Social_Critic wrote:There were no Indians left to be used as serfs after the Argentinians killed them. So they did have slaves. And they got shipped to Brazil. I heard the story from friends who told me its their dirty little secret. So you got to piece the puzzle together.
Wrong again. Argentinian indians were assimilated into the population just like it happened in every other Hispano-American state. Today, indigenous Argentinians represent 1.6% of the entire population. Indigenous Colombians represent 2% of the Colombian population. Most pre-Columbian tribes were assimilated in both countries. Now, virtually all Argentinians descend directly from native peoples, just like it happens in Colombia.
Most natives were replaced, assimilated or killed during the Conquest of the Desert and the expansion into the Northwest Chaco. But most Argentinians still descend from native peoples...
This is under their Afro Argentine article. My friends, a group of fairly educated and diverse Argentines, told me they felt the blacks had been forced to go to Brazil, rather than genocided. I'm not about to argue this subject much, frankly I don't think it's that important.
That portion of the article doesn't mention sources. It was virtually impossible for free blacks to enter Brazil thanks to the mentality at the time, so I don't really think it is accurate at all.
Fairly educated Argentinians or not, your friends are probably just stating some myths as if they were true. While many conspiracy theories exist, the truth is that the Afro-Argentine population was never broad. The main proof of that is the fact that, while most Argentinians (over 70% or even 80% according to some researches) have Amerindian ancestry, less than 5% have any African ancestry at all.
PoFo ethnic party statistics: http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8&p=14042520#p14042520