U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-29-2019, 01:18 PM
Status: "Hope is last to lose it..." (set 1 day ago)
 
5,214 posts, read 8,037,624 times
Reputation: 4269

Advertisements

Just to add to Joacocanal that some Venezuelans have told me that there are less whites now than before in Venezuela. Its something that can be seen at street level too. I’m sure there are still many whites in Venezuela, but their actual numbers has gone down with so many years of Chavez and especially Maduro. This change happen mostly due to emigration.

There are no stats to back this up yet, but a few Venezuelans of all types that I met have said the same thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-29-2019, 02:21 PM
 
146 posts, read 27,850 times
Reputation: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by joacocanal View Post
but they (Chileans) are less White on average than Colombians, Cubans, Venezuelans, Costa Ricans, which disproves your point on the Southern Cone being more White than other parts of LatAm.


some maps and studies to prove my point (I hope, once and for all):
https://imgur.com/a/aWLv8Zh

https://imgur.com/a/KjIAgKL

https://imgur.com/a/9OUCAJS

https://imgur.com/a/jc2NYE4

what is laughable about it? I said that there are, proportionally, more Afro Uruguayans than Afro Ecuadorians or Afro Peruvians. That's a fact.

wat

Exactly, and that proves my point. Chile preferred to associate with countries that according to you have nothing in common with them (Mexico, Colombia, Peru) instead than doing it with their "Southern Cone" brothers.

it doesn't matter, the climate/biome is not radically different north and south of the Capricorn line. And Sao Paulo still has a lower average temperature (19ºC) than Asunción (23ºC).

It is and the point is that Argentina and Chile don't share the same dialect and there isn't a "Southern Cone Spanish".

Sure, India was so no important for the British... Malaysia, Singapore, Eastern Africa etc etc. The British never tried to get control all over the Spanish ports in the Caribbean sea multiple times, Havana, Veracruz, Cartagena, Portobello etc...

so what? the point is that there are many White blonde Venezuelans, descendants of the thousand Europeans that arrived at Venezuela in the XX century. There are tons of very dark Chilean Mestizos, also in Argentina and Uruguay. There are many Afro Uruguayans. There are many Blacks in Chile and they are rightful citizens, they come from Haiti, the Pacific coast of Colombia, Venezuela, the DR etc.

Blacks were a big factor on the Independence battles of Chile: https://www.elquintopoder.cl/cultura...independencia/

Yes, Venezuela is very chaotic, so is Argentina, a very chaotic country in a huge crisis.

I proved you are wrong over and over. There are many Blacks and Mulattoes in Uruguay since Colonial times; in Southern Brazil too, because migration from other regions of Brazil, among other factors.

There are 900.000 Indigenous peoples in Argentina, according to the 2010 National Census. Proportionally, it's a similar figure to that of Colombia (3% of the pop of both countries).

No correlation.

The most developed countries in AFrica are tropical ones: Mauritius, Seychelles. South Africa is more developed than Subsaharan countries but it's less developed than any tropical South American country except Bolivia (lower HDI).

in Asia you have very developed countries in the tropics such as Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia (to a degree). Thailand is developing fast. Countries like Afghanistan, Nepal or Kyrgyzstan are not tropical and have fairly cold climate, but they are poor.

In South America, Panama, Costa Rica, several Antillean countries and even Colombia, Peru and Ecuador are more developed than Paraguay or Bolivia, which are near the Tropic of Capricorn. Panama and Costa Rica are wealthier and more developed than Argentina.

at this point you just sound butthurt that I proved you wrong so many times. I already showed you that Southern cone countries don't have a lower population density than the other South American countries; and that no country in South America is "overpopulated" (all of them having population densities below or well below World average except Ecuador).

but you are also very wrong regarding the "poor, unstable" part. I already said that Chile was just as poor as most of Latin America during a good part of its history. It's also suffered a merciless dictatorship, have you heard about Pinochet?

Argentina's history is like the definition of unstability, politically and economically speaking. Anyone knows that.

Uruguay had it all to be as rich as a Western European country, in the early XX century. Unstability and authoritarism inhibited the country from it.

On the other side, countries like Colombia and Costa Rica have been much more stable, not having any important dictatorship periods (Colombia had one dictator for 4 years in the 50s, but it was a pretty soft dictator compared to Southern Cone dictatorships).


the largest sets of Spanish and Portuguese colonial architecture are located in Mexico, Peru, Colombia, Ecuador, and in areas of Brazil like Rio, Bahia, Minas etc.
1) Where are you from ?, You sound really bitter about (Southern Cone ) being the most prosperous and whitest region in Latin America. (Those are facts). I dont see too many indigenous looking people or too many blacks in southern cone on a regular basis unlike regions such as North and North east Brazil, Caribbean , Colombia , Mexico, Peru or even venezuela. Most people (not all ) in southern cone are just meztizo with a more Caucasian tendency. (Fact!).

2) Chile not being part of Mercosur doesnt mean it doesn't have anything in common with Argentina , Uruguay or Paraguay . (Pacific Alliance ) is a merely economical Bloc. (Mercosur) its more than that, it's also political and cultural . Colombia is not necessarily very similar to Peru .

3) Again (Sao Paulo ) is not southern cone given the fact that the term (southern cone ) is first (geographical) and it means that it only includes regions and countries located mostly (inside the triangle shape landmass ) .

4) rioplatense accent (it's an accent) not another language . Btw it's Spanish .

5) South Asia and South East Asia were already very populated and stablished civilizations plus since they lie in the tropics , Europeans didn't find them too attractive to settle , otherwise they certainly would have taken control over them . Tropical zones are not good for food agriculture beside sugar canes and cotton fields , why do you think Latin countries didn't get strong European settlements execept in the southern cone that lies In a temperate zone better for agriculture

6) the more south you in south America the more whites you'll encounter (particularly in the Patagonia. (Chile/Argentina ) . Yes there are whites in tropical areas like in Venezuela, Cuba, North east Brasil but they're mostly browns and mixed , and lots of blacks , we don't have to be genius to know that

7) blacks were sent in wars in the southern cone area to get them killed and get rid of them on purpose. Read history

8) don't you think chaotic Venezuela is way more dramatic than chaotic Argentina? ... LMAO ( Venezuela is practically In a dictatorship), people are literally fleeing the country because they are starving and don't have anything left . (Get a grip )

9) all the indigenous combined population of the southern cone will never be as large as Peru, Mexico, Ecuador, Bolivia and Amazonas Brazil . (The Brazilian Amazon ) has literally jungle people living in it. Yes there are a few pure Indigenous and blacks here and there in Argentina or Chile but still not a majority (get a grip)

10) I love it when you say the most developed countries in Africa and in the tropics are (tiny little nations ). Irrelevant in the global sphere . South Africa is still the most prosperous Sub saharn country (also with the largest European migration ) (get a grip)

11) I love it when you compare tiny countries like Costa Rica or Panama to Argentina (get a grip) , Peru or Colombia have a larger population so that means bigger problems and more poverty than a country like Paraguay (a southern cone country ) colombia with its drugs cartels shouldn't be compare to any southern cone country or Peru and its large slumbs make southern cone countries a little bit more Inhabitable.

12) so what a big difference Chile was able to achieve in a few decades !! From dictatorship to being the most developed Latin country . Venezuela is still figuring it out , Colombia and Mexico and great part of the tropical Brazil still on their way . Southern cone has been there and done that

13) People like to give a hard time to Argentina , yet when a random Latin country does a little progress they talk as if they were becoming the new European Union over night . Still no other Latin country has achieved all what Argentina has

14) Colombia had something worse than dictatorship (it has drugs cartels, guerrilla, terrorist).

15) European Architecture is more than just (Spanish And Portuguese architecture) , Buenos Aires , Santiago and Porto Alegre (the largest southern cone cities ) have overwhelmingly a more generalized European vibe in their historical buildings such as English, French, Italian, German and even Russian (SO THIS FACT OBVIOUSLY SUPPORT MY OBSERVATION THAT THE CLOSEST REGIONS TO THE EARTH POLES HAD A STRONGER EUROPEAN INFLUENCE . Look at the countries and some of their major cities near the artic and antartica USA ( New York ), Canada (Montreal ) ,Argentina (Buenos Aires ), Chile (Santiago) ,South Africa (Cape Town ) , Australia (Sydney) , New Zealand (Auckland) and of course Europe .

DO YOU STILL THINK THERES NO ANY CORRELATION?????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2019, 03:25 PM
 
Location: London, UK
2,876 posts, read 1,551,564 times
Reputation: 1621
Argentina, Uruguay and Southern Brazil are the whitest parts of Latin America.
Then comes Colombia, Venezuela and Costa Rica.
Even Cuba pre-revolution was substantially white, Chile comes after pre-50's Cuba yet is still the most prosperous country in Latin America. Sure there was a move to supplant the Mapuche population in Southern Chile with some French and German migration but still Chile is very much a Mestizo country and Venezuelans/Colombians/Costa Ricans generally have more Caucasian facial features than Chileans do.

A correlation of course exists. A system of white supremacy, colonialism and exploitation for the past 600 years has of course allowed the more prosperous parts of the world to be white (with the exception of the powers of East Asia pre-European aggression i.e. pre-1800's and the rise of East Asia post World War II).
This is in huge part due to brutal and exploitative tactics and having directly or more importantly indirectly benefited from this wealth generation from conquest, subjugation and of course invention - not exactly something to be ultra-proud of (in its entirety).

However things are changing. You don't see Mexicans moving to Argentina but you do see the opposite. Lots of Argentinians move to Mexico for more career and job opportunities. This is quite telling of current global trends. Sure you can live in the past in a bygone era but the present is another matter and the world is changing rapidly.

Brazil is currently experiencing an identity crisis and evidence of this is the rise of white supremacist ideology. Its also quite an insular country and have very little notion of the realities of the rest of South America let alone the rest of Latin America. In that respect they're like the United States with people fond of pigeon holing just to make things simpler for them to understand. Eg. In the mind of a somewhat educated Brazilian, North Brazil = Venezuela/Colombia, Chile is White and Southern Cone, Mexico is Native and poorer than Argentina; Cuba, Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico are Black/Pardo/Mulato. When in fact this is somewhat removed from reality.

The thought that Porto Alegre has more European architecture than somewhere like Bogota is laughable. Have you seen the amount of British architecture in Bogota? In fact 10%-25% of the DNA of many people in Bogota has British-Irish roots, its just not something talked about very often because this is a reality more-so in the lower-middle social classes than in the upper social classes which tend to stem from Spain or other Southern European ancestry mixed with the Muisca (Chibcha) Indigenous civilization.

Luckily that contagion (Bolsanaro-Trumpesque ideology) has yet to re-assert itself in northern South America/Meso-America. We'll see if this trend continues or not...




Last edited by Pueblofuerte; 04-29-2019 at 04:03 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2019, 03:32 PM
 
146 posts, read 27,850 times
Reputation: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
Just to add to Joacocanal that some Venezuelans have told me that there are less whites now than before in Venezuela. Its something that can be seen at street level too. I’m sure there are still many whites in Venezuela, but their actual numbers has gone down with so many years of Chavez and especially Maduro. This change happen mostly due to emigration.

There are no stats to back this up yet, but a few Venezuelans of all types that I met have said the same thing.
Venezuela indeed received a big European migration (and it was maybe because of that one the richest countries in the Americas ) but again today most Venezuelans have a strong multiracial admixture, I have met many Venezuelans and yes many of them were very caucasians but most of them fall into the tipical Latino stereotyped appearance. After all Venezuela lies in the tropics near the amazon and not too far from the ancient Inca civilization and its remainace (Peru)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2019, 03:56 PM
 
Location: London, UK
2,876 posts, read 1,551,564 times
Reputation: 1621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Untasted View Post
After all Venezuela lies in the tropics near the amazon and not too far from the ancient Inca civilization and its remainace (Peru)
This is funny. Coastal Venezuela (Where most people live) is as far away from the Amazon as Krakow is from Istanbul and if Zurich was Caracas, the Inca civilization of Peru would be as far away as Mali in West Africa. This is what I mean by pigeon holing and limited exposure of global realities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2019, 04:14 PM
 
146 posts, read 27,850 times
Reputation: 28
[quote=joacocanal;55058402]
in Asia you have very developed countries in the tropics such as Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia (to a degree). Thailand is developing fast. Countries like Afghanistan, Nepal or Kyrgyzstan are not tropical and have fairly cold climate, but they are poor.

1) you're such a lier for not unknowledging my observation about the correlation that exist around the Earth poles . All of the regions and countries near the artic and antartica in the temperate zone are the most prosperous in their respective regions because of the European Migration. Look at where all these nations/regions are located ,!!!!!!!
( Europe, Russia , Siberia.) , USA/Canada (in North America ) , Southern cone (in south America ), South Africa (in Africa ) , Australia/New Zealand (in Oceania) . They all lie in temperate zones of the earth

2) IN FACT there are only two regions in the world that lie in the subtropical/temperate zone BESIDE THE EUROPEANS AND THEIR DESCENDANTS and they happen to be the only ones to challenge European power and economy. EAST ASIA (China, Japan and the Koreas) and the GREATER MIDDLE EAST (including North Africa , Central Asia and North India that have a strong middle eastern /Muslim influence ). JAPAN and SAUDI ARABIA are the only NON-EUROPEAN or WESTERNIZED countries with one the highest income (according to world bank) . This has to do with race , since the eastern Asians ( in particular) have been the only race/culture that could challenge Western powers followed by the Arabs .

Last edited by Untasted; 04-29-2019 at 04:27 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2019, 04:17 PM
 
146 posts, read 27,850 times
Reputation: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pueblofuerte View Post
This is funny. Coastal Venezuela (Where most people live) is as far away from the Amazon as Krakow is from Istanbul and if Zurich was Caracas, the Inca civilization of Peru would be as far away as Mali in West Africa. This is what I mean by pigeon holing and limited exposure of global realities.
Peru and Venezuela are still in the same region (in the northern part south America ). Very far from the southern cone
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2019, 05:27 PM
 
146 posts, read 27,850 times
Reputation: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grabandgo View Post
Funny how a lot of people let the buildings of Buenos aires convince them that Argentina is somewhat more developed, white or European or whatever.

All those buildings where built in a era of huge immigration and economic growth, now they serve as a curtain to cover the economic collapse of that country.

Sure when you are driving around downtown BS it doesn't look that poor, but the fact is that Argentina has been going down for the last 30 years and today has a GDP-PPP lower than Panama. inflation is huge, and so is crime. Uruguay, the same, in 2018 Uruguay had a murder rate higher than the Dominican Republic.
but it keeps selling its self as the safest country in South America.

Argentina and Uruguay are still selling the image of a bygone era, and lots of people still buys that. but the facts are slowing catching up.

Other latin countries are not doing better . Mexico , Colombia , Venezuela , most part of brazil are still more f $#/^ed up than southern cone (nobody said this region is first world) but in comparison to those millions FAVELAS in brazils and illegals plus refugees from Mexico and venezuela . Southern cone at least is ahead of other latin countries. Yes people buy the European architecture and culture , that's why everyone still a bit fascinated by Argentina , particularly buenos aires , I Lived in New York for 5 years and visited Buenos Aires for a week and the similarities between the 2 cities are incredible (of course New York is more modern and better maintained ). But the similarities are impressive. Argentina nor the southern cone is as bad as the media say it is
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2019, 06:11 PM
 
146 posts, read 27,850 times
Reputation: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pueblofuerte View Post
Argentina, Uruguay and Southern Brazil are the whitest parts of Latin America.
Then comes Colombia, Venezuela and Costa Rica.
Even Cuba pre-revolution was substantially white, Chile comes after pre-50's Cuba yet is still the most prosperous country in Latin America. Sure there was a move to supplant the Mapuche population in Southern Chile with some French and German migration but still Chile is very much a Mestizo country and Venezuelans/Colombians/Costa Ricans generally have more Caucasian facial features than Chileans do.

A correlation of course exists. A system of white supremacy, colonialism and exploitation for the past 600 years has of course allowed the more prosperous parts of the world to be white (with the exception of the powers of East Asia pre-European aggression i.e. pre-1800's and the rise of East Asia post World War II).
This is in huge part due to brutal and exploitative tactics and having directly or more importantly indirectly benefited from this wealth generation from conquest, subjugation and of course invention - not exactly something to be ultra-proud of (in its entirety).

However things are changing. You don't see Mexicans moving to Argentina but you do see the opposite. Lots of Argentinians move to Mexico for more career and job opportunities. This is quite telling of current global trends. Sure you can live in the past in a bygone era but the present is another matter and the world is changing rapidly.

Brazil is currently experiencing an identity crisis and evidence of this is the rise of white supremacist ideology. Its also quite an insular country and have very little notion of the realities of the rest of South America let alone the rest of Latin America. In that respect they're like the United States with people fond of pigeon holing just to make things simpler for them to understand. Eg. In the mind of a somewhat educated Brazilian, North Brazil = Venezuela/Colombia, Chile is White and Southern Cone, Mexico is Native and poorer than Argentina; Cuba, Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico are Black/Pardo/Mulato. When in fact this is somewhat removed from reality.

The thought that Porto Alegre has more European architecture than somewhere like Bogota is laughable. Have you seen the amount of British architecture in Bogota? In fact 10%-25% of the DNA of many people in Bogota has British-Irish roots, its just not something talked about very often because this is a reality more-so in the lower-middle social classes than in the upper social classes which tend to stem from Spain or other Southern European ancestry mixed with the Muisca (Chibcha) Indigenous civilization.

Luckily that contagion (Bolsanaro-Trumpesque ideology) has yet to re-assert itself in northern South America/Meso-America. We'll see if this trend continues or not...



1) finally someone who can use more intelectual words to explain what I've been trying to say to everyone. I dont try to be racist or to descriminate, what I say are just facts , based on my research but I have objections to 2 points you made

2 ) Argentinian inmgrants in Mexico is very different from the Mexican inmigrants in the USA . Argentinians who migrate to Mexico are many artists , actors , or some more better prepared (academically speaking ) people ., unlike mexicans whom mostly are poor and uneducated who migrate to the USA . (Another fact of why argentinians migrate to mexico is because they are required for their more european looks for the mexican television since mexico apparently cannot fullfill its standart of beauty from its own population.) We have to add the fact that Mexico because of its proximity to the USA have the most Influential media network in Latin America (televisa) . Another fact Argentinians , Uruguayans , are among the best prepared inmigrants community in the USA so more than other Latinos community.

3) it's very easy to verify the Porto Alegre vs Bogota (of which is more european ) . Let's just Google their skyline and we'll notice Porto Alegre being more european in aspect . I dont doubt Bogota has european Influence just like all American cities , but again southern cone wins in this aspect in Latin America . .. maybe it's harder to notice Bogota european influence because first it's an urban aglomeration of 8 millions , doubling Porto Alegre with 4 million and second because Bogota slums are much wide spread out overshadowing its British Influence

Last edited by Untasted; 04-29-2019 at 06:41 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2019, 07:02 AM
 
729 posts, read 382,426 times
Reputation: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Untasted View Post
It's pointless to argue with Paulistas ( they don't use logic to measure which areas are more prosperous). Sao paulo and the whole south east region has over 80 million people, when the south has over 30 million . Of course the south east will be richer but also less equal among its population. This is like comparing Mexico City to Buenos Aires. Mexico City is larger but Buenos Aires has a better standart of quality of life. Again the southern cone region is not too densely populated like other Brazilian or Hispanic American region
Sao Paulo has better GINI coefficient than Parana and Rio Grande do sul, just little worse than Santa Catarina. Overall better GDP per capita, HDI and GINI... Where do you figure out this better standard of living for the souther Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay ?
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

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top