Category Archives: Brazilians

by | April 9, 2017 · 4:59 PM

Judith Mirville on the Perils of Braziliafication for the Jews

Very nice comment from Judith Mirville showing that if Jews are promoting Braziliafication in the hopes that it will be good for the Jews, they may be sorely mistaken.

That will prove to be an especially bad move: in a Brazilified society such as Brazil, the various cultures of that multiculturalism cannot agree together safe onto one point: the Jews are the main responsible for the present state of affairs, even people such as the Japanese of Belo Horizonte, the German of Porto Alegre, the Negroes from Bahia and the White Trash rednecks of the chaparral of Sertão can agree on that.

I am now practicing Portuguese, listening to various videos to study various local accents and slangs, and everybody is inveighing against Jews each one for their different reasons.

The Negroes accuse them of having organized the slave trade, which in the specific case of Northern Brazil was true. The rednecks of Sertão accuse them of having geared the whole musical culture of Brazil towards hedonistic and then gay values.

The well-to-do Portuguese of São Paulo accuse them of having subverted the monarchy to install a de facto British colonialism in the form of a Republic as well destroying the military regime which was the last rampart against the tide of Cultural Leftism everywhere in the intelligentsia. The Germans there are of a type that was never morally bullied into repentance for WWII.

And the Japanese, though not big haters of Jews, all want them to be put back into ghettos for practical reasons and accuse them of having organized the whole of Western colonialism in non-White countries and robbed Asia of its traditional technological superiority and intelligence by programming so many other Whites beyond their real innate capacity to feel inventive and superior.

It comes to no mystery that cultures in an multicultural environment tend identify with their most reactionary elements, and therefore are more inclined to look for a culprit or archetypal symbol of evil from without. And it turns out that in Brazil the most rabid antisemitic movements are decidedly multicultural chic, not White Power, especially since the traditional White racism of Brazil claimed that the core of the nation was made up of mythical Jewish ancestry.

The Extreme Left to Center Left culture that still refuses most the conspiracy-justified antisemitism is monocultural non-Catholic Portuguese (mildly anti-Black de facto, though praising mulatto women for their supernatural beauty but only in their own role of providers of sentimental entertainment), and they are the ones who communicate the least with other cultures in their own country and prefer to communicate with other White nations in the world (France for the culture, the Anglo-Saxon countries for business) than with their own co-nationals of different hues.

All great antisemitic bouts of the past started out in rather multicultural environments. Austria, for instance, used to be the most multicultural part of Europe, and further back in time, you can find Spain and Portugal, which at one time used to be the most diversified countries: in both cases, mythical antisemitism could develop unchecked for being the only political language common to so many diverse groups even though not the ideal one to that many individuals.

How do the Jews let that happen to the point of loving it as it may seem?

That is very simple: first, as you put it, their intelligence is grossly overrated. They are emotion-driven more than many others. It must also be known that Jewish identification with the intellectual superiority of openness of mind is a very recent and atypical thing in the course of history. That identification began only as a byproduct of the Enlightenment culture and only among Jews that wanted to get free of their traditional ghetto culture, which turned out into a majority at a certain point.

Before that point, intellectual curiosity was far more severely repressed in Jewish culture than in Christian culture, the rabbis had far more tolerance of and liking for magic: even the study of too much geography was deemed dangerous. The general morality among them used to be that one must as an individual make plans for the day, as a family for the week, and as a Jewish community for the year, but NEVER beyond, since all promises of the preceding years were to be overridden at each Rosh ha Shanna. What is good for Jewish prosperity this year only is the real good, the rest is goyish daydreaming.

Even if the consequences of what is done this year are evidently ultra-negative for your own descendants, such as destroying the environment or installing a future millennial totalitarian regime just to make sure your tiny few talents are employed and well-paid, that is none of your business as a Jew. You must think of those descendants as of imaginary non-Jewish beings.

When for instance you adopt Communism as a Jew, the important thing is to enjoy a higher life through it and also a good relationship with many non-Jews for a few years’ space at most. You must not inquire too seriously about the ultimate consequences of your ideological choice. It is a fashion among many others to have to dress your own brain and others as well as their bodies according to a taste that sells right now.

If it turns out that by so doing you will progressively install a Nazi-like regime first courting and then turning against you, so be it, que sera sera, that was God’s intention for you to bring it about. It is a culture based on the principle of pure prostitution and on the faith that such an attitude alone can bring about joyful survival to a group: they are actually not so racist towards strangers provided they share that very same mentality.

27 Comments

Filed under Americas, Anti-Semitism, Asians, Austria, Black-White (Mulattos), Blacks, Brazil, Brazilians, Christianity, Colonialism, Culture, Europe, Europeans, History, Japanese, Jews, Judaism, Latin America, Left, Marxism, Mixed Race, Political Science, Portugal, Portuguese, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Sociology, South America, Spain, The Americas, White Racism, Whites

by | March 8, 2017 · 5:58 PM

Only Whites Are Expats?

Trash: White are COLONISTS essentially. We do not have the same primitive tribal link to the land that Mestizos or Africans do. So you move to Sydney and write your parents every day on e mail. Maybe a once a year trip.

I know many whites who moved to Australia from California. They did it simply to get away from NAM’s and be in a White individualist country. They were happy to do so…like I was happy to leave Greater Detroit.

First of all, residents of Europe are not colonists at all. They have all lived right where they are. The only White colonists are in South Africa, the US, Australia, Canada and New Zealand.

And what makes you think Australia is individualist? Last time I checked, it was quite socialist.

And for exactly the same reason that you say Whites leave the US, many people all over the world leave their lousy countries to move to a better country. There is an economic element of course, but there is also the notion that their own country is a Hellhole.

Bottom line is people all over the world move all over the place all the time.

Inside Latin America, there is huge migration. Costa Rica is now full of Nicaraguans. Cuba is full of Jamaicans and Haitians. The Dominican Republic is full of Haitians. Argentina is filling up with Bolivians and Peruvians. Plenty of Colombians have moved to Venezuela. Central Americans move to Mexico. And many Latin Americans have moved to Spain now due to the common language. The Whiter ruling class of Latin America seems to live about half their lives in Spain.

Many Latinos have come to the US and even Canada now. People from all over Latin America come to the US. Most are from Mexico and Central America – mostly from Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras and Costa Rica. From the Caribbean, we have many Cubans, Dominicans, and Haitians. Many South Americans such as Colombians, Brazilians, Venezuelans, Ecuadorians, Chileans, Peruvians, Argentines, Uruguayans, and Bolivians. I have met South Americans from all of these countries in the US.

South Asians pour into the UK, US, Canada and the Gulf states.

Europe is filling up with Black Africans. Many North Africans moved to France and the Netherlands. All of Europe is filling up with Syrians. There are a lot of Iranians in the Nordic states. Turkey is full of Syrians, Crimean Tatars and Kirghiz.

Black Africans flood into South Africa and also the Arab states of North Africa. Libya and Egypt are full of Black Africans, mostly Nigerians. Right now there are some Nigerians in SE Asia and there are quite a few in China. Nigerians appear to be one of the more mobile groups of Africans.

Filipinos flood into China, the US, Australia, the Gulf and Jordan. Chinese move to Australia, the US and Canada. Koreans move to the US. China is full of Koreans.

Palestinians and now Syrians have been living all over the Arab World for some time now. Lebanese move to Australia.  Quite a few Egyptians, Palestinians, Lebanese, Iraqis, Syrians, and Yemenis moved to the US. Many Uighur Chinese have moved to Syria.

Polynesians move to the US and Australia.

Central Asians pour into Europe and the US. Residents of the Stans such as Kazakhstan, Kirghistan, and Uzbekistan and Tajikistan move to Russia.

105 Comments

Filed under Africa, Americas, Arabs, Argentina, Argentines, Asia, Asians, Australia, Blacks, Bolivians, Brazilians, Canada, Caribbean, Central America, Chileans, China, Chinese (Ethnic), Colombians, Colonialism, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Dominicans, Ecuadorians, Egypt, Egyptians, Eurasia, Europe, Europeans, Filipinos, France, Guatemalans, Haitians, Hispanics, Hondurans, Immigration, Iranians, Iraqis, Jamaicans, Jordan, Koreans, Latin America, Lebanese, Libya, Mexico, Middle East, Near East, Near Easterners, Netherlands, Nigerians, North Africa, North Africans, North America, Northeast Asians, Oceanians, Palestinians, Peruvians, Political Science, Polynesians, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Russia, SE Asians, Sociology, South Africa, South America, South Asians, Spain, Syria, Syrians, Turkey, Uighurs, Uruguayans, USA, Venezuela, Whites, Yemenis

by | March 11, 2016 · 11:25 AM

Latin American Whites: A Mirror of the Future of America

RL: Keep in mind that some of the most vicious White priders and White supremacists of all say that if you are 75-85% White, you are White? So you disagree with these Latin American Nazis I guess?

Gay State Girl: Isn’t that because South America was a Nazi haven?

The only association with Latin America and Nazism is because of some German immigrant communities in Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia and Paraguay who were Nazi sympathizers. They didn’t treat the local Indians very well, and there were notable attempts at genocide especially in the Bolivian Chaco. However, there is no evidence that Latin American Nazis were Nordicists or that they had anything against non-Nordic Whites.

Your average Latin American White, while surely a White prider, is usually not a Nazi by any stretch of the imagination. This is because White pride in Latin America takes a very different and more subtle form in Latin America than it does here. Yes, Latin Whites are racist, but this is diluted by the fact that most of them are not pure White anyway, as the vast majority have non trivial amounts of Indian or even Black in them.

So “Whiteness” is more of a question of degree than purity. The fact that Latin Whites are not pure themselves tends to leaven their racism. Mestizos are often tolerated or even regarded as White although Peruvian and especially Argentine Whites have always been racist towards what they call mestizos. However, half of Argentine Whites have Indian blood in them themselves.

Latin American White White pride goes all the way down to Mexican Harnizos. I know a Mexican Harnizo who is 60-70% White, and he loves to claim White. He’s basically a Latin American White prider. Although there are some Latin Americans on Stormfront, most Latin American Whites find European White nationalism highly distasteful. Almost no Whites down there talk about splitting off to form their own White country. There is some talk of that in the South of Brazil, but even there, they would just split off the south which is already full of non-Whites as it is. The movement to split off the south of Brazil as its own nation appears doomed and has very little support.

All Latin American White countries like Uruguay, Argentina, Costa Rica and the south of Brazil are rapidly darkening. Costa Rica is full of 1-2 million illegal aliens, mostly from Nicaragua. The government doesn’t care, and they will probably be legalized as is the case with almost all illegal alien waves in Latin America.

Argentina is rapidly filling up with illegals, mostly mestizos from Bolivia, Peru and Paraguay. There are forming an underclass gang-type subculture in the cities, and there are complaints that Argentine girls are running off with the thuggish mestizos. However, the government seems to want to legalize the illegals there also. The problem in Latin America is that the illegal aliens are generally the same race as the natives, so there does not seem to be any logic to not legalizing them. They are just more of “our people.”

Most Latin Americans are not big environmentalists and much of the continent is underpopulated anyway.

White men running off to marry mestizos is a problem in White communities all over Latin America. The racial purists wring their hands, but there seems to be nothing they can do. White Mexican men continue to marry light skinned mestizas, and there doesn’t seem to be any way to stop them.

A similar phenomenon is occurring in Argentina. There does not seem to be anything stopping the darkening process down there either as much as the purists throw up their hands. If you ask a White Argentine what he feels about the mestisization of his country, they will tell you that they don’t like it, but then they will throw up their hands and say, “What can you do?” They act like the situation is hopeless, not to mention inevitable.

A gradual darkening of the White race appears to be an inevitability not only in Latin America where it has been an ongoing process for centuries but also in the US. The mestizization of the US, which is really all that the darkening process or decline of the White majority is, is simply the same mestizization process that has been going on forever in the rest of the Americas.

So what is happening is that at long last North America, the eternal aberration and odd man out, White and English speaking, is beginning to join the rest of the continent to become just another country in the what I would call “the Americas.”

Race in the Americas is typically mestizo or in some cases mulatto and mass mixing has characterized Mesoamerica, Central America and South America from the start.

Language in the region has tended to be Spanish, though there is a large Portuguese component (really just another Iberian Romance language) and some smaller outposts of English and French, often creolized. The English and French speaking regions tend to be mulatto or even Black and most are in the Caribbean.

The US curiously has avoided these dual phenomena of mestizization and Hispanophonization.

In addition to a mestizization process, the US is also becoming a significantly Spanish-speaking land, once again in tandem with the rest of the continent which overwhelmingly speaks an Iberian Romance language.

Canada is a holdout, but possibly the mestizization process and development of the Spanish language is not long for that land either. Canada has a large Indian population, but they have not married in much with the Whites for some odd reason, unlike in Latin America. Settlers to North America tended to bring women with them while Iberian settlers did not, hence the Iberians took native wives, so this may explain the lack of much mestizization there. French is present in Canada as it is in the Caribbean.

Nordicism is generally absent in Latin America probably because most Latin Whites are Meds. There are some Nordicists in the south of Brazil, but they are not very popular.

The bizarre socially transmitted disease (STD) called Nordicism is mostly only found in the US and Northern Europe. There are hints of it in the north of Spain and Italy, but there is little hatred towards Southern Spaniards from the northerners, who often think of themselves as Celts. Italy is another story. Other than that, Nordicism has no support anywhere.

Nordicism has permanently alienated all East Europeans and Slavs because of its association with Hitler. There are Nazis in Eastern Europe and Russia, but they are not Nordicists. In some parts of the globe such as Eastern Europe and Russia, Nazi symbols and identification have instead been co-opted as general White pride symbols, and there is often an attempt to distance themselves from the actual Nazi regime. There are Nazi types in Mongolia where it simply represents some Mongolian racial purism in the form of a racist fascist (national socialist) politics.

The case of the Whites of Latin America seems to show that not only is the notion of forming racially pure states of Whites or any other race seemingly hopeless, but further, the general darkening trend of Whites (in the US a mestizization process) appears to be an unstoppable force.

White separatists and White nationalists are a premature anachronism. They are fighting a race against time. Wars against time, as with wars against nature, have a tendency to be lost by men.

124 Comments

Filed under Americas, Amerindians, Argentina, Argentines, Asia, Black-White (Mulattos), Blacks, Brazil, Brazilians, Canada, Caribbean, Central America, English language, Environmentalism, Ethnic Nationalism, Eurasia, Europe, Fascism, French, Hispanics, Illegal, Immigration, Italy, Latin America, Linguistics, Mestizos, Mexicans, Mexico, Mixed Race, National Socialism, Nationalism, Nazism, Nicaragua, Nordicism, North America, Paraguay, Peru, Political Science, Portuguese, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Romance, Russia, Social Problems, Sociolinguistics, Sociology, South America, Spain, Spanish, USA, White Nationalism, White Racism, Whites

by | December 29, 2015 · 11:23 PM

Robert Stark Interviews Rodrigo Herhaus de Campos

Interview here.

This seems to be a most interesting interview despite the pro-White stance. For a pro-White type, this fellow seems pretty moderate. Maybe Brazil is so far mixed that even the pro-Whites are pretty moderate.

We have some residents and former residents of Brazil among the commenters and we also have many pro-White types, so I would assume that a lot of readers would like to listen to this interview. I also wanted to listen to it as I know little about the South African and Brazilian angles this man is discussing. However, I found his accent so thick that I turned him off after about five minutes.

Let me know if you all want me to run anymore interview by this guy and whether you can tolerate his accent or not. Perhaps if you are used to hearing people speak English with a thick Portuguese accent, this may be more intelligible.

 

Topics include:

Rodrigo’s petition calling for the Right of Return for South African Whites.
How Whites are facing genocide in South Africa.
How the petition has gained widespread support.
The media coverage of the petition.
The separatist movement in the South of Brazil where Rodrigo is from.
The political dynamics of Brazil.
Race relations in Brazil.
How the main political divide in Brazil is economic rather than racial or cultural.

16 Comments

Filed under Africa, Americas, Brazil, Brazilians, Economics, Europeans, Hispanics, Latin America, Politics, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Sociology, South Africa, South America, Whites

by | August 6, 2012 · 10:52 PM

Are Asian Women Nicer Than American White Women?

Bhabi wrote:

I hear that White American men have a huge fetish for East Asian women and looks wise I don’t get it, though there are some very pretty East Asian women, I think the American men just expect that they are in general “nicer” than White American women, and who knows, maybe they are, but somehow I doubt it.

Asians, and that includes South Asians like my people too, are more upwardly mobile obsessed than Americans and can be totally merciless gold and status diggers.

Pick your poison, boys!

Oh Hell yeah!

Asian women are way nicer than White American women! If you get with an Asian chick from another country who has no money (makes an average salary in that land) she will not be a gold digger at all. You will seem like a millionaire to her anyway even if you are poor.

Asian-American women, it is true, can be merciless gold-diggers. They are extremely materialistic to the point of insanity. My brother married a Vietnamese woman who is an outrageous gold digger. Her gold digging is so out front that it would seem offensive to most Americans. She’s into MONEY big-time.

Jewish women have a reputation for being gold diggers, but it is not that well earned. Instead, they badger and pester you to be successful and make money. Not that they marry for money per se. A lot of Jews are kind of nerdy, leftwing and not particularly materialistic types nowadays.

Hispanic women are very low on the materialism scale. Especially if you get one from overseas, she will think you have a million bucks because she is just poor. Plus, Latins in general are more relaxed and not obsessed with money.

Hispanic women are also generally very nice and sweet, especially if you treat them well. But once they dump you if they think you mistreated them (as in cheating on them for example) they go cold as ice too just like Asian women. The legend of the hot and cold ranting and raving Latin bitch is in my opinion largely illusory.

I was hanging out with a Brazilian woman here in the US for a while, and she was friends with an older Brazilian woman. The young one, a 19 year old, basically cut it off with me for some reason that I don’t recall. The older one said something like, “Well, she doesn’t want to hurt your feelings. We Brazilian women are raised not to challenge men or hurt men’s feelings. We avoid confrontations with me.” I thought, this is one cool culture!

American Indian women can also be pretty nice in a deferential sort of way.

I have known many, many Asian women, and especially immigrants are extremely nice, way, way, way nicer than American White women. They’re basically trained to be submissive and deferential to men and to not start shit with me.

All women must be like this!

I was involved with a Taiwanese woman at university, and even when she was being a total bitch, it was almost laughable, because her Taiwanese megabitch mode was about the same as how most White women act normally! As far as how White women get when they are bitchy, well, she just didn’t go there. I dumped her though and then she turned into an extreme hater evil Chinese Dragon Lady from Hell.

The coldest and meanest icewomen you have ever seen on the face of the Earth! I see why Chinese guys keep them under control! They have a hidden bitch factor that’s colder than the North Pole.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

169 Comments

Filed under Amerindians, Asians, Brazilians, Europeans, Hispanics, Jews, Race/Ethnicity, Romantic Relationships, Whites, Women

by | October 6, 2011 · 9:31 PM

The Linguistic Isolation of Brazilians

From the comments section, a comment from a Brazilian physician, of all people:

Brazilians do not understand anything in Spanish.

A lot of Brazilians think they can understand Spanish due to the affinity of the languages, but when we try to communicate, we discover it’s quite different.
.
When I traveled to Europe saying that I was Brazilian, people tried to talk to me in Spanish, but I had always to ask to speak in English.

I was born, grew up and live in the Northeast of Brazil, and I’m pretty sure to say that Brazilians understand better English than Spanish, although in the extreme South it’s the opposite.
.
Brazilian people are monolingual. I’d say that only 10% of Brazilians know a second language. We are such a big country, and our economy is local. We barely interact with Spanish Latin America, unfortunately.

We understand better English cause we consume a lot of American and British culture, but only a very few Brazilians care to learn a second language. Mostly because for a lot of professions it’s not necessary.

You see, even me, a physician who depends on the English language to keep updated in my field, have a hard time with English. I took half an hour to write this simple opinion which I bet is full of mistakes.

This rings true with what I have found. I have met some Brazilians, mostly women. They often thought they spoke Spanish pretty well, but when you started speaking it with them, they were pretty lost. One had better English than Spanish. Quite a few others had such good English, that I didn’t even bother speaking Spanish with them. Another one knew some Spanish and English. I spoke to her in Spanish and English and she responded to me in Portuguese, Spanish and English. Within a few hours, I was already speaking some Portuguese. With another one, we tried to speak something called Portunol, which is some Spanish-Portuguese mixed language spoken on the Argentine-Brazilian border. It didn’t work very well.

I would agree with this guy on one thing: Brazilians think they speak and understand Spanish better than they really do. And English-speaking Brazilians are not uncommon.

Brazil has about 190 million people. You really don’t need to learn any other language to do just fine in Brazil, and most don’t.

It is similar in Hispanophone Latin America. I meet South Americans all the time who range in age from 26-46, and many of them can barely speak a single word of English. I have to communicate with them exclusively in Spanish. When you think about it, they are on a continent with hundreds of millions of Spanish speakers. Why bother to learn another language? Why bother to learn English? What for?

I can also affirm that South Americans definitely do not bother to learn Portuguese. Portuguese know more Spanish than South Americans know Portuguese. The typical South American attitude towards Portuguese is, “Why should I learn that?”

16 Comments

Filed under Americas, Applied, Brazil, Brazilians, Hispanics, Indo-European, Indo-Hittite, Italic, Italo-Celtic-Tocharian, Language Families, Language Learning, Latin America, Linguistics, Multilingualism, Portuguese, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Romance, South America, Spanish

by | June 21, 2011 · 6:21 PM

White Pride Latin America

Interesting comments from the comments section. First a fellow named Robert posts a comment, then a White Mexican named Rafa responds. I very much enjoyed their interchange, and I will comment at the end:

Robert: As a White Latin American, I think a lot of the information you put was wrong. At least the part about White Latin Americans disappearing. The CIA World Factbook puts Mexico White population at 9%, but I heard its really 15% to 18%. And Mexico’s White population wasn’t 40% during the colonial period it was more like close to 20%. I’ve heard that there are migrants heading to northern Mexico, but the majority of Northeast Mexico is still White.

You can talk to a lot of Latin Americans about that. They’ll tell you the same thing. My friend who goes to Mexico says the same thing. And as for Brazil, Sao Paulo is 70% non white? SAY WHAT!!!! I’m sorry, I haven’t been there yet, but that is just purely wrong. I’ve read in the census that its 70% White.

Personally I AM GLAD there are a lot of white people in Latin America. But then again, I personally think that if a person looks White, then they are obviously white. Even if they are 20% black or whatever. I may have been born and grown up in the U.S., but in the end, I guess I haven’t assimilated I guess.

I don’t mean to come off as if I am insulting you but I think at least half the information you got was wrong. At least when it came to the decline of White population. However, remember, all mestizos do not look the same. The phenotype can range from more European to more Indian. The White upper class of Mexico and Brazil may be mixed, but the non-white ancestry may not be enough to show and vice-versa.

Basically its a color continuum.

Rafa: I find it interesting that you said that if a person is 20% Black but looks White, then they are obviously White. By that standard, I would have to say that Mexico is between 33-40% White. The reason is simple. Amerindian features are more easily diluted than are Black African features.

There are even White Americans who are known to have claimed some sort of native indigenous ancestry such as Chuck Norris, the late Patrick Swayze, and Johnny Depp (this last one actually looks like a lot Mexicans I grew up with). The term Euro-Mestizo has even entered the lexicon of American English terms used to describe people according to their race, specifically light-skinned Mexicans who are predominantly White in appearance.

I don’t know about you, but I think that ever since the world got smaller through the invention of broadcast television and the internet, Latin Americans have gotten into a tendency of competing with each other to see whose country is whiter or has a larger population of Whites. What do you think?

By the way, as far as Northeastern Mexico being majority White, I would have to say that I agree with that statement. As you might have already guessed, I am in fact Mexican and from the Northeastern border city of Nuevo Laredo,Tamaulipas.

I grew up across the border in Laredo, Texas and it is basically an explicit fact that my native region is not as White as it used to be. Many people from Southern Mexico, and even some from Central America have established themselves in Nuevo Laredo, Reynosa, Matamoros, and Monterrey in neighboring Nuevo Leon state.

Most Mexican nationals who reside in Laredo, Texas are in fact White (as are most of their Mexican-American brethren in the region), and this often shocks non-Mexican Hispanics coming from the East Coast and California.

This is a sort of Latin American White Pride that I do not have a whole lot of issues with. To me, it resembles Black Pride in the US, which is generally healthy because it avoids some extremes and pitfalls. Some of the benefits vis a vis nasty US White Pride:

No emphasis on purity: If anything, in Black Pride there is an emphasis on less purity due to Black America’s obsession with light skin. That is, the less Black you have in you, the more proud you are, paradoxically. Now, that is not necessarily a good thing, but at least it gets us away from the purity poison.

Your average Black person in the US is 15% White. Most sane Blacks have not issues with this figure at all, and sane Black society does not regard US Blacks as impure or demand any kind of racial purity from them. You don’t have to be 100% Black to be Black in the US! Three cheers for that!

In contrast, US White Pride is utterly toxic in terms of racial “contamination.” If you have the tiniest bit of non-White in you, you’re automatically non-White. Even a lot of White ethnics are ruled out as Whites and described as non-Whites. Examples include Jews, Armenians, Turks, Eastern Aryans, Iranians, White Berbers, White Arabs, Georgians, the Caucasus, Albanians and Southern Europeans in general.

It’s absurd. Another thing to note is that in general, among races, the more emphasis there is on purity, the more violent, fascist and even genocidal the group is. It’s no accident that the Germans and Japanese were both genocidal and strongly emphasized purity of race. The two things go together quite well. As you get away from the purity trap, you become more loving and inclusive and less likely to engage in race-based violence, much less genocide. This is because, as a “contaminated” person yourself, you can’t much demand purity from others.

Increased love for others: Most White Latin Americans don’t hate the small amount of Indian or Black in themselves. It’s not the end of the world. They have a more relaxed attitude towards race, and they often love the non-White in themselves. If you love the Other in yourself, you are more likely to love the Other in others.

No demands for segregation. Latin American Whites don’t demand segregation. There was some segregation in Latin America, especially in Cuba and Ecuador, but it’s long gone. In Cuba, it lasted as long as the Revolution.

Let’s get real here for a second. What’s behind the demands for segregation? They are about fears of racial annihilation. This is what the fears of race-mixing and miscegenation were all about. But White Latin Americans are already somewhat mixed, so in a sense, they are already an annihilated race. There’s nothing to fear from dilution if you’re already diluted yourself, so there’s no need for segregation. Let the mixing begin!

A more relaxed attitude about race. White nationalists go on and on about colorism in Latin America, but at the end of the day, it’s not as big a deal as racism is here in the US. Colorism is simply not as virulent and nasty as White racism here in the US. It’s all a continuum, a sliding scale.

Thinking in a grey or continuum type manner is healthier than thinking in a black and white Manichean manner. Grey thinking is more relaxed and adaptive and leads to more tolerance and flexibility.

What problems there are in Latin America regarding race are ll tied up with class. Many Latin American so-called Whites don’t even look all that White. Indians are disliked due to class hatred, not necessarily racial hatred. The most hardened attitudes are found in South America, especially in the Andes.

It’s not that Latin America has overcome the race issue, but more that they have more or less transmuted it into a class issue. In a region where you can trade in your Indian clothes, stop speaking Indian, move to the city and then start wearing mestizo clothing and speaking Spanish and thereby automagically transform yourself from an Indian into a mestizo is a place were biological race is not so important anymore. It has been replaced by social race.

Less fear of miscegenation. I am not aware that Latin American Whites are zealously guarding their bloodlines anymore. If they are, let me know. You can hardly demand that others marry White if you are not pure White yourself. There are some Latin American Whites who would like it to be this way, but they are going against nature. In particular, Latin American White males are increasingly marrying and breeding with relatively light-skinned mestizas. The purists lament this, but what can you do? A man will be a man.

In addition, there  is another operative trend, and that is the widespread tendency among Latin American mestizas to try to “marry White” in an effort to move up in the world themselves and to create a better future for their offspring. This is highly adaptive female thinking, and it leads to a paradoxical “Whitening” effect among mestizos that occurs concurrently with whatever “darkening” effect is going on among Latin American Whites.

It’s the wave of the future. As the world’s population gets more mixed, the sort of White Pride seen in Latin America will become more the norm for all groups. True, pure races will slowly die out and become more rare, but that’s neither good nor bad, it just is. If US Blacks, a mixed group, can be proud, then anyone can be proud of their racial elements. The progeny of a racial stew can feel proud of all of the elements that went into that stew. The result is an ethnic pride that is more tolerant, loving and unconditional.

56 Comments

Filed under Americas, Amerindians, Blacks, Brazil, Brazilians, Europeans, Hispanics, Latin America, Mestizos, Mexicans, Mexico, Mixed Race, North America, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, South America, Texas, USA, West, White Nationalism, White Racism, Whites

by | January 25, 2011 · 2:38 PM

1825: When the US South Was Not Yet White

Repost from the old site.

Most people take it as a given that the USA as a nation and society is and always has been basically White, even mostly British or Northern European White. We have only to look at the authors of the Constitution and signers of the Declaration of Independence to see that all of them where White. And as the Christian fundamentalists love to remind us, they were all “Christians” too. Too bad most of them were actually Deists.

It’s true since 1830 or so (see 1830 census figures Excel, pdf ), this has been a majority-White land, and that is the picture most people’s memory and cultural knowledge of this country gives them.

But Whites have only been here a short while, and we were immigrants, or actually invaders at first, ourselves. Previously, this land was inhabited 100% by Amerindians, a race close to Northeast Asians. Before this was even a nation, huge numbers of Black slaves were imported to this land, such that most Black lineages in the US go back farther than most White lineages.

In California and the Southwest, we have even had Hispanics (almost all Mexicans) living here before those states were even a part of the US. A Filipino was part of the party that founded Los Angeles before California was even a state. He got sick in Baja and ended up staying there, but he was still present on the voyage. See below where many more Filipinos were already in this country even before 1781.

On the eve of the Gold Rush, there were a mere 1,000 Chinese in the US. Only seven of them were in California. But within a year of becoming a state, California was full of East Indians (Hindoos), Samoans/Hawaiians, Mexicans and other Pacific Islanders (Kanakas) and Chinese, all come for the Gold Rush.

By 1852, there were 25,000 Chinese alone in California. All of these groups stayed on through the whole decades-long Gold Rush and afterwards remained here as residents in the US.

So are West Africans, as this is where many of the American slaves came from. There was a Filipino settlement in St. Malo, Louisiana, in 1763, before the US was even formed. The first Chinese immigrants came to the US in 1820, but before the Gold Rush, only 1,000 or so had arrived.

Japanese and Filipinos have been present in Hawaii in large numbers since 1890, and Koreans have been present in much smaller numbers there from 1896. Hawaii was only made into a state in 1959. Cubans have also been here a very long time. Hundreds of Cubans came to St. Augustine, Florida in 1565, over 200 years before there was a USA.

Similarly, the first Jamaicans (a party of 20) in America were already in Jamestown, the first White British colony in the US, by 1619. Further, many Jamaicans were included in slave shipments to the US since Jamaica was a way station along the way between Africa and the US.

Significant numbers – two large ships full of Chilean and Peruvian miners were in California for the Gold Rush as early as 1848. A couple of thousand Brazilian and Caribbean Blacks also came for the Gold Rush. Note that California did not become a state until 1850.

Pakistanis (people from what later became Pakistan) were in the US since the 1700’s and continuing into the 1800’s in Oregon and Washington, working in agriculture, logging and mining in California. The first known East Indian Hindu came to the US in 1790, soon after the Declaration of Independence, as a maritime worker.

Mexicans, Samoans, Blacks, Cubans, East Indians, Pakistanis, Chileans, Peruvians, Filipinos, American Indians, Canadians, Japanese, West Africans, Hawaiians, Japanese, Koreans and Chinese have been here in significant, not trivial, numbers, from the very start.

They are not, as groups, wholly immigrants or foreigners to this land. They are not foreign to American culture – they are part of the very building blocks of it. Perhaps Germany, Russia, Sweden, France and most of Europe can lay claim to being predominantly White countries for centuries or millenia, but the US cannot.

On the inside back cover of a recent issue of American Heritage Magazine was a painting of the Antediluvian American South with some text below. The text took me aback. I shook my head and read it again and again and it’s stuck in my head ever since.

It said that in 1825, the US South1 was estimated to be 37% Black (almost all slaves), 25% American Indian2, and only 38% was White3. Neither the Blacks nor the Indians could vote and none were citizens until the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, but so what.

Both the US South, and the nation as a whole, were already White-minority as early as 35 years after signing of the Constitution. Take that, “White America” fools!

The White America of movies, TV, magazines, books and memories was just a temporary mirage, a ship passing in the night.

Now, as the USA moves back to becoming a White-minority land, we are not changing the basic nature, culture and essence of this nation. We just reverting to our roots.

I am not arguing for unlimited immigration to this land (In fact, I want to seriously limit it) and I am a staunch opponent of illegal immigration. Nevertheless, it angers me when White Nationalists act like this is some kind of a “White country”.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

1I misremembered the text in the issue – it referred to the US South only, not the US as a whole. A look at the US Census Bureau information (Excel file here, pdf here) clears up the mystery. A 37% Black figure is apparent for Blacks in the US South.

The 25% Indian figure quoted was obviously for Amerindians in the South. Therefore, the article claimed that Whites were 38%, Blacks 37%, and Indians 25% in the US South in 1825.

Figures for the whole of the US reveal a White majority, however, if we include the Amerindians living in the Louisiana Purchase at that time (recently part of the US in 1825), we can still make a case for a non-White majority in the US. See note 3 below for more on that.

2There were numerically small numbers of Filipinos, Chinese, Mexicans, pre-Pakistanis (people from the land that would later become Pakistan), East Indians and Cubans here in 1825, but they probably added up to less than 1% of the population.

3The American Heritage figures quoted have now been called into question (see comments at the end of this post and the comments at the end of the frankly White racist American Renaissance article that linked this piece); the suggestion is that Blacks made up 19% of the US at the time, and Whites made up the rest.

The mystery is cleared up in note 1, where the magazine text referred to only the US South, not the US as a whole.

Indians were not counted in either the 1820 or 1830 censuses, and may have numbered 8 million in the US at the time (recall that the Louisiana Purchase had just been added to the nation).

Figure 12 million Indians in the US and Canada pre-contact, with 90% of those in the US (compare US and Canadian populations now for a 9-1 disparity in US versus Canadian population – a similar distribution was probably extant pre-contact). Assume 2 million Indians gone from the original population by 1825, mostly East of the Mississippi, and 2 million living in New Spain and the Oregon Territory.

This leaves us with 7 million Indians in the US in 1825. Further, runaway slaves were clearly not counted, probably 10% of the Black population. Figuring 7 million Indians, 9.2 million Whites and 2.5 million Blacks in 1825 still leaves us with a bare minority-White population in the US. The US was probably non-White majority from 1803-1825. By 1830, Whites were the majority entire nation, and have remained so ever since.

33 Comments

Filed under Americas, Amerindians, Asians, Blacks, Brazilians, California, Canada, Chileans, Chinese (Ethnic), Christianity, Cubans, East Indians, Europeans, Filipinos, Florida, Hawaiians, Hispanics, History, Illegal, Immigration, Jamaicans, Japanese, Koreans, Louisiana, Mexicans, Modern, North America, Northeast Asians, Oregon, Pakistanis, Peruvians, Polynesians, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Reposts From The Old Site, Samoans, SE Asians, South, South Asians, US, USA, Washington, West, White Nationalism, Whites