Direct Link to Latest News


Brazil's Racial Diversity = Chaos and Disunity?

May 21, 2018

blogmoving to brazil cultural div.jpg
Is Brazil a positive or negative model for a racially diverse society? 

The more "racially mixed" a country is, the more unstable it becomes because it has no common culture, no common past, and no common background. Diversity + Proximity = War 
Chris comments about his time in Brazil, "the muddy confluence of the world's races."

Marcos, who lives in San Paolo disagrees, saying culture not race is the problem. Race has become irrelevant in Brazil, he says.  

"Preliminary results from the 2010 census show that 97 million Brazilians, or 50.7% of the population, now define themselves as black or mixed race, compared with 91 million or 47.7% who label themselves white." Source (Pure black only 7.6%)

"According to Brazil's Institute of geography and statistics, black (i.e. mixed race), Brazilians earn 44 percent less than whites. A 2016 study by the Instituto Ethos and the Inter-American Development Bank showed that black people, despite comprising the majority of the population, occupy only 6.3 percent of management positions and 4.7 percent of executive posts in Brazil's 500 largest companies." Source

Blacks seek white mates. 1/3 of all marriages in Brazil are interracial: In contrast  "to what happened in the United States where the black population was purposely segregated from the white population in order to eliminate or significantly diminish the possibility of racial mixture, in Brazil, the goal was to encourage inter-mixture so that all traces of the black race would eventually disappear from the country within a period of about 100 years." Source

by Chris 

I lived in Brazil 4 years as an American young man back in the 1990s and I have yet to see a more distrusting and antagonist society on the planet. 

Brazilians HATE each other; they hate their country, and they distrust each other to the point the country is really nothing more than a 3rd world powderkeg of social and economic disharmony and violence. Brazil is California on steroids. Highly-racially and culturally mixed and yet that country is divided, dishonest, and self-loathing.

The more "racially mixed" a country is, the more unstable it becomes because it has no common culture, no common past, and no common background. The only part of Brazil that works (sorta) is the South, where the population is overwhelmingly German, with Italians as second largest group, Ukrainians around 500,000, and about 100,000 Lithuanians, all concentrated in their own cities and towns across the 3 southern States. The south of Brazil is the only coherent part of Brazil and only white-majority region. 

Most Conservative, prettiest girls, and least Feminist. The rest of Brazil is a messy chaos of mixed and semi-white populations, all distrusting and hating one another. It is a sight to behold! 

This is the case anywhere in the world. When Norway was almost 100% ethnic Norwegian, the country worked and functioned, even with dumb socialist policies (like national healthcare). Because the population was homogeneous and educated, they did not abuse and overuse public services and that enabled socialist policies to work to some extent. 

After they allowed SOME immigration, not even at the ridiculous levels of Sweden or Germany, NOTHING works in Norway anymore. Healthcare is overwhelmed, people bleeding in ERs, elderly drinking water out of potted plants, and all levels of social services and police are overwhelmed, and the country has become more polarized and unstable.

But unlike Sweden (a country headed for total collapse), Norway woke-up and elected the "Go Forward Party" and the zero immigration parties are growing rapidly. Their motto "let's not become Sweden".

Simply put: mass immigration = chaos and disunity. No matter how much you "mix races" or "mix cultures", the "mixing" will not resolve the most basic of human behavior, which is distrust, disunity, and hate. No matter how much you indoctrinate, the truth of our most basic ideas, behaviors, and reactions will never change. That is hwy "Progressivism" has always fails, since it replies on humans to "evolve" (progress) into holy and perfect beings. This will never happen, thus Progressivism fails over an dover again.

In fact, all this "mixing" makes it all worse. My 2 cents.

Diversity + Proximity = War (by whatever means). Racial diversity introduces social instability. The races have on average differing worldviews, behaviors, temperaments, personalities, and preferences, and forcing them together into an artificial union under one political and cultural umbrella amplifies preexisting antagonisms and distinctions, resulting in lower trust and a less livable society by any one group's standards.

Marcos replies from San Paolo:

Yes, the country is dishonest, but it has nothing to do with race. It is culture. 

On the contrary, it is the best example of miscegenation in the planet, no ghettos, nobody says  "I'm Italian-Brazilian" or "I'm Irish" like in the US. Actually, nobody gives a damn about your origin here, everybody is just a Brazilian. I had black and many Japanese friends as a kid, and that was never an issue, no bullying, nothing. America is ten times worse regarding this division and lack of trust. Their gang-rapper thug culture is just starting here, being imported from America. 

The talk about the South is BS. Only small towns have any ethnic enclaves left, and even there they are disappearing or being changed into Oktoberfest-like curiosities. The Germans and Italians are mixed with everybody else, especially in big cities. 

Gisele Bundchen, left, was born almost in a farm, not in the capitals of Curitiba or Porto Alegre. And even her family spoke Portuguese, not German. And the South doesn't work, especially Rio Grande do Sul, a pocket of Marxists, a state that is bankrupt. It is the mixed Southeast (Sao Paulo, Rio, Minas Gerais) who power the country. It is also interesting to notice that the grandchildren of these European immigrant are the ones who migrated to the Northern states of Tocantins, Mato Grosso, Goias, etc, and created the largest agricultural area in the world. Do you think they wouldn't marry a beautiful mulatta? Think again. 

He completely misses the point.  The problem with Brazil is with the old Iberian (Portuguese) bureaucratic culture based on privileges mixed with Indians and African slaves who were treated like animals and never developed a modern civilized ethos. Portuguese men usually came to Brazil as explorer and plunderers, and not pioneers or settlers like in North America. They wanted to make money and go back to Europe. Because they didn't bring family, they would marry mulattas or indian women and eventually some stayed. Therefore, a culture of tolerance for racial mixing was developed, but also one of dishonest tricks from rich people who needed to fool the bureaucracy and poor people who just needed to survive. 

When immigrants came from Europe in the later XIX and early XX century, they brought a new work ethic and knowledge that resulted in development and riches, and this was in stark contrast to the more primitive early Iberian culture. Because they settled more in the South, the North is still more backward even today. That's what our friend is seeing, and he gets confused. Many of these same immigrants married mixed people, nobody cares. 

The diversity+proximity=war motto comes from Chateau Heartiste. He copied it. It makes sense in the case of Europe, where a less developed influx of immigrants invades a more established culture, but in Brazil, it was the contrary. Immigrants brought prosperity. And it happened 100 years ago, for goodness' sake. 

Again, the problem in Brazil is the privileged culture of a corrupt elite who behave like nobility above the common folk. It comes directly from the Portuguese monarchy, a regime which had different sets of laws depending on your social status. As soon as a black or mulatto person gets to power here, he starts to behave exactly like a Portuguese nobleman, I can assure you. 

First Comment from Marcio

As a Brazilian, I prefer to agree with Marcos.

We do not have serious racial problems in Brazil. It is a matter of social classes - if you are rich and well-groomed, you are welcome everywhere, whichever color your skin is. It is easy to see friends from different skin colors and different ethnic origins together. That does not start any civil war here. The few ones we had were waged by Freemasons to promote chaos and subversion. We are different from the blood-thirsty people who are always in some kind of conflict (such as in Spanish America, Africa and many parts of Asia). 

Marcos is also right as far as economics is concerned. Many people moved from the "European" South to succeed in the Northern and Mid-Western States as farmers. Three Southwestern States (I am in one of them) out of almost 30 States produce more than 50% of the Gross National Product. As Brazil is kind of an isolated country few people know anything about, people had better ask either a local or someone who has been living here for a while (and immersed into the society, and not as a closed off expatriate who does not socialize with locals) to give them a fairer idea of how things work down here.

What causes chaos is bad governance and ill-adapted people to their new home, who bring chaos and barbarism along with them. Here, we almost force foreigners to get adapted. For extra information on Brazilians, please see a good-humored German's view on us.

As far as "distrust" is concerned, that is the outcome of the bankruptcy of a legal system, thanks to socialism, in which criminals should not be punished - therefore, crime does pay off and people are exposed to frauds, robberies, homicides, etc. They aim at making a new order out of chaos. So that is why most people are wary and distrustful of many crooks or crypto-crooks around. In the past (until the 1980s, when the military in power would not allow socialists to influence people's minds so strongly), neighbors used to be known as your closest relatives without your family surname, police authority used to be highly respected, immorality used to be condemned, etc. Many people want the military back to power, and many others wish we could become a monarchy again (so a South American country was once a Habsburg-Orleans-Bragança / Austrian-French-Portuguese monarchy, did you know that?).

"Self-loathing" is also socialist, globalist propaganda. Nothing is better than an "international citizen" without any patriotism (being far-right, in their opinion). If we had 210 million patriots, we would be a second USA with huge natural resources and ready to smash intruders - and that bothers globalists, who want to plunder such resources.

I think much of the corruption is due to lack of authority presence, not due to it, in most of the territory, as settlers used to reach far away places much before the Church, the Portuguese  military,  police, and  government were able to follow them, so such tyrannical practices throve in the midst of nowhere. Where there was a strong and steady Portuguese presence, people have been much more civilized until today. 

Unfortunately, most Indians and Africans did not give a very good contribution to local morals as they were pagans with primitive and beastly customs (as everywhere else), but civilized people of such ethnic origin are even nicer than many whites. There is a saying here: "a gentle black is gentler than most whites", or "he is a black with white soul". Such lack of civil customs also plagues places with those people from Canada to Argentina as much as there are such uncivilized people there. 

I think ill-adapted or non-adapted people to local customs and from such diverse origins are the ones who can foster chaos in European and North-American countries - even because their governments have done nothing to force their adaptation; on the contrary, native inhabitants are the ones who have been forced to accept foreign and barbaric people and their attitudes under "political correctness" instead of openly condemning them. 

Alexandre, another Brazilian, writes:

To say that Brazilians hate each other is simply preposterous. To say that Brazilians hate their country is an exaggeration. Life in Brazil is very hard for most people, especially so for those who are poor and live in the great cities. Heat and poverty make a terrible mix. That Brazil still functions at the average temperature of 35° C is a quasi-miracle in itself. Criticism of one's country is only natural so how could Brazilians not say bad things about Brazil? Have you ever heard what Italians say about Italy? I have, and they made me wonder about how rational and productive the Brazilian Government (federal, state and local) is...

Now, truth be told, Brazil was a much gentler society up until, say, the early 1960s, but so was the world. Today, with a population of 200 million people and 60000 murders per year (+ 40000 people killed in car accidents), day by day life in Brazil is not for careless and naïve people. Please do not go down the Amazon river alone on a boat neither go visit slums infested with drug dealers who hold honest workers hostage of their mad, murderous whims, okay!? Forget about riding a bicycle in the streets, either.

But Marcos is right when he says that race in Brazil is not THE problem. I like to illustrate this point by telling you that Booker Pittman (1909-1969), a grandson of the great Booker T. Washington, chose to live and die in Brazil. Interesting, eh!?

Unlike Marcos, though, I think the problem with Brazil is the lack of taste of its population for real, good and sound education, at all social levels. Granted: there are good physicians and dentists; good lawyers and some good academics at various fields (the agricultural sciences come to mind immediately), but there is a generalized lack of people well-prepared for the educated public debate of the grand issues, hence the low level of governance. For instance: the recently (2016) impeached president, Dilma Vana Rousseff, (of Bulgarian descent - a mere curiosity) could not (cannot) finish a single coherent sentence. (There is a book about this, entitled "Dilmese".) How could she be elected in 2010? And reelected in 2014?

Now, add to all of this the horrors of Cultural Marxism. Fortunately, the hegemony of the Left in Brazil seems to be fractured, though not broken (the American Foundations keep very generou$). By the way: former president (2003-2010) Lula da Silva (and the top brass of his Workers Party, too) has been in custody down here in Curitiba since April 7, after having his conviction (corruption and money laundering) upheld (other appeals to the Superior Courts in Brasilia still pending, but his political rights have been suspended for the next eight years). Any news of criminal procedures against the Clintons?...

Scruples - the game of moral dillemas

Comments for "Brazil's Racial Diversity = Chaos and Disunity?"

KK said (May 22, 2018):

When speaking with multi-racial people, including many Brazilians, history, culture and politics are almost always off limits, including any lessons from history. These topics are too painful. The result? Trivial conversations and shallow friendships.

Al Thompson said (May 21, 2018):

Race has nothing to do about anything. The problem is the communism, socialism, and fascism. Ask yourself this question: Is it immoral to marry someone of a different race? In using that natural law, the only possible answer to the question is no. Racism is a big nothing burger.

Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at