on tv are all British. Britney Spears is from Louisiana, shes like 98% of whites there= of british ancestry

Isleño
06-28-2018, 12:02 AM
yo lo apoyo a ustedes

isleños unidos

Muchas gracias, chacho. Igualmente. Isleño hasta la muerte 🇮🇨

Isleño
06-28-2018, 12:03 AM
There are more Anglos in Louisiana than creoles

Thats bullshit

Isleño
06-28-2018, 12:07 AM
Nigga most whites in louisiana claims to be German/British. You guys are a very minority group living in isolates communities. Same reason u never found creole celebs coz u guys are like almost non existent. All louisiana stars i know we have on tv are all British. Britney Spears is from Louisiana, shes like 98% of whites there= of british ancestryBritney Spears probably has colonial ancestry in her family tree. There are German Creoles here. Creole in Louisiana means to be a person of colonial descent. Most people here are not British descent. Most people here are either of French Spanish or German colonial descent. Even those that are here that are not of full colonial descent usually have partial colonial descent. I live here, you don’t. I know what’s here, you don’t.

Heather Duval
06-28-2018, 12:43 AM
Britney Spears probably has colonial ancestry in her family tree. There are German Creoles here. Creole in Louisiana means to be a person of colonial descent. Most people here are not British descent. Most people here are either of French Spanish or German colonial descent. Even those that are here that are not of full colonial descent usually have partial colonial descent. I live here, you don’t. I know what’s here, you don’t.
Not according to census. All whites and Aframs celebs from Louisiana have German or English surnames but you can keep saying so

Heather Duval
06-28-2018, 12:46 AM
Also never saw any fucking creature from Louisiana with spanish surname in the media

Isleño
06-28-2018, 12:51 AM
Not according to census. All whites and Aframs celebs from Louisiana have German or English surnames but you can keep saying so

What census? And that’s bullshit. I can list celebs from Louisiana with colonial surnames (many German names are colonial)

Isleño
06-28-2018, 01:00 AM
Also never saw any fucking creature from Louisiana with spanish surname in the media

Because you don’t live here, that’s why. No, not creatures, people. Actually my cousin is the most famous modern Louisianian of Spanish descent there is and he has a real estate tv show on national television called “The Deed” his name is Sidney Torres IV. He is my cousin on my mother’s side. Take a look:

https://wgno.com/2018/06/27/sidney-torres-show-the-deed-is-1-trending-in-the-u-s/

Heather Duval
06-28-2018, 01:04 AM
What census? And that’s bullshit. I can list celebs from Louisiana with colonial surnames (many German names are colonial)

Lil wayne is from Louisiana, Britney Spears and many others they all have British or German surnames lke average Americans

Heather Duval
06-28-2018, 01:07 AM
Because you don’t live here, that’s why. No, not creatures, people. Actually my cousin is the most famous modern Louisianian of Spanish descent there is and he has a real estate tv show on national television called “The Deed” his name is Sidney Torres IV. He is my cousin on my mother’s side. Take a look:

http://https://wgno.com/2018/06/27/sidney-torres-show-the-deed-is-1-trending-in-the-u-s/
Herss a list of celebs from Louisiana: most have german/british and french surnames
Not a fucking single spanish surname, which doesmt mean they may have iberian colonial input
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_from_Louisiana

KMack
06-28-2018, 01:08 AM
Britney Spears probably has colonial ancestry in her family tree. There are German Creoles here. Creole in Louisiana means to be a person of colonial descent. Most people here are not British descent. Most people here are either of French Spanish or German colonial descent. Even those that are here that are not of full colonial descent usually have partial colonial descent. I live here, you don’t. I know what’s here, you don’t.

Creole technically means native born. And German, Irish and Italians all made it there. Ships that were "supposed" to go to NYC or Boston went to NO. French ancestry is very strong in NO and all over Louisiana.

Isleño
06-28-2018, 01:11 AM
Lil wayne is from Louisiana, Britney Spears and many others they all have British or German surnames lke average Americans

Little Wayne is black. Lots of blacks from Mississippi moved to New Orleans during the 1960’s. They have English surnames. Also, in Northern Louisiana, there are people that have moved there from other parts of the south and they have British surnames. Most people in Southern Louisiana have French, Spanish or German colonial names.

Isleño
06-28-2018, 01:25 AM
Creole technically means native born. And German, Irish and Italians all made it there. Ships that were "supposed" to go to NYC or Boston went to NO. French ancestry is very strong in NO and all over Louisiana.

Creole is a word from colonial times. It meant native born to the colony. Louisiana was sold to the US in 1803 and everyone that arrived in Louisiana after that year is not considered creole. So today, we adhere to that still. Those of us with colonial origins are referred to as creole and Louisianians that were born in Louisiana after 1803are referred to as just Louisianians, not creole Louisianians.

And yes, lots of Italians, Irish and Germans arrived starting in the 1830’s. They are not Creoles. However, they have been creolized and grew up with a creole culture. That’s why we use words like creole Italians rather than Italian Creoles. When creole is the adjective it signifies that they are creolized but not Creoles. When creole is the noun, such as in the word French creole or Spanish creole, it signifies that they are Creoles and the ethnicity attached is the type of creole. Mulatto type Creoles are called “Creoles of color”. The white Creoles are the French Creoles, the Spanish Creoles and the German Creoles. Many Creoles also are a mix of any combination of those. French ancestry is found all over New Orleans, but is strongest in south Louisiana. Spanish ancestry is mainly found in Southern Louisiana.

AphroditeWorshiper
06-28-2018, 01:36 AM
Yes all the problems in Latin America are caused by Portuguese and Spaniards despite few Iberians migrated to Latin America.

Latin America is only "Latin" by language but not by genetic, 90% of the people there is full Amerindian, or black or mixed between black and Amerindian. Why its my fault if an Amerindian decide to shoot with a gun to his Black neighbour?

Meanwhile Portugal and Spain have one the lowest crime rates of the world. So why is my fault what is happening in Latin America?

Come on Latin America is independent since 1800s so you have had time enough to improve a little bit by yourselves and time to stop blame others.
You and nobody else are responsible of what happens in your countries, so try to solve it by yourselves.

I suppose that according to your arguments if India is a big shithole is thanks to the British, right?

wrong, millions of Iberians have migrated to here

Latin America is way more Iberian than Amerindian, even Bolivia or Peru it's more spanish than Amerindian

also many problems here it's a Colonial legacy, come on :rolleyes:

AphroditeWorshiper
06-28-2018, 01:39 AM
The biggest problem of Latin America it's a thing called "Drugs"

a thing brought by Europeans, Amerindian lived in harmony with nature with a highly developed civilization, evil Europeans :cry2:cry

Isleño
06-28-2018, 01:43 AM
Lil wayne is from Louisiana, Britney Spears and many others they all have British or German surnames lke average Americans

I know little Wayne is from Louisiana. See, this is where living here verses arguing a point from overseas makes a difference. Lots of blacks from the Mississippi delta moved into North Louisiana in the past century. These people spread into parts of Louisiana and during the civil rights era, blacks moved into New Orleans in mass amounts and in mass amounts, whites moved out to the suburbs. These blacks moved into New Orleans. That’s why they have English surnames as they were slaves of people with those surnames outside of south Louisiana. In 1950, New Orleans was 69% white, 31% black. Just before hurricane Katrina in 2005, New Orleans was 67% black, 31% white. The numbers reversed. Today, New Orleans is about half black, a third white and the rest made up of Vietnamese, Latin American mestizos and Arabs. Also, Colonial Louisianians are all Catholics. The vast majority of blacks in New Orleans now are Baptist. These blacks are either non-colonial or are mixed with non-colonials. There are folks in Louisiana with English surnames. But understand that they came from other states and do not make up the majority in south Louisiana and are mixed with French in North Louisiana.

Isleño
06-28-2018, 01:52 AM
Herss a list of celebs from Louisiana: most have german/british and french surnames
Not a fucking single spanish surname, which doesmt mean they may have iberian colonial input
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_from_Louisiana
The Spanish were mainly absorbed into the French populations of Louisiana. Also, the Spanish that melted away into the French population gallicized their name to sound French. So Rodriguez became Rodrigue, Dominguez became Domingue, Plasencia became Plaisance etc. However, in some areas, these mixed French-Spanish people kept their Spanish surnames. There are only three surviving Spanish communities left in Louisiana and they are the Isleños (my community), the Malagueños, and the Adaesanos. The rest have been absorbed into thecolonial French and German communities. But who cares about celebrities. I live here, so I see way more people’s surnames than you do. Spanish surnames are present, but less common than French surnames. But again, lots of Spanish surnames among the mixed French-Spanish groups have been made to look French.

Isleño
06-28-2018, 01:53 AM
The biggest problem of Latin America it's a thing called "Drugs"

a thing brought by Europeans, Amerindian lived in harmony with nature with a highly developed civilization, evil Europeans :cry2:cry
Stop being a racist

Isleño
06-28-2018, 01:55 AM
Creole technically means native born. And German, Irish and Italians all made it there. Ships that were "supposed" to go to NYC or Boston went to NO. French ancestry is very strong in NO and all over Louisiana.

I don’t know if you read literature, but I have some links to some good books and university material on Creoles of all the types in Louisiana. Also, people don’t realize the Cajuns are technically Creoles. They assumed the name Cajun in 1968 and their previous name was Acadian Creoles.

Heather Duval
06-28-2018, 01:56 AM
The Spanish were mainly absorbed into the French populations of Louisiana. Also, the Spanish that melted away into the French population gallicized their name to sound French. So Rodriguez became Rodrigue, Dominguez became Domingue, Plasencia became Plaisance etc. However, in some areas, these mixed French-Spanish people kept their Spanish surnames. There are only three surviving Spanish communities left in Louisiana and they are the Isleños (my community), the Malagueños, and the Adaesanos. The rest have been absorbed into thecolonial French and German communities. But who cares about celebrities. I live here, so I see way more people’s surnames than you do. Spanish surnames are present, but less common than French surnames. But again, lots of Spanish surnames among the mixed French-Spanish groups have been made to look French.
Louisiana self repoted ancestry list
https://statisticalatlas.com/state/Louisiana/Ancestry

Didnt see spanish

Isleño
06-28-2018, 02:01 AM
Louisiana self repoted ancestry list
https://statisticalatlas.com/state/Louisiana/Ancestry

Didnt see spanishThats because the Spanish arrived here in the 1760’s-1770’s and by the 1850’s most had married into French families. So people in 2018 May not know they have Spanish ancestry, they think it’s purely French. But it’s not. I met many people that found out from doing DNA tests they were like 30-40% Iberian DNA. They traced their family trees and found many Spaniards. Many know about the Spanish ancestry, but many do not. That survey sure didn’t survey my community, because there would be Spanish on there. Which areas did they survey in that study? That’s important.

Heather Duval
06-28-2018, 02:05 AM
Thats because the Spanish arrived here in the 1760’s-1770’s and by the 1850’s most had married into French families. So people in 2018 May not know they have Spanish ancestry, they think it’s purely French. But it’s not. I met many people that found out from doing DNA tests they were like 30-40% Iberian DNA. They traced their family trees and found many Spaniards. Many know about the Spanish ancestry, but many do not. That survey sure didn’t survey my community, because there would be Spanish on there. Which areas did they survey in that study? That’s important.

It says the State as a whole.

Isleño
06-28-2018, 02:21 AM
It says the State as a whole.

I was just looking at that again and that’s pure bullshit. Sub-Saharan African at less than 1%? Lmao �� man, 30% of Louisiana is black! Then there is a category that says unclassified at 12% that might be the Spanish there and then there is a category at more than 40% that is “other” lol wtf is that? The state is 60% white, 30% black and 10% other. Also, it has Cajun at less than 2% �� Cajuns make up a third of the population of the state. Most of south Louisiana is Cajun. And French at 13%? Man this survey is a joke. That’s not all of Louisiana, that’s bullshit.

AphroditeWorshiper
06-28-2018, 02:25 AM
Stop being a racist

I'm just kidding hehe :)

Isleño
06-28-2018, 02:27 AM
Louisiana self repoted ancestry list
https://statisticalatlas.com/state/Louisiana/Ancestry

Didnt see spanish
And Spanish is listed under the Hispanic column, not the European column and the total is 4.4% Spaniard and 2.3% Spanish for 6.7% total. Anyway, that census is bullshit. When it shows Sub-Saharan African at less than 1% when I know blacks are 30% of the state, I know it’s bullshit. Cajuns 1.8%? Lmao �� �� �� straight bullshit. According to this, there are more Mexicans than Cajuns. Straight bullshit.

Kriptc06
06-28-2018, 02:30 AM
The biggest problem of Latin America it's a thing called "Drugs"

a thing brought by Europeans, Amerindian lived in harmony with nature with a highly developed civilization, evil Europeans :cry2:cry

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/22/45/50/2245509c2e5a4166af12b597e7e28e8a.gif
sure thing pal

Carlito's Way
06-28-2018, 02:38 AM
Thats because the Spanish arrived here in the 1760’s-1770’s and by the 1850’s most had married into French families. So people in 2018 May not know they have Spanish ancestry, they think it’s purely French. But it’s not. I met many people that found out from doing DNA tests they were like 30-40% Iberian DNA. They traced their family trees and found many Spaniards. Many know about the Spanish ancestry, but many do not. That survey sure didn’t survey my community, because there would be Spanish on there. Which areas did they survey in that study? That’s important.

are there any census or a source that show that large spanish population you are speaking about? considering the fact that mexicans were the ones who built New Orleans and New Orleans was being managed via Mexico City, thus its obvious that if there were any "spanish" out there, then those would be Mexicans, not Spanish from Spain, I also dont consider Canarians real Spaniards, the same way I wouldnt have consider Puerto Ricans nor Cubans Spanish if they had remained with Spain

AphroditeWorshiper
06-28-2018, 02:54 AM
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/22/45/50/2245509c2e5a4166af12b597e7e28e8a.gif
sure thing pal

https://i.gifer.com/MffS.gif

Isleño
06-28-2018, 03:01 AM
are there any census or a source that show that large spanish population you are speaking about? considering the fact that mexicans were the ones who built New Orleans and New Orleans was being managed via Mexico City, thus its obvious that if there were any "spanish" out there, then those would be Mexicans, not Spanish from Spain, I also dont consider Canarians real Spaniards, the same way I wouldnt have consider Puerto Ricans nor Cubans Spanish if they had remained with Spain
Who told you Mexicans built New Orleans? The French built New Orleans and the Spanish rebuilt a portion of the French quarter that burned down, but also changed the building codes and did work on the rest of the French Quarter. The Spanish in power used the local population to rebuild. Most of the Mexicans that are in New Orleans today came to rebuild after Hurricane Katrina. When I was child, I don’t remember seeing any Mexicans in New Orleans. Actually there is a city in Mexico where New Orleanians built much of it. It’s called Tampico.

There were Spaniards in the city of New Orleans in colonial times. But they were absorbed by the French there by the late 19th century. Many white Creoles in the New Orleans area are a mix of French-Spanish. In the New Orleans area, my community is the only surviving Spanish settlement. And we are considered Spanish here. The Canary Islands is part of Spain. We may not be the exact same in DNA as Spaniards from the peninsula, but we are not that different. We just have a bit more North African DNA than peninsular Spaniards.

Carlito's Way
06-28-2018, 03:15 AM
Who told you Mexicans built New Orleans? The French built New Orleans and the Spanish rebuilt a portion of the French quarter that burned down, but also changed the building codes and did work on the rest of the French Quarter. The Spanish in power used the local population to rebuild.

not according to historians in the architecture of New Orleans, in these two books, historians credit Mexico for the architecture of New Orleans and that the influence didnt come via France like many people tend to think
Manuel de Godoy explains it in his book La Nueva España y la Luisiana
Reasonover's Land Measures by John R. Reasonover




Most of the Mexicans that are in New Orleans today came to rebuild after Hurricane Katrina. When I was child, I don’t remember seeing any Mexicans in New Orleans.

there are records of Mexicans living in Louisiana before your people even arriving in Louisiana, there were Mexicans in Louisiana which they played a big part in the development of Jazz music, there were also Mexican communities in that state.




Actually there is a city in Mexico where New Orleanians built much of it. It’s called Tampico.

New Orleanians didnt built that city at all, not sure where you are getting your info from




There were Spaniards in the city of New Orleans in colonial times. But they were absorbed by the French there by the late 19th century. Many white Creoles in the New Orleans area are a mix of French-Spanish. In the New Orleans area, my community is the only surviving Spanish settlement. And we are considered Spanish here. The Canary Islands is part of Spain. We may not be the exact same in DNA as Spaniards from the peninsula, but we are not that different. We just have a bit more North African DNA than peninsular Spaniards.

Again, I am asking you for a census that show the number of Spaniards during the colonial days of Louisiana
out of all the Creoles ive seen with their online genealogy, not one shows a Spanish ancestor at all, they show French and Haitian ancestors for the most part
can you show me an example of a Creole who has Spanish ancestors in his/her family tree?

Isleño
06-28-2018, 03:16 AM
are there any census or a source that show that large spanish population you are speaking about? considering the fact that mexicans were the ones who built New Orleans and New Orleans was being managed via Mexico City, thus its obvious that if there were any "spanish" out there, then those would be Mexicans, not Spanish from Spain, I also dont consider Canarians real Spaniards, the same way I wouldnt have consider Puerto Ricans nor Cubans Spanish if they had remained with Spain
I don’t know if there is a census counting all the Spanish descendants in Louisiana. There are three sizable communities of Spanish descendants and they are the Isleños, the Malagueños and the Adaesanos. The Isleños, we have probably about 60,000 of us, but if we were to count the people mixed with Canarian, it could be 200,000 people. Isleños exist in two places in south Louisiana, but people mixed with Canarian descent are in many parts of South Louisiana.

The Malagueños exist around New Iberia, Louisiana and they are smaller in number at around maybe 20,000. But if you count people mixed with Malagueño, there could be 60,000. Adaesanos are smaller as well. I don’t know their numbers, but I assume it’s maybe around 10,000. There are lots of Louisianians that are mixed with Spanish that don’t know it. Most of the peninsular Spanish that were here mixed into the French descent population. However, many that are mixed with Spanish are aware. Lots of white Creoles that are mixed French Spanish are aware.

Isleño
06-28-2018, 04:00 AM
not according to historians in the architecture of New Orleans, in these two books, historians credit Mexico for the architecture of New Orleans and that the influence didnt come via France like many people tend to think
Manuel de Godoy explains it in his book La Nueva España y la Luisiana
Reasonover's Land Measures by John R. Reasonover Link to the quote? I’ll get back to you with this one, I have to go digging for a source that shows French and French Caribbean architecture. I’ve seen it. I’ve also seen a source for Spanish architecture. However, New Orleans was built before Spain owned Louisiana. I’ll get back to you on this one.





there are records of Mexicans living in Louisiana before your people even arriving in Louisiana, there were Mexicans in Louisiana which they played a big part in the development of Jazz music, there were also Mexican communities in that state. can you post the link to the records and the link for the source about jazz? I know there were a few Mexicans in Louisiana in the old days, but never a large presence. Anyway, source links, please.





New Orleanians didnt built that city at all, not sure where you are getting your info from Of course they did. They didn’t build the whole city, but they built much of it. Who were these New Orleanians? Surprisingly they were not the French or Spanish or Louisiana born white Creoles, they were Creoles of color, the same type that have a community in California where you live. Many of them fled New Orleans when US laws decided they were to be identified as black rather than their own mulatto category with rights and freedom like the French, Spanish and white Creoles allowed, that they were to be slaves, just as the real black slaves. Many of them fled to Mexico to escape slavery and decided on Tampico. They then began to build their New Orleans style architecture in Tampico and they imported many materials from New Orleans itself. If you look at Tampico today, it resembles New Orleans. That’s because New Orleanians built much of it. I can provide sources if you want proof.





Again, I am asking you for a census that show the number of Spaniards during the colonial days of Louisiana
out of all the Creoles ive seen with their online genealogy, not one shows a Spanish ancestor at all, they show French and Haitian ancestors for the most part
can you show me an example of a Creole who has Spanish ancestors in his/her family tree?I don’t have a census showing Spanish ancestry. I’d have to try to find one for colonial times. I’ve read reports of Spaniards settling in the city of New Orleans and other places in New Orleans, but that’s it. Of course there is evidence for the Spanish communities in Louisiana, but that’s not what you are asking for. For average Louisianians, I know many people in various cities and towns in southern Louisiana that claim Spanish ancestry, but as an admixture as they usually had a larger French ancestry. As for Creoles having Spanish ancestry, it depends. Like we’ve discussed before that I had to prove to you, Creoles can be white, mulatto, métis/mestizo or black. Among Creoles with European ancestry, there is usually a claim put out by Creoles of color (mulatto type) that they have French, Spanish, West African and Amerind ancestry. However, upon studying them, I had not seen the proof for the Spanish claim or Amerind claim for many of them. Some had, but many didn’t. There is a similar claim by some French Creoles (white Creoles). However, I did find proof of these claims of Spanish admixture in this group as I’ve seen family trees from various people of this group and their claims seem to be true. There is a peer-reviewed study on white Americans, and for Spanish ancestry in white Americans, it showed Louisiana with the highest amount. I can find the study if need be. If you need proof of Spanish ancestors in average Louisianians, I’d have to searching as I don’t have this info saved or on hand.

Remember, mainland Spaniards (peninsular) were absorbed by the French and white Creoles early on, so any ancestry an average Louisianians would have that is Spanish is pretty far back in the family tree, possibly in the late 1700’s. Only three Spanish communities survived today, all the other Spaniards that were here were absorbed by the French.

RMuller
06-28-2018, 04:02 AM
Latin America is only "Latin" by language but not by genetic, 90% of the people there is full Amerindian, or black or mixed between black and Amerindian.

:picard2: Full amerindians and full blacks are under 1% of the population of LATAM.

Smitty
06-28-2018, 04:27 AM
This correlates so strongly with race, it's amazing people will still try to deny it. Iberian colonization motivations and techniques created these racial differences, but at the end of the day, race is the determinant.

Carlito's Way
06-28-2018, 04:32 AM
Link to the quote? I’ll get back to you with this one, I have to go digging for a source that shows French and French Caribbean architecture. I’ve seen it. I’ve also seen a source for Spanish architecture. However, New Orleans was built before Spain owned Louisiana. I’ll get back to you on this one.

New Orleans was not built before Spain owned it, during the time French had colonized that area, it didnt have architecture at all
if you read the books I gave you, they talk about it perfectly on how New Orleans use to look under French vs how it looked under New Spain







can you post the link to the records and the link for the source about jazz? I know there were a few Mexicans in Louisiana in the old days, but never a large presence. Anyway, source links, please.

"Hart's music store on Canal Street published over eighty Mexican compositions during this period, influencing local instrumentalists and providing one more link in the complex history of interlocking Latin and African-American musical styles. Beyond its purely musicological impact, the Latin-Catholic culture, whose influence permeated nineteenth-century New Orleans, benignly fostered the development of jazz music. This culture, which bore its own scars of discrimination, was far more tolerant in accepting unorthodox social hybrids than the English-Protestant ethos that prevailed in other parts of the New World."

"Madrid's recent argument that the influence of late-19th century Cuban and Mexican musical practices permeate early jazz to an extent often unacknowledged.
But the music of "Spanish" people that Jelly Roll Morton acknowledges when he describes "The Spanish Tinge" is not just identified with Cuba and Mexico."



Mexico also influence Blues but thats a different topic, we influence many genres in America that is because we lived side by side with these black populations of those states where those genres were created




Of course they did. They didn’t build the whole city, but they built much of it. Who were these New Orleanians? Surprisingly they were not the French or Spanish or Louisiana born white Creoles, they were Creoles of color, the same type that have a community in California where you live. Many of them fled New Orleans when US laws decided they were to be identified as black rather than their own mulatto category with rights and freedom like the French, Spanish and white Creoles allowed, that they were to be slaves, just as the real black slaves. Many of them fled to Mexico to escape slavery and decided on Tampico. They then began to build their New Orleans style architecture in Tampico and they imported many materials from New Orleans itself. If you look at Tampico today, it resembles New Orleans. That’s because New Orleanians built much of it. I can provide sources if you want proof.

Provide me source because Tampico has Venice, Italian influence in its architecture, not to mention this whole plan of rebuilding Tampico was planned by the Mexican dictator Profirio Diaz in which he actually brought Europeans to Tampico to design the city, most of the architects of that time were actually French since he worshiped the French and wanted to turn Mexico into a copy of France, this is also when France become a big influence in Mexican culture, where even French was being spoken by the upper class of Mexico City, where upper class Mexicans were being influence by French fashion etc, that was also the time when Mexico City was considered the Paris of the Americas.

New Orleans never built anything in Mexico, New Orleans were also in Veracruz and they were a much large number of them in Veracruz than in Tampico, yet there is no such thing as a replica of New Orleans anywhere in Veracruz. Tampico had a large French population, they influence many aspects of Tampico, also most of the Creoles of Tampico were actually whites with parents/grandparents from France, most of the creoles in Veracruz were majority colored people with a small minority of them being white. There are Mexicans from Tampico on Ancestry who have Creole ancestors, they discover that their creole ancestors were white with recent linage in France.


"El inmueble tuvo un costo de 1,850,000 monedas de oro y ostenta ladrillos de fabricación inglesa y una herrería original que fue traída de Francia. Actualmente alberga al museo “La Victoria de Tampico de 1829”, donde se explica cómo tropas mexicanas triunfaron sobre el ejército invasor español y se logró la consolidación de la Independencia de México."


"Ubicado en el puerto de Tampico y basado en la arquitectura industrial del siglo XIX, el edificio costó 1,850,000 monedas de oro y fue Porfirio Díaz quien eligió el diseño, de corte inglés."


"Han transcurrido 112 años desde que Porfirio Díaz Mori (1830-1915), entonces presidente de la República, inaugurara una terminal aduanera integrada por un edificio principal y almacenes anexos. A orillas del río Pánuco, en Tampico, Tamaulipas, aquel día de 1902 se concretó el proyecto, que tenía la garita más atareada del país y estaba a corta distancia del golfo de México.

La zona aduanal tampiqueña existió desde 1827 y la ciudad creció en torno suyo. En 1829 fue derrotada la última intentona de la corona española para reconquistar a México, en la Plaza de la Libertad, punto donde estaba la primera aduana.

La construcción de la nueva garita fue ordenadatras el incendio de las instalaciones originales. Con planos y tabiques de origen británico, la obra inicióen 1896 en una franja entre el Pánuco y su afluente, elTamesí, y formó un conjunto con la estación del tren.

A Díaz le aconsejaron instalar el complejo del otrolado del río, en Veracruz, pero la propia Carmen Romero Rubio, tamaulipeca y esposa del mandatario, lo convenció de lo contrario.

La mampostería le da esa textura y tono rojizo esenciales. Sus arcadas, sus verdes cubiertas a dos aguas, sus escaleras, así como sus elementos estructurales y ornamentales de hierro colado le confieren un corte europeo. Las líneas férreas tendidas a su costado norte fueron ganadas al río Tamesí, que fue desviado para el proyecto."


"Tampico's downtown architecture is an eclectic mix, reflecting the growth of the city during the Porfiriato (the period of rule by President and dictator Porfirio Díaz). During the oil boom of the first decades of the 20th century, much "grandiose" architecture was built, inviting comparisons with Venice, Italy, and New Orleans in the United States. Many buildings feature wrought-iron balconies (in the 20th century, these were mostly built of English cast iron). Similar balconies are characteristic of the French and Spanish-influenced architecture in New Orleans. Some of the balconies in Plaza de la libertad bear the original plaques showing their manufacture at the Derbyshire forge of Andrew Handyside and Company."



Here is a little history of Profiro Diaz and his obsession with France

MEXICO DURING THE PORFIRIATO: THE PARIS OF THE AMERICAS

France already had a strong influence in Mexico during the colonial period. This increased during the 19th century as a result of the French intervention, and it was during the administration of President Porfirio Díaz that French culture became an integral part of Mexican culture.

The Porfiriato was a 34-year period from 1876 to 1911, the year Porfirio Diaz resigned the presidency in face of the Revolution led by Francisco I. Madero, Francisco Villa, Emiliano Zapata and the Flores Magón brothers.

During this period the first department stores were established in Mexico, most of them founded by "barcelonettes" (people from the French arrondissement of the same name). It seems natural that these places bore a strong French influence reflected in their layout.

During the Porfiriato, Mexico would gradually become a “little Paris.” Even in 1910, Ferrocarriles Nacionales de México – Mexico’s state owned railway company from 1938 to 1998 – would run ads the weekly “Revista de Revistas” (Lit. Magazine of Magazines) like this:

"Let’s go to Mexico City. Lightings, parades, exhibitions, floats and historical parades combined with beautiful parks and boulevards, streets and buildings in the Paris of America. All form an ensemble that could hardly be repeated."

http://cdn.mexiconewsnetwork.com/uploads/images/9763Porfirio-Diaz-mexico.jpg

During this period, Mexico’s capital city bore a clear trend towards modernization that was greatly influenced by Europe: public electricity replaced old naphtha lamps; silence was interrupted by the noise of automobiles; and even art seemed inspired by European trends such as Art Nouveau, Art Deco, Romanticism, among others.

“Formal” music became popular. Romanticism and music hall became widespread. Styles such as Mazurkas, Polkas, waltzes, operas, operettas, among others, were the most listened to during this period.

Paintings displayed religious and nationalist themes, with a strong romantic influence. Portraits and landscapes were the most important forms of expression of the time.

Important architects of different nationalities, including Boari Adamo, Emile Bernard , Maxime Roisin , Silvio Contri , Ernest Brunel, among others, also reached Mexico during this period.

There were also Mexican architects, although it is worth noting that most of them were disciples of foreigners. Among them one finds Manuel Ortiz Monasterio, Bernardo Calderon, Ignacio Marquina and Federico Mariscal.

Antonio Rivas Mercado and Emilio Dondé are among the best known names in Mexican architecture. The former made the Angel of Independence sculpture which still stands on a roundabout on Mexico City’s Reforma Avenue. Dondé would go on to build the Church of San Felipe de Jesús.

Important buildings like the Palace of Fine Arts, The Postal Palace, the Angel of Independence monument, the Palace of Communications and Public Works, Boker Building, the Juarez Theater, The Revolution Monument , Plaza Manuel Tolsá, The Expiatory Temple, The old Maritime Customs building of Tampico, among others, were built during this period.

https://a.travel-assets.com/findyours-php/viewfinder/images/res60/168000/168430-Palacio-De-Bellas-Artes-Mexico-City.jpg

The Palace of Fine Arts is one of the most representative examples. It was commissioned by Díaz to celebrate the Centennial of the Independence of Mexico. Its construction lasted 30 years since it began in 1904 and ended in 1934. It was trusted to architects Adamo Boari and Federico Mariscal; and the engineer William H. Birkmire.

The building would be declared an "Artistic Monument” by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), due to its cultural significance.

Notably, French architect Emile Bernard (1844-1929) was invited by the Díaz administration to design the Federal Legislative Palace of Mexico, which was meant to be one of the greatest works of architecture in the world. However, Bernard’s involvement would be postponed indefinitely when President Díaz left power and went into exile.


http://www.andrewcusack.com/net/wp-content/uploads/palaleg1.jpg
http://www.andrewcusack.com/net/wp-content/uploads/palaleg5.jpg



I don’t have a census showing Spanish ancestry. I’d have to try to find one for colonial times. I’ve read reports of Spaniards settling in the city of New Orleans and other places in New Orleans, but that’s it. Of course there is evidence for the Spanish communities in Louisiana, but that’s not what you are asking for. For average Louisianians, I know many people in various cities and towns in southern Louisiana that claim Spanish ancestry, but as an admixture as they usually had a larger French ancestry. As for Creoles having Spanish ancestry, it depends. Like we’ve discussed before that I had to prove to you, Creoles can be white, mulatto, métis/mestizo or black. Among Creoles with European ancestry, there is usually a claim put out by Creoles of color (mulatto type) that they have French, Spanish, West African and Amerind ancestry. However, upon studying them, I had not seen the proof for the Spanish claim or Amerind claim for many of them. Some had, but many didn’t. There is a similar claim by some French Creoles (white Creoles). However, I did find proof of these claims of Spanish admixture in this group as I’ve seen family trees from various people of this group and their claims seem to be true. There is a peer-reviewed study on white Americans, and for Spanish ancestry in white Americans, it showed Louisiana with the highest amount. I can find the study if need be. If you need proof of Spanish ancestors in average Louisianians, I’d have to searching as I don’t have this info saved or on hand.

Remember, mainland Spaniards (peninsular) were absorbed by the French and white Creoles early on, so any ancestry an average Louisianians would have that is Spanish is pretty far back in the family tree, possibly in the late 1700’s. Only three Spanish communities survived today, all the other Spaniards that were here were absorbed by the French.


Louisiana was never meant to be settled by Spaniards, the same way many of them really never settled in Texas, California, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona etc, who settled there were simply Mexicans whether they were white, mestizo, Amerindian, mulatto or black, that is irrelevant. There is not one single state in America that Spain owned which was settled by them in large numbers, and like I said, I dont count Canarians as Spanish at all

When Spain owned Louisiana, they wanted that state to get populated, they actually allowed Cajuns and Haitians to settle in that state, thus making French influence even stronger
you can read about it here, they never called in for Spaniards to go there and populate that state

http://www.americanarchivist.org/doi/pdf/10.17723/aarc.55.1.qm37443507226728?code=same-site

StonyArabia
06-28-2018, 05:16 AM
This correlates so strongly with race, it's amazing people will still try to deny it. Iberian colonization motivations and techniques created these racial differences, but at the end of the day, race is the determinant.

Doubtful if one look at how advanced the natives of this area is.

Smitty
06-28-2018, 11:41 PM
Doubtful if one look at how advanced the natives of this area is.

I assume you mean the Aztecs and the Inca? They were advanced relative to Stone Age technology, but not relative to their European counterparts. Of course, Amerindians have created civilizations and are miles ahead of Africans and aboriginals. But they were behind Europeans in 1492, and it's no surprise that Amerindian-heavy Latin American countries are behind European-heavy Anglo countries today. There are undoubtedly other factors as well, but this is a glaring one.

Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin
06-28-2018, 11:57 PM
Doubtful if one look at how advanced the natives of this area is.And they did it without borrowing technology from asians africans or middle easterners. Everything was aunthetically independantly created. While we know that europeans stole inventions from middle easterners and asians. Africans probably too.

Odin
06-29-2018, 09:21 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42PymQ1Cpek

RMuller
07-01-2018, 05:44 PM
And they did it without borrowing technology from asians africans or middle easterners. Everything was aunthetically independantly created. While we know that europeans stole inventions from middle easterners and asians. Africans probably too.

Agree.

Tietar
07-01-2018, 06:59 PM
the population in ibera was too small to colonize a huge continent

Pacific Highlander
07-13-2018, 09:51 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBal7F6bdbY

arkas
07-13-2018, 12:20 PM
https://i.imgur.com/KSSPGgB.png
https://i.imgur.com/ATaxtCC.png

Wow, that really puts things in perspective.

Sundqvist
11-30-2019, 02:16 PM
bump?

Duffmannn
11-30-2019, 06:49 PM
If you make a comparison between british colonies and spanish-portuguese colonies, you should take into account all colonies, not only some.

If we take into ecuation India, Nigeria, Ghana, Kenia, Sudan, Guyana, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma, Zimbabwe, Egypt... probably spanish-portuguese colonies are more developed in middle term.

Duffmannn
11-30-2019, 06:52 PM
. The USA laws and constitution were based on British laws..

The legal system of Louisiana stills nowadays based on continental law of spanish-french origin, not british one.

The single state of the entire USA.

Aldaris
11-30-2019, 07:11 PM
If you make a comparison between british colonies and spanish-portuguese colonies, you should take into account all colonies, not only some.

If we take into ecuation India, Nigeria, Ghana, Kenia, Sudan, Guyana, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma, Zimbabwe, Egypt... probably spanish-portuguese colonies are more developed in middle term.

More importantly, Iberians are the only ones who got to keep their piece of a cake, disregarding the wastelands inhabited by stone-age level tribes. As for Africa, India, Egypt, etc. Those are all independent now, ruled by the natives in there. Not the case in Latin America, where the Iberian elite rules ever since.

JamesBond007
11-30-2019, 07:20 PM
Doubtful if one look at how advanced the natives of this area is.

The native tribes mathematics level was below that of ancient Greece and somewhat below Ancient Egypt and Sumeria ( the natives they could not even approximate the pi [3.14...] or conic structures since they did not have the wheel), the native tribes did not even have the wheel meanwhile the Europeans were using advanced technology like the Astrolabe to find and conquer them. Also, the native tribes were barbarians who practiced human sacrifice.

JamesBond007
11-30-2019, 07:23 PM
This correlates so strongly with race, it's amazing people will still try to deny it. Iberian colonization motivations and techniques created these racial differences, but at the end of the day, race is the determinant.

People are idiots. Everyone should know that whites create the best civilizations and that only Asians come close to matching it and it is questionable whether they can truly match it (it is unknown). It is also known that Latinos make civilizations that are more corrupt than whites but superior to blacks and it is also known that blacks have never had a civilization worthy of the name and cannot even maintain civilizations handed over to them on a silver platter via colonialism e.g. certain ex-colonies in Africa etc...

Ranger0075
11-30-2019, 07:30 PM
More importantly, Iberians are the only ones who got to keep their piece of a cake, disregarding the wastelands inhabited by stone-age level tribes. As for Africa, India, Egypt, etc. Those are all independent now, ruled by the natives in there. Not the case in Latin America, where the Iberian elite rules ever since.

Well, Former Anglo colonies in Central-Southern America are much more less Native than Former Iberian colonies in the same continent and they are also ruled by foreigners (not anglos, but africans)

Just look at Guyana, Jamaica, Belize, Trindad & Tobago, Barbados, Bahamas, St. Lucia, St Kitts and Nevis, etc

Elite bahamians

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcTuHgGaY0dC3neetkCkFKOyKIINvaN WJMTITemF7e_5s4mEiAAe

Duffmannn
11-30-2019, 08:17 PM
Well, Former Anglo colonies in Central-Southern America are much more less Native than Former Iberian colonies in the same continent and they are also ruled by foreigners (not anglos, but africans)

Just look at Guyana, Jamaica, Belize, Trindad & Tobago, Barbados, Bahamas, St. Lucia, St Kitts and Nevis, etc

Elite bahamians

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcTuHgGaY0dC3neetkCkFKOyKIINvaN WJMTITemF7e_5s4mEiAAe

The elite of countries like Guyana or Trinidad y Tobago is not black, but hindu.

(The upper class of Bahamas is white, like in all the caribbean islands except Haiti, where it is lebanese)

luc2112
11-30-2019, 08:26 PM
If you make a comparison between british colonies and spanish-portuguese colonies, you should take into account all colonies, not only some.

If we take into ecuation India, Nigeria, Ghana, Kenia, Sudan, Guyana, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma, Zimbabwe, Egypt... probably spanish-portuguese colonies are more developed in middle term.

Really, it depends more on the region and immigration than on the colonizer, (English, Spanish and Portuguese).

Some forget that Brazil is the 9th richest country in the world. Reasonable GDP / population ratio, surpassing millennial countries and highest IQ. Country that had impressive performance was South Africa (which is currently being gradually destroyed by blacks).

EUA, AUS and NZ received euro immigrants who prosper, no mystery here. Perhaps the Euro-NW immigrant (farmer) is better than the Iberico, after all they are capitalists of the agricultural revolution. Spain and Portugal had begun to lose worldwide importance after the agricultural revolution followed by the industrial revolution.

Westbrook
11-30-2019, 08:50 PM
Protestant work ethic and self-deprecation

JamesBond007
11-30-2019, 08:57 PM
Worldwide corruption index : northern European countries followed by France are superior. America has roughly the same corruption index as France :


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Corruption_Perception_index_2018.svg/1920px-Corruption_Perception_index_2018.svg.png

luc2112
11-30-2019, 09:07 PM
Worldwide corruption index : northern European countries followed by France are superior. America has roughly the same corruption index as France :


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Corruption_Perception_index_2018.svg/1920px-Corruption_Perception_index_2018.svg.png
You should look better at your private financial system.

Westbrook
11-30-2019, 09:12 PM
But how was that possible? Latin America was colonized centuries before North America giving them a big head start, and the US didn't become a country until the end of the 18th century. How did it become stronger than the rest of the Americas and the European powers so quickly? Why didn't Mexico or Brazil become the dominant power instead? I think that's the question.
because America has ruined Latin America by supporting dictators, arming cartels, financing morons like Benito Juarez, causing civil wars, supporting Trujillo and the list can go on and on

luc2112
11-30-2019, 09:12 PM
Protestant work ethic and self-deprecation

Germans and Dutch are better than British in this regard. They are captalist and communitarian.

luc2112
11-30-2019, 09:17 PM
But how was that possible? Latin America was colonized centuries before North America giving them a big head start, and the US didn't become a country until the end of the 18th century. How did it become stronger than the rest of the Americas and the European powers so quickly? Why didn't Mexico or Brazil become the dominant power instead? I think that's the question.

USA received 10 times more euro immigrants than Brazil. USA has more natural resources. More fertile lands in temperate region, oil and coal, closer proximity to europe. AUS took longer to develop.

luc2112
11-30-2019, 09:56 PM
Yes all the problems in Latin America are caused by Portuguese and Spaniards despite few Iberians migrated to Latin America.

Latin America is only "Latin" by language but not by genetic, 90% of the people there is full Amerindian, or black or mixed between black and Amerindian. Why its my fault if an Amerindian decide to shoot with a gun to his Black neighbour?

Meanwhile Portugal and Spain have one the lowest crime rates of the world. So why is my fault what is happening in Latin America?

Come on Latin America is independent since 1800s so you have had time enough to improve a little bit by yourselves and time to stop blame others.
You and nobody else are responsible of what happens in your countries, so try to solve it by yourselves.

I suppose that according to your arguments if India is a big shithole is thanks to the British, right?

If Brazil were just white and indigenous we would be much better. Unfortunately we have black people.

Westbrook
11-30-2019, 10:30 PM
Australia problem has always been that it's too far away from Europe and the rest of the west. It's still a problem today even with modern travel.
USA received 10 times more euro immigrants than Brazil. USA has more natural resources. More fertile lands in temperate region, oil and coal, closer proximity to europe. AUS took longer to develop.

Westbrook
11-30-2019, 10:30 PM
So why didn't more Euros immigrate to Brazil?
If Brazil were just white and indigenous we would be much better. Unfortunately we have black people.

Duffmannn
11-30-2019, 10:47 PM
If Brazil were just white and indigenous we would be much better. .

In the best case Brazil would be like Argentina-Chile-Uruguay.

In the worst case like Mexico or Peru.

Zuh
11-30-2019, 11:12 PM
In the best case Brazil would be like Argentina-Chile-Uruguay.

In the worst case like Mexico or Peru.

What worst cases Why are you even comparing Mexico with those countries? You sometimes surprises me really .


Mexico is richer per capita and higher human development than brazil BY A MILE let alone peru...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/71/GDP_PPP_2019.png/640px-GDP_PPP_2019.png

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_American_and_Caribbean_countries_by_ GDP_(PPP)

Mexico 074 Brazil 079 Peru 089

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_American_countries_by_Human_Developm ent_Index

Duffmannn
11-30-2019, 11:15 PM
What worst cases Why are you even comparing Mexico with those countries? You sometimes surprises me really .


Mexico is richer per capita and higher human development than brazil BY A MILE let alone peru...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/71/GDP_PPP_2019.png/640px-GDP_PPP_2019.png

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_American_and_Caribbean_countries_by_ GDP_(PPP)

Mexico 074 Brazil 079 Peru 089

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_American_countries_by_Human_Developm ent_Index

Of course, that´s my point, Brazil is poorer because has blacks.

Without blacks could be Mexico-Peru, or Argentina-Chile-Uruguay

CostaRicaBall
11-30-2019, 11:16 PM
The native tribes mathematics level was below that of ancient Greece and somewhat below Ancient Egypt and Sumeria ( the natives they could not even approximate the pi [3.14...] or conic structures since they did not have the wheel), the native tribes did not even have the wheel meanwhile the Europeans were using advanced technology like the Astrolabe to find and conquer them. Also, the native tribes were barbarians who practiced human sacrifice.
http://www.atoda.com/amerindian/art/wheel3670.jpg

luc2112
11-30-2019, 11:27 PM
So why didn't more Euros immigrate to Brazil?

Yes USA + -30 million, Brazil + - 3 Million. US agriculture funded the industrial revolution.
Argentina received more immigrants than Brazil and in the 1980s had more cars than France and more phones than Japan, after that period fell into political turmoil, to this day they do not have a solid economic growth plan.

luc2112
11-30-2019, 11:38 PM
In the best case Brazil would be like Argentina-Chile-Uruguay.

In the worst case like Mexico or Peru.
Integration of Amerindian with capitalism takes longer than economists think. Latam Amerindian countries are doing relatively well. Spain used many semi-bastard mestizos in Mexico for colonization, Aztec/Maya may be resistant to western culture.

https://i.postimg.cc/rpCtcfJS/dgf.jpg

luc2112
11-30-2019, 11:52 PM
What worst cases Why are you even comparing Mexico with those countries? You sometimes surprises me really .


Mexico is richer per capita and higher human development than brazil BY A MILE let alone peru...




Mexico has similar problems to Brazil in the SSA regions. The Mexican Police are inficient and corrupt, many millionaires (more than Brazil proportionally). Have you noticed that Mexico tries to find other cities with criminality to justify it? Some Mexicans are frustrated people.

Smeagol
12-01-2019, 12:05 AM
Because Anglosphere countries up until recently were almost entirely white (and are still majority white in spite of third world immigration), while Latin American countries are and always have been mostly inhabited by mongrels.

luc2112
12-01-2019, 12:14 AM
Because Anglosphere countries up until recently were almost entirely white (and are still majority white in spite of third world immigration), while Latin American countries are and always have been mostly inhabited by mongrels.

At first, USA had a white majority advantage and had segregation/apartheid for blacks, after the laws changed, mix or not mix with them, it will not make a difference.
The blacks in Brazil were more prosper when they were slaves.

Zuh
12-01-2019, 02:36 AM
Mexico has similar problems to Brazil in the SSA regions. The Mexican Police are inficient and corrupt, many millionaires (more than Brazil proportionally). Have you noticed that Mexico tries to find other cities with criminality to justify it? Some Mexicans are frustrated people.

Who is frustrated? Because not me despite Mexico's cartel problems and corrupt politicians the truth is Mexico is more advanced than Brazil GDP and human development.


People need to understand cartels are not a problem to the average citizens the only people being beheaded in Mexico are cartel rivals or people who have ties to the drug problem.

luc2112
12-01-2019, 02:39 AM
People are idiots. Everyone should know that whites create the best civilizations and that only Asians come close to matching it and it is questionable whether they can truly match it (it is unknown). It is also known that Latinos make civilizations that are more corrupt than whites but superior to blacks and it is also known that blacks have never had a civilization worthy of the name and cannot even maintain civilizations handed over to them on a silver platter via colonialism e.g. certain ex-colonies in Africa etc...

Uruguay and Chile are not corrupt. Brazil was not in the military government either (but was a little after with the return to democracy). Southern Europeans have problems, but England is not a "wonder" as you think.

Zuh
12-01-2019, 02:40 AM
Of course, that´s my point, Brazil is poorer because has blacks.

Without blacks could be Mexico-Peru, or Argentina-Chile-Uruguay

Then why are you comparing again "mexico -peru" Peru social development is behind Oaxaca which is the most amerindian states in Mexico.

luc2112
12-01-2019, 03:16 AM
Who is frustrated? Because not me despite Mexico's cartel problems and corrupt politicians the truth is Mexico is more advanced than Brazil GDP and human development.
Cast, first World:

https://apnews.com/689ad1f7d2084812b1b4086e248144b8

Rio de Janeiro has good per capita income and HDI, but it is a bad place with problems. There are cities in the state of Amazonia with half the lowest income and lower HDI that people live better.



People need to understand cartels are not a problem to the average citizens the only people being beheaded in Mexico are cartel rivals or people who have ties to the drug problem.
The cartels are already in Mexico's capital, and their homicide rates rise by 10 percent a year.

Zuh
12-01-2019, 03:34 AM
Cast, first World:

https://apnews.com/689ad1f7d2084812b1b4086e248144b8

Rio de Janeiro has good per capita income and HDI, but it is a bad place with problems. There are cities in the state of Amazonia with half the lowest income and lower HDI that people live better.


The cartels are already in Mexico's capital, and their homicide rates rise by 10 percent a year.

Mexico doesn't have favelas or slums like in many areas of brazil though.

Sorry if im being harsh for speaking the truth don't get me wrong i love brazil though and a bit drunk.

luc2112
12-01-2019, 03:43 AM
Mexico doesn't have favelas or slums like in many areas of brazil though.

Sorry if im being harsh for speaking the truth don't get me wrong i love brazil though and a bit drunk.

In fact, the slums in Mexico are larger than Brazil in proportion to the population (Brazil is larger in number of people). Most of the Brazilian slums are of SSA (or mixed SSA) population.
LATAM's largest slum is in Mexico City.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q67gldZ1P_8

Zuh
12-01-2019, 03:45 AM
In fact, the slums in Mexico are larger than Brazil in proportion to the population (Brazil is larger in number of people). Most of the Brazilian slums are of SSA (or mixed SSA) population.
LATAM's largest slum is in Mexico City.

Let your inferiority complexes to other latino nations Mexico is richer both GDP and human development then Brazil and those are the FACTS

CostaRicaBall
12-01-2019, 04:43 AM
The comparission dont make sense. I mean; when people talk about anglo-sphere they talk about white colonies of the commonwealth and not of all the anglo-colonies while when they talk about iberian-sphere they talk about latin americans when most of this ones are the equivalent to non-white anglo colonies. Only Uruguay, Argentina and maybe old Cuba can stand the white anglo-sphere. So yes, as whole iberian sphere is more developed than anglo-sphere if you take in account the non-white anglo colonies making anglo-colonies vs iberian-sphere ON AVERAGE.
The scale in terms of succesfulness is like this;

White anglo colonies>white iberian colonies>average iberian colony> average anglo colony. Take in account that spaniards press a hard reset on the amerindian server while anglos has more advantage because they didn't press it and they kept the indigenous population (several of them from the Old World).

luc2112
12-01-2019, 04:47 AM
Let your inferiority complexes to other latino nations Mexico is richer both GDP and human development then Brazil and those are the FACTS

I have no inferiority complex and I was not comparing either. I said how mexico is really. Brazilian slums are even more absurd because the country is not densely populated.

luc2112
12-01-2019, 04:54 AM
White anglo colonies>white iberian colonies>average iberian colony> average anglo colony. Take in account that spaniards press a hard reset on the amerindian server while anglos has more advantage because they didn't press it and they kept the indigenous population (several of them from the Old World).

British also used slaves. The development of the Anglo colonies is related to the Euro colonists and not to the English administration.

sean
12-01-2019, 08:42 AM
Anglo America and Latin America are polar opposites. The former was racially protective of the Anglo stock and was a leader in technology, science, stability, quality of life, and prosperity. The latter was racially immoral and was a leader in poverty, corruption, barbarity, depravity, primitiveness, and crime.

The cultural dysfunctionality of latin mongrels reflects the many genetic mishaps that occur from crossbreeding between sub-races. Latin mongrels are inherently inclined to delinquency, violence, and sporadic, unreliable civilisational advancement. They essentially cannot advance beyond feudalism, a mass of passive peasants policed by those with the greatest capacity for violence, and ruled over by those most capable of scheming. Genius is rare among them. Outliers tend to be less mongrelised (for instance, there is a tiny minority of pure Europeans living in Latin America). They too are highly race conscious, and regardless of what they pretend to gain advantages within Western Civilisation, have no delusions about racial capacities and distinctions in their own countries.

Most of the ruling class in Latin America is "white" (75%+ Southern European DNA, a mongrel slightly lighter than the other mongrels) and even the brownest mestizo looks down his nose at the few remaining Indios in the jungles and mountains, or the descendants of black slaves (of which there are far more in Latin America than some of us realise).

Latin America is more comparable to something like Turkey than Australia or the USA.

luc2112
12-01-2019, 10:03 AM
Anglo America and Latin America are polar opposites. The former was racially protective of the Anglo stock and was a leader in technology, science, stability, quality of life, and prosperity. The latter was racially immoral and was a leader in poverty, corruption, barbarity, depravity, primitiveness, and crime. .

They look great, in practice they used slaves in the south of the USA and the excess of their population post agricultural revolution to the north, the rest was semi-enslaved in British industries, including children.



The cultural dysfunctionality of latin mongrels reflects the many genetic mishaps that occur from crossbreeding between sub-races. Latin mongrels are inherently inclined to delinquency, violence, and sporadic, unreliable civilisational advancement. .
Finnish are "mongrels" and have none of these problems. Your theory is a real joke...

For a society to be stable, everyone must be equal. When you have two different cultures/peoples (one of them being inferior) there are some social problems.

Delinquency, violence comes from out-of-wedlock children who did not have a father (it is called family disintegration). The statistics of Afro-American single mothers are 74%, most of these children will end up in jail when they are young.

I am against miscegenation with blacks, but an aphartaide will not last long and your birth rate is psychopathic.

Anti-miscegenation in the USA was not necessarily for racial purity, it was feared the loss of Christian values on the women's side (Euro-NW woman was always crazy, see what is happening today) another was to create a population brown anti-white.

I don't know if USA used high birth rate white for colonization, in Brazil it was required by the government for immigrants.

sean
12-01-2019, 01:24 PM
They look great, in practice they used slaves in the south of the USA and the excess of their population post agricultural revolution to the north, the rest was semi-enslaved in British industries, including children.

Slavery didn't really build anything. If your comical theory was true, then it would have been the South, the place where all the slaves were, that was the more developed area in the Civil War. Of course we know the exact opposite is true, the North absolutely dwarfed the south in industry, population, railroads, armament production, and basically every measure of development.

All that slavery built was the personal fortunes of a small aristocratic class of southern planters, who simply reinvested that into the linear growth of more agricultural holdings. And this fortunes were largely wiped out after the war.

And no, we didn't enslave children.

Latin American children today:

https://i.imgur.com/0raUX8Q.png


Finnish are "mongrels" and have none of these problems. Your theory is a real joke.

You are a clown. They do have their own problems.

https://i.imgur.com/VcdBy5Y.jpg

But Finland is one of the best countries to raise kids. You could have lived in an idyllic small country town that is 100% Finnish and enjoyed being together as a family going to sauna at your mökki.

Why would anyone pick a third-world latin mongrel or a nigger over a Finn? Majority of Finns actually look WHITE.


Delinquency, violence comes from out-of-wedlock children who did not have a father (it is called family disintegration). The statistics of Afro-American single mothers are 74%, most of these children will end up in jail when they are young.

Latin mongrels are worse than niggers. Mexico was a poor country even before the cartels sprang up because that's what they are. They're not inventive, pragmatic, or intelligent, and they don't have a huge internal drive to succeed like Americans did. They are nihilistic and just accept things the way they are, and they're okay with that.


Anti-miscegenation in the USA was not necessarily for racial purity, it was feared the loss of Christian values on the women's side (Euro-NW woman was always crazy, see what is happening today) another was to create a population brown anti-white.

On the other hand, the Catholic Church has blessed mixed-race marriages in Latin America for centuries. In fact, the Catholic/Protestant split explains much of the difference between Latin America and the Anglosphere. Whereas the Protestants imposed strict anti-miscegenation laws, the Catholic Church defended the inherent dignity of the indigenous peoples and encouraged the mixing of races.

This history is undeniable. The Catholic Church has never condemned miscegenation. To do so would be a Protestant heresy. Popery is Pharaseeism and a surefire ticket to hell.


I am against miscegenation with blacks, but an aphartaide will not last long and your birth rate is psychopathic.

I don't know if USA used high birth rate white for colonization, in Brazil it was required by the government for immigrants.

I read your post 5 fuckin' times and can barely make out what you're trying to say. I put that into Google translate but even it couldn't decipher your babble. Your grasp of English grammar is poor and your tendency to make terse replies doesn't help things.

Why do you keep quoting me with inane conversation and broken English? There is no point, brown mongrel. You are too low on IQ to make any kind of point.

bandeirante
12-01-2019, 01:40 PM
Slavery didn't really build anything. If your comical theory was true, then it would have been the South, the place where all the slaves were, that was the more developed area in the Civil War. Of course we know the exact opposite is true, the North absolutely dwarfed the south in industry, population, railroads, armament production, and basically every measure of development.

All that slavery built was the personal fortunes of a small aristocratic class of southern planters, who simply reinvested that into the linear growth of more agricultural holdings. And this fortunes were largely wiped out after the war.

And no, we didn't enslave children.

Latin American children today:

https://i.imgur.com/0raUX8Q.png



You are a clown. They do have their own problems.

https://i.imgur.com/VcdBy5Y.jpg

But Finland is one of the best countries to raise kids. You could have lived in an idyllic small country town that is 100% Finnish and enjoyed being together as a family going to sauna at your mökki.

Why would anyone pick a third-world latin mongrel or a nigger over a Finn? Majority of Finns actually look WHITE.



Latin mongrels are worse than niggers. Mexico was a poor country even before the cartels sprang up because that's what they are. They're not inventive, pragmatic, or intelligent, and they don't have a huge internal drive to succeed like Americans did. They are nihilistic and just accept things the way they are, and they're okay with that.



On the other hand, the Catholic Church has blessed mixed-race marriages in Latin America for centuries. In fact, the Catholic/Protestant split explains much of the difference between Latin America and the Anglosphere. Whereas the Protestants imposed strict anti-miscegenation laws, the Catholic Church defended the inherent dignity of the indigenous peoples and encouraged the mixing of races.

This history is undeniable. The Catholic Church has never condemned miscegenation. To do so would be a Protestant heresy. Popery is Pharaseeism and a surefire ticket to hell.



I read your post 5 fuckin' times and can barely make out what you're trying to say. I put that into Google translate but even it couldn't decipher your babble. Your grasp of English grammar is poor and your tendency to make terse replies doesn't help things.

Why do you keep quoting me with inane conversation and broken English? There is no point, brown mongrel. You are too low on IQ to make any kind of point.

guyana british colony very poor!

luc2112
12-01-2019, 02:03 PM
Slavery didn't really build anything. If your comical theory was true, then it would have been the South, the place where all the slaves were, that was the more developed area in the Civil War. Of course we know the exact opposite is true, the North absolutely dwarfed the south in industry, population, railroads, armament production, and basically every measure of development.

All that slavery built was the personal fortunes of a small aristocratic class of southern planters, who simply reinvested that into the linear growth of more agricultural holdings. And this fortunes were largely wiped out after the war.

And no, we didn't enslave children.

In summary they used slaves

https://eh.net/encyclopedia/child-labor-during-the-british-industrial-revolution/


Why would anyone pick a third-world latin mongrel or a nigger over a Finn? Majority of Finns actually look WHITE.
I spoke of miscegenation and not of color



On the other hand, the Catholic Church has blessed mixed-race marriages in Latin America for centuries. In fact, the Catholic/Protestant split explains much of the difference between Latin America and the Anglosphere. Whereas the Protestants imposed strict anti-miscegenation laws, the Catholic Church defended the inherent dignity of the indigenous peoples and encouraged the mixing of races.
I spoke of anti-miscegenation for black people in the USA that was politically/socially obviously supported by the church. Is there any misegenization in Australia and NZ with Maoris, but they need to be christian for church to approve.


There is no point, brown mongrel. You are too low on IQ to make any kind of point.

I low IQ? You don't convince anyone with your "theories" of problematic miscegenation, you're frustrated with the white race as a gay mulatto from Rio de Janeiro.

luc2112
12-01-2019, 02:16 PM
guyana british colony very poor!

DR is ahead and with less homicide

https://i.postimg.cc/C1XLrGwq/Untitled-2.jpg

luc2112
12-01-2019, 03:15 PM
You ain't white. I'm not convincing anyone. I haven't even tried to convince you. I'm just really entertained at your cope.
Yes I am white, but for you all problems is due to miscegenation? I already met people mixed with amerindians, they have no problems.



Isn't Brazil the tranny capital of the world? For all we know, we could be talking to one right now lel.



I don't know, maybe, but Brazil is populous. But yes in the white / ssa regions have many gay men, I do not know the explanation. Sexual appetite, high testosterone, child of single mothers or miscegenation.

Blacks are frustrated with everything, people with more money than them, whites considered prettier, their own color (mainly women). They do not live well with another race.

bandeirante
12-01-2019, 03:34 PM
They were not slaves, you clown.

Child labour went the way of the dodo in Britain in the mid 19th century (1860's iirc), same for Germany (most of the German states anyways).



You ain't white. I'm not convincing anyone. I haven't even tried to convince you. I'm just really entertained at your cope.

Isn't Brazil the tranny capital of the world? For all we know, we could be talking to one right now lel.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHprQPB2aRE




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7ysRY_aE0E

Canada? irrelevant country

bandeirante
12-01-2019, 03:46 PM
They were not slaves, you clown.

Child labour went the way of the dodo in Britain in the mid 19th century (1860's iirc), same for Germany (most of the German states anyways).



You ain't white. I'm not convincing anyone. I haven't even tried to convince you. I'm just really entertained at your cope.

Isn't Brazil the tranny capital of the world? For all we know, we could be talking to one right now lel.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHprQPB2aRE




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7ysRY_aE0E

Canada? irrelevant country

bandeirante
12-01-2019, 03:47 PM
Yes I am white, but for you all problems is due to miscegenation? I already met people mixed with amerindians, they have no problems.



I don't know, maybe, but Brazil is populous. But yes in the white / ssa regions have many gay men, I do not know the explanation. Sexual appetite, high testosterone, child of single mothers or miscegenation.

Blacks are frustrated with everything, people with more money than them, whites considered prettier, their own color (mainly women). They do not live well with another race.

fake!

luc2112
12-01-2019, 03:53 PM
Brazil is still a shithole. I'd prefer living as a poor man in most places in Europe as living as a rich dude in Brazil.


Stay in your country telling stories to Eskimos. Troll...

luc2112
12-01-2019, 03:58 PM
Canada? irrelevant country

The Brazilians who went to wool have returned, a left type (brainwashed) and the place is a freezer.

luc2112
12-01-2019, 04:02 PM
fake!

Unfortunately not!

bandeirante
12-01-2019, 07:58 PM
Unfortunately not!

ja é difícil ver gays a rua imagina travesti!

tipirneni
12-01-2019, 08:43 PM
Anglosphere countries have vast invested money in economies of China, India, Japan etc... There is big global education and commerce also huge captive market in these countries
vs Latin America counties are more closed economies

luc2112
12-01-2019, 10:11 PM
Anglosphere countries have vast invested money in economies of China, India, Japan etc... There is big global education and commerce also huge captive market in these countries
vs Latin America counties are more closed economies

It depends on the economy of the country, the higher the GDP, the greater its influence on the foreign market. Part of the great economy agricultural and later industrial of the USA is related to German immigrants. Once a country becomes independent, its policies may differ from the colonizer.

luc2112
12-01-2019, 10:26 PM
ja é difícil ver gays a rua imagina travesti!

I lived in two cities of similar size a few years ago (without this current liberalism). An inland city with more euro and small part amerindian (gays was rare). Another colonial beach with white/SSA (40,000 inhabitants) had more gay men.

kratz
12-03-2019, 03:10 AM
I would challenge everyone to answer this questions, "Why is it that when many middle class Latinos from any country including Brazil move to the USA they become successful or live somewhat stable and prosperous lives?"

What I mean by this I mean is that I have realized that its the mostly the society that one lives in and not the individual talent which determines prosperity. For instance, many societies in Latin America have a myriad of problems but some of the biggest are the weak government institutions and the lack of stability. For instance, only in Latin America I heard people who want to change the countries constitution, the country's economic system, overthrow the government through a revolution. One can blame the US but one cannot turn the blind eye that there were elements of the population who wanted this 'radical change.'

Meanwhile, in countries like the US most of the people have the same values: Small Government, Individual rights, same constitution, nuclear families and Free Markets. Most of the people who live here have more or less the same goals and expectations of what the government can or can't do for you.

luc2112
12-03-2019, 03:51 AM
I would challenge everyone to answer this questions, "Why is it that when many middle class Latinos from any country including Brazil move to the USA they become successful or live somewhat stable and prosperous lives?"

In the case of Brazil, they are immigrants of low middle class is the disciplined population of the country. Poor Brazilians are similar to black Americans, especially SSA mixes (North Amerindians Brazilian are better).


What I mean by this I mean is that I have realized that its the mostly the society that one lives in and not the individual talent which determines prosperity. For instance, many societies in Latin America have a myriad of problems but some of the biggest are the weak government institutions and the lack of stability.

The Brazilian government has never been bad, but the poor tend to vote for leftist opportunists. That was why we had military government.

It was good government and the country prospered with lower the crime and corruption.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf_lNzlVFos

bandeirante
12-20-2019, 06:56 PM
In the case of Brazil, they are immigrants of low middle class is the disciplined population of the country. Poor Brazilians are similar to black Americans, especially SSA mixes (North Amerindians Brazilian are better).

The Brazilian government has never been bad, but the poor tend to vote for leftist opportunists. That was why we had military government.

It was good government and the country prospered with lower the crime and corruption.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf_lNzlVFos

lol most brazilians in usa: poor mulattos for minas gerais!

Tietar
12-20-2019, 09:31 PM
Kratz, stop opening shit threads to suck anglosphere dicks and relating Spain to Latin America, centuries ago that Spain has no influence, only the Canary Islands chose to remain spanish, others enjoy their freedom and their culture

Do you wanna know the truth?, the bastard children (those with a majority of native population) were abandoned by dad USA

http://www.theheroesclub.es/magazine/wp-content/uploads/commonwealth_carrusel.jpg

Duffmannn
12-20-2019, 09:48 PM
I would challenge everyone to answer this questions, "Why is it that when many middle class Latinos from any country including Brazil move to the USA they become successful or live somewhat stable and prosperous lives?"
.

Because that´s not true, all hispanics are way poorer than white americans.

They have the sensation of prosperity because they are parasitizing the richness produced by others.

When the other will become a minority and the hispanics (and other groups) a majority, it will become like another latin american country with huge economical differences between whites and non-whites.

Jacques de Imbelloni
12-20-2019, 09:49 PM
The Anglosphere is better than Latin America, there is no doubt about that.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=linC65qnh_o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-Q7sO98gkM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AFq52mQ6gI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfuAGcw6RQs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ewdisyzk4k

Jacques de Imbelloni
12-21-2019, 10:10 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8u4TUXiXFPI

luc2112
12-21-2019, 10:50 PM
Because that´s not true, all hispanics are way poorer than white americans.

They have the sensation of prosperity because they are parasitizing the richness produced by others.

When the other will become a minority and the hispanics (and other groups) a majority, it will become like another latin american country with huge economical differences between whites and non-whites.

Nope, for poor Latino immigrants, the countries of the 1° world have a higher minimum wage and a larger job offer (manpower, factory worker).

For the middle class immigration, depends on economic crisis, wage for profession is higher in other country or is temporary unemployment. If you are middle class employed in 2nd world in many cases you will have the same standard of living that in the 1st world.

There is immigration to poorer countries, farmers looking for cheaper land, entrepreneurs in an unsaturated society for a specific trade, etc ...

bandeirante
12-27-2019, 10:01 AM
USA received 10 times more euro immigrants than Brazil. USA has more natural resources. More fertile lands in temperate region, oil and coal, closer proximity to europe. AUS took longer to develop.

most usa europe immigrants 1850>>>>!
usa natural resources?

bandeirante
12-27-2019, 10:03 AM
Yes USA + -30 million, Brazil + - 3 Million. US agriculture funded the industrial revolution.
Argentina received more immigrants than Brazil and in the 1980s had more cars than France and more phones than Japan, after that period fell into political turmoil, to this day they do not have a solid economic growth plan.

lol brazil colonial: 700m euros immigration
usa colonial 450m euros immigration

WeißerJunge
02-19-2020, 03:39 PM
More people killed in Mexico than in Iraq ?...... ( war.. suicidal terrorist attack)

Most of those killings in Mexico are not civilian. They are mostly cartel members. It is unfair to compare civilian deaths in war zones to the total deaths from cartel/drug gang dominated countries.

Jacques de Imbelloni
02-19-2020, 04:02 PM
The Anglosphere is better than Latin America, there is no doubt about that.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=linC65qnh_o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-Q7sO98gkM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AFq52mQ6gI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfuAGcw6RQs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ewdisyzk4k

---

PaleoEuropean
02-19-2020, 04:15 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8u4TUXiXFPI

I need the special edition bluray

Jacques de Imbelloni
02-19-2020, 04:25 PM
I need the special edition bluray

The director's cut version is way superior to the first edition.

PaleoEuropean
02-19-2020, 04:26 PM
The director's cut version is way superior to the first edition.

I love how they have a fridge next to their bed with nothing but a giant cucumber in it lmfao.