Captain Sam wrote:The Brazilian census says over half of Brazil is black and Amerindian, while whites and mixed fit in to the same 48.43% category. You have a very delusional view of your own country.
lol half of Brazil is amerindian?
there are less amerinds in Brazil than in the US...
All blacks and mixed-race Brazilians have some Portuguese ancestry. Recent genetic studies showed that self-classified blacks in Brazil have about 40%-50% of European genes, and relatively few (<10%) amerindian genes. It is not rocket science to analyze the data and see that virtually all
Brazilians are mixed-race, even the ones that have a white phenotype. Virtually all Brazilians descend from Portuguese people.
The recent census indicates that about half of Brazil is actually white. Actually, the exact figures were 47.3% of Brazilians being white. 43.1% self-classifying as "brown" (seriously, there is no multiracial category in the Brazilian census, since the categories are based on skin color, not ancestry). recent genetic studies also showed that those people that self-classify as brown actually have 60%-70% European ancestry.
Not that the race matters the slightest, since my point here is that basically all Brazilians descend directly from Portuguese colonists..
Trust me, I know my country much better than you
Please study more before making these ridiculous claims that blacks constitute half of the Brazilian population... I bet you have never even stepped in Brazil, have you?
Reminds me of the Argies on 4chan always arguing about how white they are. Why does it matter if most of the country isn't of European origin?
It seriously doesn't matter if we are white or not. I always strongly advocate miscegenation, in order to avoid racial tension.
What matters is the fact that we are predominantly Portuguese-descended, indigenous and black culture didn't influence our culture more than the European one. If we were mostly Yoruba-descended, spoke Yoruba and practiced Candomblé, I'd have no problem acknowledging that we are not Western. The problem is that we are not. Brazilians are direct descendants of Portuguese settles, who mixed with Amerindians, Africans and European immigrants through the 5 centuries of Brazilian existence. Genetically, we still are around 70% European, though that is pretty irrelevant. Brazilians have the most varied phenotypes in the planet (one of the reasons why Brazilian passports are the most faked, since absolutely anyone can pass as a Brazilian). But we are still ethnically, genetically and culturally descendants of Portuguese settlers.
Sharing a European language doesn't constitute as being western. Otherwise most of Africa would be considered western.
He is talking about sharing an European literature, not an European language. What you don't seem to understand is that Brazil and Argentina are not Mexico or Peru. Fortunately or unfortunately (it seriously doesn't matter), the indigenous component wasn't important in the formation of our culture. And even ethnically, Brazilians have, on average, only 10% of Amerind genes. In the regions where the Amerind component remained strong up to the early 19th century, they have only 20% Amerind admixture. Indigenous peoples were mostly absorbed prior to the start of European immigration or genocided (i know this is not a verb, btw, but it should be).
The African component is more relevant, though Brazilians are, on average, just about 20% African. And keep in mind that we are talking about genetics, not culture. And I'm only coming to this point because you yourself started mentioning it. Basically, saying that Brazilians are not western because we have some amerindian and african admixture is just as ridiculous as saying that Finns and Estonians are not Western, because they have about 15% Asian genes. Or that Portugal and Spain are not Western, because lots of Arabs and Berbers crossed the Mediterranean to live there when they ruled the Iberian Peninsula.
And if you do not believe me, I can easily gather dozens of articles on genetic studies, though wikipedia has a good summary on a few of them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_people#Genetic_studies
Culturally, on the other hand, we are just as European as the US. Indigenous influences remain strong only on place names: Itaipu, Itaúna, Abaetuba, Amapá, Paraíba, Pará... Milwaukee, Massachusetts, Dakota, Alaska, Alabama, Tucson, Oklahoma. African influence is strong mainly in black majority areas (the black belt in the US, state of Bahia in Brazil). Besides that, Africans influenced basically popular music in both countries: Jazz, Rock, Blues, R&B... Samba, Bossa Nova, Choro. Besides that, the culture is predominantly European in both cases.
The only real difference between Brazil and the US, in how the Europeans influenced the countries is the fact that miscegenation took place on much higher levels in Brazil. And even then, we got the second largest European immigrant population in the Americas, just after the US.
I'm not lying when I say that most Brazilians (actually, virtually all) are predominantly European- and Portuguese-descended. It is just the way it is. If we were Chinese, I'd have no problem saying we were Chinese. But we aren't. We are a New World people, composed mainly by Europeans, Africans and Natives, pretty much like all other countries in the Americas, from Canada and Greenland to Argentina and Chile.
Seriously, why do people like you and Maas think you know more about Brazil than I do? Seriously, I go out everyday. I see Brazilians everyday. I know how we are like. I know how our culture is like. I also have studied plenty about our ancestry and origins... We, with our 70% European, 20% African and 10% Amerind ancestries are just as Western as Finns with they 85% European and 15% Asian ancestries. I'd even go as far as saying that we are much more western than them, since our culture is based on the Southern European one, while theirs has a large Russian/Slavic/Eastern European influence. And I'm damn proud of the minor yet relevant contribution Africans and Amerinds did to our culture and ethnic composition.
And, as a matter of fact, most of Africa does NOT
speak European languages. Only the economical centers of African countries have a native Indo-European-speaking majority. In the rest of continent, European languages are learned basically as a second language. Most of Sub-Saharan Africa speak Niger-Congo languages. And, unlike Brazilians, very few of them are direct descendants of European colonists and/or immigrants. What to say of those whose heritage is predominantly European. They are virtually no one, quite different from Brazil, where they are virtually everyone...
Brazil is neither Angola nor Mexico, seriously...
If you wanna be taken seriously, don't tell a surgeon how to perform a surgery. Ask, politely, about the things he knows that you don't