U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:24 AM
 
2,720 posts, read 2,221,228 times
Reputation: 1227
Default The Chilean vs Argentinean rivalry....

As an American who has been studying Spanish for quite some time and spending ample time in Latin America, the two countries I most certainly love and have spent the most time in are Argentina and Chile. I've lived in Argentina for six months and Chile a whole year. Upon understanding the two countries the first thing I noticed was this intense rivalry between the two nations.

I have to be honest, unless they're from certain parts of Chile or certain parts of Argentina, sometimes I cannot tell the Chilean or Argentinean accent appart until I hear the slang. In some cases the accents can be pretty identical. Of course there is always that Argentinean that has to stress that Italian inflection and just come off like such a pretentious fool.

I really do not know why they verbally flay each other so much but from an outsiders perspective (and from the little Spanish I've learned) I do have to say that the Argentinean cannot seem to handle a verbal joust with a loud and comical Chilean. The Argentinean to me seems so "French" in that he does not like to put up with such rowdy nonsense that Chileans dish out. Chileans to me sound like cockney Englishmen or Irishmen when they're getting into it with some one especially an Argentinean.

It's a fun thing to watch because it just looks like two brothers going at it thinking their minor differences are really that important.

Anyone else understand the rivalry between the two? I am sure it's just in jest and the two countries know they're sister states, but it's just hilarious to watch them try and one up each other.

I also do not understand their combined hatred of Peruvians, Bolivians and Paraguayans? Chileans and Argentineans tend to think they're better and "whiter" than the other three. It's pretty crazy!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:41 AM
 
Location: Gringo Gultch
396 posts, read 260,943 times
Reputation: 482
Here in Peru there is a major "distrust" for the Chileans even though they are clamoring to invest in "Peru Miracle"! Argentinians are suffered as fools for the way they squandered their economy. The animosity against the Chileans goes back to the war between the two countries and the current conflict being decided in the Hague.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 10:11 AM
 
2,720 posts, read 2,221,228 times
Reputation: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpineprince
Here in Peru there is a major "distrust" for the Chileans even though they are clamoring to invest in "Peru Miracle"! Argentinians are suffered as fools for the way they squandered their economy. The animosity against the Chileans goes back to the war between the two countries and the current conflict being decided in the Hague.
Distrust because Peruvians think that Chileans are just using Peruvian land labor and business to get rich?

Or do Peruvians just generally not like Chileans? From what I know visiting Chile and Argentina, neither country much likes Peruvians and it's mostly due to really bad racism.

What surprised me about Argentina was how poor it was or how poor it became! I was in Argentina first and then Chile, and I found Chile to be much more modern and developed. I was expecting Argentina to be the grand European country that they love to advertize. Instead I found a pretty broken economy with a lot of petty crime. I felt bad for the people.

Chile on the other hand, compared to the other Latin American countries was a well oiled machine. Little crime, clean streets, ample modern business. But I bet the corruption it lacks is simply because corruption is the law in Chile because it seems like all the laws already favor the rich and if you're a businessman you're treated way better than a migrant worker.

Just on the accent and way of talking I noticed that the Chilean is much more razor sharp and quick witted than the Argentinean. The Argentinean is much more cultured and high brow and this may come off as pretentious to other Latinos.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 06:05 PM
 
2,720 posts, read 2,221,228 times
Reputation: 1227
Anyone else?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 06:20 PM
 
Location: Canada
1,024 posts, read 856,051 times
Reputation: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarcelonaFan View Post

I also do not understand their combined hatred of Peruvians, Bolivians and Paraguayans? Chileans and Argentineans tend to think they're better and "whiter" than the other three. It's pretty crazy!
Sadly, that seems to be pretty common through out Latin America. Looking down on your neighbors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 06:40 PM
 
719 posts, read 512,180 times
Reputation: 312
Chile controls a lot of Peru, at least in the economic sense (even the national airline "LAN Peru" is only a division of the Chilean owned company LAN).

Then you have the pisco rivalry - which should be Peruvian, there is even a province in Peru named "Pisco", and the capital city of that province is also called Pisco. Chileans are simply smarter businesspeople and learned how to export it better.

Argentineans are the whitest of all, but this differs by city (Mendoza is not going to be as white as Buenos Aires). Every South American country has a white population though, even Bolivia - it's just so small it's therefore deemed irrelevant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 07:47 PM
 
Location: Montreal
267 posts, read 165,328 times
Reputation: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarcelonaFan View Post
What surprised me about Argentina was how poor it was or how poor it became! I was in Argentina first and then Chile, and I found Chile to be much more modern and developed. I was expecting Argentina to be the grand European country that they love to advertize. Instead I found a pretty broken economy with a lot of petty crime. I felt bad for the people.

Chile on the other hand, compared to the other Latin American countries was a well oiled machine. Little crime, clean streets, ample modern business. But I bet the corruption it lacks is simply because corruption is the law in Chile because it seems like all the laws already favor the rich and if you're a businessman you're treated way better than a migrant worker.
You know something, if the British had been successful in their invasions of Buenos Aires in 1806-07 and had stayed in the region long-term, Argentina would have become a country every bit as modern as Canada or Australia or the United States. (Being a temperate-zone country with a small indigenous population, Argentina as a British colony would have developed much more like Canada, Australia, etc. than India, much of British Africa, etc.) There would have been even more British investment in Argentina than in this world, and that investment money would have stayed in Argentina the way it did in British colonies like Canada or Australia, paving the way for genuine economic development. It would have developed a Canada-like mixture of English and Spanish, and more importantly, there would be far less corruption. Argentina would be a major developed economy just larger than Canada's, and would be a member of the analogue of the G7 (along with Canada, the US, the UK, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan). And real-life Argentina did have the same economic potential as Canada in the early 1900s! I consider real-life Argentina as more of an aborted First World country than a genuine Third World country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 08:06 PM
 
2,720 posts, read 2,221,228 times
Reputation: 1227
I understand what you're saying but chile didn't need colonization to be successful. It just took the basic formula. It's like the Japan of Latin America. It took a lot of the workings of Great Britain and molded it to its business and social model.

When I was in Chile it reminded me a lot of the UK while Argentina reminded me a lot of Italy and France.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 08:28 PM
 
Location: Montreal
267 posts, read 165,328 times
Reputation: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarcelonaFan View Post
I understand what you're saying but chile didn't need colonization to be successful. It just took the basic formula. It's like the Japan of Latin America. It took a lot of the workings of Great Britain and molded it to its business and social model.

When I was in Chile it reminded me a lot of the UK while Argentina reminded me a lot of Italy and France.
I'm well aware that Chile is considered the "England of South America", and it's true that Chile developed much more robust long-term institutions than Argentina even without formal British colonization; that was a function of Chile being geographically isolated from the centres of Spanish American power like Buenos Aires or Lima or Mexico City. Still, Chile was sometimes vulnerable to serious civil war, political upheaval, and dictatorship in the late 19th and 20th centuries in a way that Canada, Australia, the US, etc. weren't as much - look at the Allende and Pinochet eras, for instance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:34 PM
 
Location: Buenos Aires and La Plata, ARG
818 posts, read 394,385 times
Reputation: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by yofie View Post
You know something, if the British had been successful in their invasions of Buenos Aires in 1806-07 and had stayed in the region long-term, Argentina would have become a country every bit as modern as Canada or Australia or the United States. (Being a temperate-zone country with a small indigenous population, Argentina as a British colony would have developed much more like Canada, Australia, etc. than India, much of British Africa, etc.) There would have been even more British investment in Argentina than in this world, and that investment money would have stayed in Argentina the way it did in British colonies like Canada or Australia, paving the way for genuine economic development. It would have developed a Canada-like mixture of English and Spanish, and more importantly, there would be far less corruption. Argentina would be a major developed economy just larger than Canada's, and would be a member of the analogue of the G7 (along with Canada, the US, the UK, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan). And real-life Argentina did have the same economic potential as Canada in the early 1900s! I consider real-life Argentina as more of an aborted First World country than a genuine Third World country.
Sad but true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top