The Guardian: "Time to challenge Argentina’s white European self-image, black history experts say"

Renzi

Registered
Despite a couple unique cultural elements, such as tango, wouldn't you agree that Argentina is merely a peripheral outpost of European civilization, like Australia, and therefore its collapse is part of the general collapse of European civilization?
Australia is a white settler colony with a very defined Anglocentric identity, while Argentina, despite the arrival of European boat people, has the same history of transculturation, racial mixing, and chaotic demographic changes as the rest of Latin America. The bitterness of the Euro-descendant elite of this country comes from the fact that it never lived up to the promise (or delusion) of becoming an "outpost of European civilization." Argentina is, and always will be, just a less poor country in a region of very poor countries.
 
You say that like it was a BAD thing.

You seriously think it's a crime to be white? News flash - that's racism right there.
It's not a bad thing or a good thing.

It's simply a statement, based upon my life experience / observations of different places and the people who are in each location.

It's no crime to be any race or any skin color as far as I am concerned. I could care less actually. If a person is a good person, I don't mind what their exterior is. and if they are a bad person, it really has nothing to do with what they look like as much as it has to do with what is within them. (Hate, envy, greed, lust, etc...)
 
Australia is a white settler colony with a very defined anglocentric identity, while Argentina, despite the arrival of European boat people, has the same history of transculturation, racial mixing, and chaotic demographic changes as the rest of Latin America. The bitterness of the Euro-descendant elite of this country comes from the fact that it never lived up to the promise (or delusion) of becoming an "outpost of European civilization." Argentina is, and always will be, just a less poor country in a region of very poor countries.
I believe, with the exception of the US & Canada, all the countries of The Americas will never be overly prosperous and certainly I don't expect world leadership from any of them. But if there were to ever be world leadership from one or more of them, it might come from Mexico or Brasil, merely because I feel world leadership potential goes hand in hand with larger population sizes of a country.

I am not sure if others will agree, but this is my hunch.
 

Wade K.

Registered
Australia is a white settler colony with a very defined Anglocentric identity, while Argentina, despite the arrival of European boat people, has the same history of transculturation, racial mixing, and chaotic demographic changes as the rest of Latin America. The bitterness of the Euro-descendant elite of this country comes from the fact that it never lived up to the promise (or delusion) of becoming an "outpost of European civilization." Argentina is, and always will be, just a less poor country in a region of very poor countries.
But primarily the racial mixing is in the northwest of the country, correct? Southern Italians and Spaniards were mixed from centuries of Moorish conquest long before arriving in Argentina. They to some extent have a resemblance to the mixed population of the Northwest. But the question for me is if Argentina doesn't have a substantial black population now like Brazil then why bring it up? There's nothing to be gained from creating problems where none exist. Now if you want to talk about the marginalization of the indigenous after extermination campaigns you might have something. But since most of Argentina's European population arrived after that happened it's no more fair to cast blame than on white immigrants arriving in the States after slavery. Just seems that if a population wants to see themselves as white then there are those who want to cast aspersions on them.
 

Redpossum

Registered
But primarily the racial mixing is in the northwest of the country, correct? Southern Italians and Spaniards were mixed from centuries of Moorish conquest long before arriving in Argentina. They to some extent have a resemblance to the mixed population of the Northwest. But the question for me is if Argentina doesn't have a substantial black population now like Brazil then why bring it up? There's nothing to be gained from creating problems where none exist. Now if you want to talk about the marginalization of the indigenous after extermination campaigns you might have something. But since most of Argentina's European population arrived after that happened it's no more fair to cast blame than on white immigrants arriving in the States after slavery. Just seems that if a population wants to see themselves as white then there are those who want to cast aspersions on them.
Yes, exactly. Because, of course, you end racial discrimination by practicing racial discrimination.

This trendy, fashionable nonsense makes me want to puke. And it is exactly what led so many people to vote for The Donald. Nero fiddled while Rome burned, and we argue over dusty old injustices 200 years gone while the world burns down around our ears.
 

Bajo_cero2

Registered
Australia is a white settler colony with a very defined Anglocentric identity, while Argentina, despite the arrival of European boat people, has the same history of transculturation, racial mixing, and chaotic demographic changes as the rest of Latin America. The bitterness of the Euro-descendant elite of this country comes from the fact that it never lived up to the promise (or delusion) of becoming an "outpost of European civilization." Argentina is, and always will be, just a less poor country in a region of very poor countries.
The racial delusion in Argentina was a germanic influence in the 30´of the XX century whose example to follow was Australia (see Macri´s speeches and plans: https://www.lanacion.com.ar/sociedad/de-la-economia-del-avestruz-a-la-del-canguro-por-que-no-somos-australia-y-que-necesitamos-para-serlo-nid2242557/) because, as a former colony of Spain, the policy was always the integration of the local populations. The same happened with former slaves. I posted some months ago a study that showed that about 15 or 20% (I do not remember) of its population has African gens.
In my personal case, I have Italian, French, Russian Jude, Polish and native american (mapuche) blood. My children has to add Chinese and Korean blood.
 
Last edited:

Fiscal

Registered
From Fiscal's posts, he lives in the province of Santa Fe. That area had lots of immigration of Ukrainian Jews, very white skin color.

It all depends on the province. If you go to Jujuy, most of the population has indigenous features. I'd say Argentina is much whiter, maybe the whitest, however we want to define that, than most of the countries in the Americas.
I live in a small town in Santa Fe, like hillbilly country Arkansas is the best way to put it. The place looks like a nazi summer camp, but not as well run
 

Fiscal

Registered
Australia is a white settler colony with a very defined Anglocentric identity, while Argentina, despite the arrival of European boat people, has the same history of transculturation, racial mixing, and chaotic demographic changes as the rest of Latin America. The bitterness of the Euro-descendant elite of this country comes from the fact that it never lived up to the promise (or delusion) of becoming an "outpost of European civilization." Argentina is, and always will be, just a less poor country in a region of very poor countries.
Are you saying "transculturation" and "racial mixing" are inherently bad or counterproductive to a society?
 
Top