Are you Brazilian?

Then what you said really is laughable.

:lol: :100:

No, I guess you already know I am Spanish! :eyes:

No, I guess you already know I am Spanish! :eyes: — javi2541997

I didn't know. I was going to ask you a bunch of questions if you were. :grin:

:sparkle: :up:
We all learn something new everyday here!

There weren’t native peoples of Brazil because “Brazil” is a creation of Portugal and the only official language of Brazil is Portuguese. The rest are just spoken languages. — javi2541997

Make sure you include an emoticon of a clown mask, when you type such words Javi or readers will think you have lost your way.
Just in-case your serious. These might help you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Brazil
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_in_Brazil

There weren’t native peoples of Brazil because “Brazil” is a creation of Portugal — javi2541997

Are there no native Americans because that place became named after a mapmaker?

Javi or readers will think you have lost your way. — universeness

They already believe I completely lost my way... :sparkle:

Are there no native Americans because that place became named after a mapmaker? — universeness

I didn't say that. I said that "Brazil" is a state created due to the independence from Portugal.
Before Portuguese galleons arrived to America, there were living indigenous people but that specific territory wasn't named as "Brazil" until the Portuguese conquerors decided to put this name.

Before Portuguese galleons arrived to America, there were living indigenous people but that specific territory wasn't named as "Brazil" until the Portuguese conquerors decided to put this name. — javi2541997

That's the whole point Javi. There were millions of people living on that land mass before it was named after the relative nobody Amerigo Vespucci. Brazil was named by the Portuguese after a common tree that grew along the coast (brazilwood tree) in that particular landmass. There is not a lot of significance in that. Some 2000 tribes of people lived on that landmass for thousands of years longer than it was labelled Brazil. It's very insulting and historically ignorant to hand wave away the significance of the crime of genocide, inflicted on the indigenous people of the land mass, now labelled as Brazil, by European horrors such as the Portuguese empire and their accompanying offerings, such as influenza, smallpox, god, the Portuguese language and gunpowder.

That's the whole point Javi. — universeness

Thanks for understanding me, friend.
:up: :sparkle:

I do understand some of your more unpalatable world views friend, which is why I am trying to debate stuff with you. As it seems to me, you have a great deal of good in you as well.

I look forward to the day when you type about the completely unjust and genocidal treatment of the global indigenous populations which existed all over this planet.
I look forward to your insistence that the remainder of these 'first nations' must be fully respected, protected and have their future secured.
We could still learn so much from them about how to treat and respect the ecology of our planet.
I look forward to your typing's about how angry you feel about the more horrific history of the peoples who live/have lived on the landmass, whose name has changed from Iberia/Hispania to Spain, in the same way I am angry with the more horrific history of the landmass I currently live on.
You can start such typing's whenever you feel enlightened enough to do so.
Yeah, I know, just like you, I can be a sarcastic sod as well.

Thanks for understanding me, friend. — javi2541997

I only tried to explain that Brazil (despite all the negative characteristics you put over Portugal) is not an indigenous concept but Portuguese. I was speaking about etymology.
If you want from me to recognise how bloody my country is I would say yes. You are right. Spain has committed a lot of bad stuff around America but this is another different topic and I think we already discussed this issue at the "shoutbox"
If you want to me to say sorry I will not do it. Because the "genocide" was perpetrated by landlords and vassals of the king. My family (and the most part of Spanish families) were not involved in such stuff.
"Spain" is a concept created by Romans too. I guess I should find some responsibilities to the Italians. Italy bad and bloody for making disappear the Iberians.

I was speaking about etymology. — javi2541997

So was I Javi. That about covers the importance of a countries name imo, its nothing but mere etymology. You did inspire me to write a wee thread however. I would be interested in any post you contribute to it. Only if it interests you of course.

He was just saying that the political entity, Brazil, has no indigenous people. The continent of South America does. No need to get offended.

I know what he was 'just typing,' I was not personally offended. Perhaps the indigenous people of Brazil would be?

So you go on my ignore list. :up:

:rofl: It's fascinating that you think such an act has any significance. If you convince everyone on TPF to do the same then, yes, you will certainly succeed in diminishing whatever presence or influence I have on others through TPF and I would either stop posting here or post much less until perhaps I got responses from new members but on a planet of almost 8 billion people, the little tantrums of frank are not as significant as you obviously think they are.

I hope Bolsenaro concedes his defeat, and Brazil gets a break from post-truth, COVID-denying, environmemt-destroying assholes. Lula is a good man, and Brazil needs good people at the top.

A coup is unlikely. I’m guessing he’ll simply do what Trump did: scream fraud with zero evidence and energize his base, so that perhaps they do the dirty work for him, a la January 6th. — Mikie

So far this hasn’t been the case. He’s been much more subtle about it than Trump. He’s not conceded, but not yelled about fraud (yet). He’s also not told his supporters to stop blocking the streets, of course. Still, not what I was suspecting.

Apparently many of his top officials and allies in the senate have already congratulated Lula— which makes things harder.

Isn’t it something that Brazil is handling things better than the US. January 1st can’t come soon enough.

“I don’t understand it that well, but they have to intervene and hold new elections,” said Andrea Vaz, 51, a computer-hardware seller holding a sign that said, “Fraud in the voting machines!” at a large protest outside the Brazilian Army’s national headquarters in Brasília. “We saw various videos. People giving out money, buying votes,” she added. “There’s proof.”

Mass delusion at its best.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/02/world/americas/bolsonaro-election-protests.html

They likely would be being referred to as ‘people’ rather than peoples ;)

Most natives of the Americas were actually wiped out by disease rather than - as many like to believe - war and genocide. War and genocide barely did anything compared to this.

There was mass corruption that led to the regime shift. I am talking about astronomical levels of corruption here btw.

Was Lulu innocent or set up by US officials? Probably the later … but I’m a cynic :D

Most natives of the Americas were actually wiped out by disease rather than - as many like to believe - war and genocide. War and genocide barely did anything compared to this. — I like sushi

I think I already covered your points earlier, including your concern about 'people' rather than 'peoples,' with:

Some 2000 tribes of people lived on that landmass for thousands of years longer than it was labelled Brazil. It's very insulting and historically ignorant to hand wave away the significance of the crime of genocide, inflicted on the indigenous people of the land mass, now labelled as Brazil, by European horrors such as the Portuguese empire and their accompanying offerings, such as influenza, smallpox, god, the Portuguese language and gunpowder. — universeness

I was just stating a fact about what happened to the indigenous peoples of the americas. To equate the spread of disease with genocide is silly. It is estimated that over 90% of the population died due to the ravages of disease … such is NOT genocide.

The Portuguese were incredibly brutal because they literally emptied their prisons and sent them to Brasil. If you were being sold as a slave you would 100% want to be taken to the states rather than Brasil that is for sure!

Lord Thomas Cochrane was a significant figure in South America. He almost single handedly booted the Spanish and Portuguese out. Interesting guy to study if you like history.

I was just stating a fact about what happened to the indigenous peoples of the americas. To equate the spread of disease with genocide is silly. It is estimated that over 90% of the population died due to the ravages of disease … such is NOT genocide. — I like sushi

Well, I appreciate what you mean but there is a valid argument that if the Portuguese and the Spanish were not as brutal as they proved to be, then they would not have inadvertently introduced these diseases at a time when the civilisations of South America were unable to defend against them.
Would it not have been much better, if the Portuguese and the Spanish had worked with and traded with the native tribes instead of murdering them. Perhaps they could have even helped them combat the deadly diseases they introduced them to. I agree that they did not intend to introduce their diseases to the 2000 tribes of Brazil but it was their murderous activity that increased the rate and extent of the spread. I think that it's fair to lay some of the blame of the resultant genocide at the door of the Portuguese. At least more so, than it is valid to lay the blame for Covid at the door of the Chinese.
It is also very important not to minimise the number of indigenous people that such invaders did personally, physically slaughter.

Lord Thomas Cochrane — I like sushi

I am more familiar with the efforts of Simon Bolivar in ridding South America of foreign invaders, but I have heard of Cochrane, but considered him more as a mercenary whose main motivation was wealth acquisition rather than being driven by a moral imperative to deliver the indigenous peoples of South America from the Spanish and Portuguese. A quick wiki reminder confirmed he also fought for the Greeks and was convicted of fraudulent activity on the stock exchange. Many such 'English Lords of the British Empire,' were global mercenaries in search of fame and fortune but I personally consider all such character's nefarious individuals who warrant no historical respect.

You need to read up on your history :D

So many assumptions you make there it is laughable :D

You think people coming from Europe could some how not breath? Be serious. As soon as a reasonable number of people were infected it led to collapse of civilisations in the Americas without ANY hostile intention on the part of those landing there.

There is evidence for this along the Amazon where it was reported there were large kingdoms by explorers. Upon returning later no one found these mythical kingdoms … because everyone died of disease. Modern archeology has shed light on this.

You need to read up on your history — I like sushi

Are you not assuming you know more about history than I do?
What assumptions are you making?

As soon as a reasonable number of people were infected it led to collapse of civilisations in the Americas without ANY hostile intention on the part of those landing there. — I like sushi

But they did have hostile intentions along with any ailments they brought with them. The British and the French did the same to the native peoples of North America and Canada. More natives have died due to disease that war, but this is true in all of human history. Many more people have died of influenza variants and the various plagues in history than the total number killed in all wars ever. So does that mean we can dilute the horrors of war because disease has killed more people?
Is the human immorality of war more forgivable because you cannot judge disease as inherently immoral?

There is evidence for this along the Amazon where it was reported there were large kingdoms by explorers. Upon returning later no one found these mythical kingdoms … because everyone died of disease. Modern archeology has shed light on this. — I like sushi

Now who is making historical assumptions. How do you or they know how many died and how many survived and abandoned the place because so many died? Petra, Uruk, Ur and hundreds of other city state remains exist today and some have been fully excavated.
There was a myriad of reasons reported as to why such early settlements were eventually abandoned, disease was not the only reason.