In your opinion, which of these two statements sounds more 'reactionary'?

[Tooting Carmen]

Because its root is in a White supremacist sentiment. Statement 1 is more in line with ethnic/racial nationalism which is preferable to a White supremacist mindset (regardless if the perpetrator or the victim is living by it).

So if we were to take statement 1 as Anglo/'classical' racism and statement 2 as 'embranqueamento' theory/Latino racism (broadly speaking), does that mean that the second type of racism is actually worse than the first type? (Contrary to received opinion).

[TrueIndepence]

So if we were to take statement 1 as Anglo/'classical' racism and statement 2 as 'embranqueamento' theory/Latino racism (broadly speaking), does that mean that the second type of racism is actually worse than the first type? (Contrary to received opinion).

The problem is Anglo racism wasn't just about segregation and separation of races, it was pure White terrorism/exploitation against anything darker than them. If the "classic racists" were only about keeping distance from other races, I wouldn't give it much thought. I wouldn't even consider it a dangerous because it would not end with the genocide of the other race. The 'embranquecimento' practices could (potentially) mean the end of non-White races.

[Tooting Carmen]

The problem is Anglo racism wasn't just about segregation and separation of races, it was pure White terrorism/exploitation against anything darker than them.

True.

If the "classic racists" were only about keeping distance from other races, I wouldn't give it much thought. I wouldn't even consider it a dangerous because it would not end with the genocide of the other race.

Hmm. It would still be oppressive and semi-totalitarian though, even if it really were the case that each racial group had access to services of a similar standard (which never happened anyway).

The 'embranquecimento' practices could (potentially) mean the end of non-White races.

Except that humanity is much more complex than those 19th century theorists thought. Do you think that there is at least some truth to the idea of Latin America being a bastion of racial harmony and love (relative to other places), or that it is 100% bogus?

[Latinus]

Do you think that there is at least some truth to the idea of Latin America being a bastion of racial harmony and love (relative to other places), or that it is 100% bogus?

The question was not directed to me, but may I answer it?

Compared to the US and it's more segregationist and purist racism, Latin America was significantly less racist and with race having less of a cultural/identitarian bias, but it's not like every racial group here had/have the same oportunities and spent/spend their days dancing kumbaya together.

No, racism was/is also part of Latin America.

In Brazil:
>Most people that live in the slums are pardos/blacks, because after slavery was abolished, the government didn't care about them, prefering to rely on European immigrants.

>There were/are cases of incidents involving black people being barred from entering private rich areas, even when themselves were rich. In fact, the first law against racism in Brazil was created because a black woman from the US was denied service in an upper class place. https://aha.confex.com/aha/2017/webp...aper20947.html

Police is also know here to target and be more opressive towards black people in a blitz.

>And while, like we discussed many times before, the link between race and social class can be very exagerrated by foreign eyes, it does exist. Looking rich/playboy here is usually a combination of caucasoid aesthetics/style, like these:

Spoiler!

>Brazilian media has always favorited whites over blacks/pardos. And it was a common stereotype to use black actors/actresses to play maids, poor, criminal people, in contrast with the rich ones, played by white. There is even a 2000 documentary about this avalaible on YouTube called: "A Negação do Brasil."

>Back in XIX and early XX centuries, Brazilian government endorsed racist eugenics thinkings, which wished to erase the black population and even limit/ban of the entrance of members of the yellow race in our territory.

...

[TrueIndepence]

Hmm. It would still be oppressive and semi-totalitarian though, even if it really were the case that each racial group had access to services of a similar standard (which never happened anyway).

It would be oppressive. I don't defend people being forced to live separately, only voluntarily. However, this totalitarian view is still more benign than encouraging non-Whites to commit mass suicide by mixing away. It is even worse when you think you need to kill the soul of a people for them to be willing to mix with another race in order to "improve their future generations". It's far more harmful than being forced to live in segregation, unless you are talking about the Black neighborhoods in the US South or the Jewish ghettos of Nazi Germany (And again, these are not simply examples of segregation, but rather terrorism, exploitation and genocide).

Except that humanity is much more complex than those 19th century theorists thought. Do you think that there is at least some truth to the idea of Latin America being a bastion of racial harmony and love (relative to other places), or that it is 100% bogus?

It's complicated. While I don't think every White Latin American is secretly trying to "weed out" the non-White DNA of the region by miscegenation, there are elements of this type of thinking in practically every interracial relationship in Latin America (to varying degrees). Nothing else could explain why over 90% of successful football players in Brazil date and marry outside of their race. So no, Latin America is far from being a "bastion of racial harmony and love", there are multiple studies on the matter that prove this, as well as my personal experience. On the other hand, people do form honest bonds between one another as well. Whites who date outside their race in Latin America don't just pretend like nothing happened if they suddenly lose their non-White partners over death or cheating. I do not doubt the feelings of most people in interracial relationships, even if (in Latin America specifically) there are Historically racist and genocidal intents behind incentivizing these relationships to happen in the first place.
Latin America is a place where love is rarely a lie, but also rarely blind...

[Tooting Carmen]

The thing is though: at which point do people consider two ethnic groups to be so different that mixing between them makes them uncomfortable? Some might argue that even mixing a Swede with a Portuguese is a borderline form of 'race-mixing', and even more so a Japanese with a Malay, or a Somali with a Ghanaian.

[Tooting Carmen]

Also, while for a Mestizo, Arab, Chinese or Indian to say they would never date or marry a Black person is almost definitely right-wing(ish), would this necessarily be the same for one who would say they would never date or marry a White person? (Depending on the context and place).

[Andullero]

Also, while for a Mestizo, Arab, Chinese or Indian to say they would never date or marry a Black person is almost definitely right-wing(ish), would this necessarily be the same for one who would say they would never date or marry a White person? (Depending on the context and place).

I'd say yes, it's racial conservatism all the same. In this day and age, left wingism seems to be all about cosmopolitanism of any stripe.

[Tooting Carmen]

I'd say yes, it's racial conservatism all the same. In this day and age, left wingism seems to be all about cosmopolitanism of any stripe.

Allow me to not 100% agree. (And I am someone who doesn't entirely agree with the "White privilege" thesis, nor do I support the redefinition of racism as "prejudice plus power"). If the Arab/Chinese/Indian/Mestizo were to reject having White partners out of sheer nationalism, xenophobia or ethnic pride/chauvinism, then yes that'd be right-wing in a traditional sense. If, however, they were to construe it as a rejection of assimilationism or White supremacism (whether real or perceived), particularly if they were living in the West, then there is a case for it to take on a (pseudo)-leftish slant.