Both used slavery and abused natives, but why Brasil isn't

>>2861381
No Protestant work ethic.

Dixie didn't do anything that made the United States as successful as now.

>>2861393
>reject Protestantism in favor of deism, freemasonry and secularism
>Protestant work ethic
What did he mean by this?

The confederates lost in the US, in Brazil they never left power

No free (FREE) farmland in the West, and no access to immigrating European professionals/capital in the mid-late 1800s

One is the blackest country outside of Africa.

File: christian_flag.jpg (174KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1600x1200px

>>2861403
The US Gov't does not represent all Americans.

>>2861422
The second is Deffinitly false and the first is false unless you have a specific definition of free.

>>2861381
because brazil is the natives

>>2861402
This. Out of everything that built America slavery wasn't one of them.

Reminder that if it wasn't for slavery the entire American continent from the tip of terra del fuego to Canada, Passing through the Caribbeans, would be free of blacks. One thing is to cross the Mediterranean, another is to cross the Atlantic and blacks are still to this day incapable of doing that. Imagine a white Caribbean...

It's quite simple.

USA:
>people dedicated to seeing it flourish as their own thing even while it was a colony
>strong national ideas about what it meant to be American
>culture itself is centered about American people doing great things for American people
>encouragement of entrepreneurship through education
>encouragement of industry
>stable government
>not afraid to strongarm neighbors into helping it
Brazil:
>nationalism does not flourish here
>no strong ideas about what it meant to be Brazilian
>culture’s development focused on the natural beauties of the country
>education was not a focus – Brazil would found its first university in the 20th Century, the US having founded its first university in the 16th Century
>encouragement of big owner agriculture – Brazil, unlike Japan and the US and many many countries, has yet to have gone through a Land Reform meaning the land is still in the hands of few people
>fucking unstable government – Semi-Constitutional Monarchy, Democracy, Fascist Dictatorship, Democracy again, Military Junta, Democracy once more (and unstable as fuck in all three times)
>after the Empire didn’t try to force its neighbors into favorable trade deals – Brazil has a really strong economy compared to Bolivia, for example, yet it doesn’t do anything to try and get great deals out of Bolivia, ending up losing money most of the time

tl;dr - The USA succeeded because it implemented literally every existing tactic in the book to succeed - it fancied itself as a great power and that's exactly how it played itself. And that's not bad at all, unlike what Brazil seems to think.

if spaniards brought women with them the whole america would be a fucking paradise

I don't get it either. Brazil is fucking huge and rich in resources. It could easily become world superpower if it would just get its shit together.

>>2861741

CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:

Brazil doesn't have a political or an economic situation to really get its people to bring it to great power level, plus entrepreneurship and dedication to innovation are not cultural things except in maybe the culturally southern region (Southern States, São Paulo and Mato Grosso do Sul).

Oh, and it's not nearly as ruthless as the USA. It has the power to be mean and force advantageous deals, yet it refuses and blames it all on others.

Brazil is just not playing the game by the rules, and that really fucking hurts it.

>>2861491
>Reminder that if it wasn't for slavery the entire American continent from the tip of terra del fuego to Canada, Passing through the Caribbeans, would be free of blacks.
Quite the bullet dodged I guess.

>Imagine a white Caribbean...
Absolutely disgusting.

>>2861450
>>2861450
just saying false isn't an argument

>>2861741
they have affirmative action like no other country on this planet

>>2861491
Slave-based economy is the only way European powers could've ever profited off the colonies after the native workforce got decimated by diseases.

>>2861538
>>nationalism does not flourish here
wrong
>>no strong ideas about what it meant to be Brazilian
wrong
>>culture’s development focused on the natural beauties of the country
not particularly/irrelevant
The rest i more or less agree but
>>after the Empire didn’t try to force its neighbors into favorable trade deals – Brazil has a really strong economy compared to Bolivia, for example, yet it doesn’t do anything to try and get great deals out of Bolivia, ending up losing money most of the time
Reminder that the war of Paraguay began with a brazilian intervention in Uruguay because they didn't want to pay denbts

>>2861901
>after the empire

Also it's true, Brazilian nationalism does not compare to other nationalisms.

>>2861911
What other nationalisms?
Plenty of successful countries have a much weaker sense of nationality, like Switzerland.

catholocism and race mixing

File: 9786071603005.jpg (24KB, 288x445px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 288x445px

This question could be almost entirely the same for all latin american countries. Why if they all started developing at a western peace at the same time (more or less), did the states and canada seem to have achieved more (in capitalist terms)? Latin american historians atribute this phenomenon to the difference in political and social projects established by the Crowns, that means, between the catholic and the protestant church. Neither of them is better than the other, but they had different goals, which led to different historial pathways and different forms of development. The fact that latin americans are catholic and northern americans aren't makes the entire difference, not just in religion but in the way life and politics are constituted.

>>2861381

Because Mediterranean Culture is fucking lazy and northern European culture is superior

>>2861381

because the American Empire controls Brazil and the world

>>2861971
what about Belize?