Talk:Social apartheid in Brazil

Demagogy

APARTHEID was a regime in South Africa where people were segregated by law. In Brazil we have a portion of 18% of the population that isn´t prepared to compete in capitalism, because they lack good education and infrastructure. Therefore, poverty in Brazil is not caused by a deliberated wish of a regime. On the contrary, the erradication of poverty an important desire of the brazilian society and government. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.55.62.247 (talk) 16:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old POV template with a dormant discussion, per the instructions on that template's page:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

If editors are continuing to work toward resolution of any issue and I missed it, however, please feel free to restore. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:20, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I've restored the tag as the initial issues that led to it being placed have not been resolved, and the discussion does resume with some regularity. Perhaps it's time to try again.Cúchullain ^t/c 13:14, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

A good first step would be to make the changes you want to see explicit here on the talk page (or de-archive the relevant section). Given the low editor traffic this appears to get (only 3-4 edits this year), I'd say nothing's stopping you from fixing the problem as you see fit for now. Even after skimming the archive, I'm not clear on the exact crux of the remaining dispute; I simply want to make sure that this article isn't being "perma-tagged." Tanks for your help with this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:26, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. I'll leave the tag for now, however, as I have a feeling anything I do will be reverted.Cúchullain ^t/c 13:32, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good--enjoy your Wednesday-- Khazar2 (talk) 13:38, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll start work on this today.Cúchullain ^t/c 13:56, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Since it looks as though your edits have held for a week without any dispute, is it all right with you if I remove the tag? Or do you feel there's more work still to be done? -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:33, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

As it's held up so far, I've removed the tag. There's more work to be done, but if the dispute arises again in the future we'll handle it as it comes. Thanks for your input, Khazar.Cúchullain ^t/c 14:15, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick attention to it! I'm de-watching this article now, but feel free to ping me if related issues come up in the future. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:20, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll be doing a bit more work on it here and there.Cúchullain ^t/c 15:31, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Problems with this article

This article is fairly outdated. There have been radical changes in Brazil in the last two decades. Many of the references used in building the article are from the early to mid 90's and some are from the early 2000's. There have been many changes in the social structure, the middle class has grown significantly with the policies of Lula over the past decade and the idea of racial stratification is much less so now than it was two decades ago. I do not have any sources to back this up, but I have recently returned from spending a month in Brazil and I was last there in 2007 - the differences in those seven years are huge.

Also, as has been mentioned above, in reality, though there may be a stratification in terms of income by race, the races interact on a social level in Brazil much more fluidly than in the US. In social setting and even in families, there is a large mixing of races and today, most people do not seem to differentiate between race. Even in upper middle class families and social groups, there are whites, blacks, pardos and others including Japanese people and they all seem to engage with one another on an equal level. I was even told by an older white Brazilian that he does not actually notice race or skin colour differences in people, it's not sometime that is forefront in mind. In one example, an new in-law to the family was a fairly dark skinned pardo and this person only noticed it when the pardo himself mentioned his skin colour.

This article should be seriously revamped or perhaps deleted. There are still many relevant topics that are discussed and social and economic disparity continue to be major issues in Brazil. However there are many statements made in the article that are not really true in 2014 and the focus on race seems to be misplaced in Brazil of 2014.

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esoulliere (talk • contribs) 21:08, 24 September 2014 (UTC) 

Misleading Image

Where is the image used in this page from? The one that specifies the northern states are majority white, and the south are majority mixed. Not to say that the southern states do not experience this, but northern Brazil is much more racially mixed due to its deep connections to slavery and colonialism, as the first region to be colonized. States in the south experienced more immigration from Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and have stronger rates of whiteness. Much of the Afro-Brazilian and mixed population in the South moved there from the north due to opportunity, and in the 19th century due to a mass transfer of slaves during the coffee production phase of plantation economies at the time. This also has created more of an "apartheid" culture in Brazil in southern states because there is a lot of resentment of darker northern people. This image needs to be removed, and much of the material on this page needs to be updated or removed altogether.