European majority in Latin America

Metaverse

Banned
Thinking about a Scenario, I wondered if the European settlers could assimilate the Natives in the whole Latin America and end it up with a majority of European descent with part Native descent in everyone, somewhat like Chile. You could have the European settlers and colonial empires initially coming and treating the Natives as equals and join them in their colonies as more European settlers keep arriving.

The end result would be a mostly European descended population with a part Native ancestry in everyone. Could this be plausible and what would be the effects, in your opinion?

Chile is the microcosm of what I'm talking about. Everyone has some Native ancestry and mostly European.
 
I have thought that most of Latin Americans are European descents and purely natives and African origin people are minorities.
 
I have thought that most of Latin Americans are European descents and purely natives and African origin people are minorities.

Perhaps based upon the narratives of the ruling class who re-define peoples and erase the heritage of indigenous and other folk. Mexico for instance, is notorious for this behavior of de-legitimizing its indigenous populace and claiming such and such numbers of people are mestizo or regarding the entire populace as mestizo, when this is not true in the totality of experience and reality in Mexico as lived by said people’s.

In the mainline Spanish colonies, we generally have this. Peru, Mexico, Colombia, Central America, Chile, Venezuela, Ecuador. Argentina, Uruguay, etc are the outliers. So do remember, that these statistics are skewed to governmental narratives 1 and 2, the life-lived experiences in said countries speak to the continued existence of a caste system based upon color and origin and percentages and so forth.
 
Chile is the microcosm of what I'm talking about. Everyone has some Native ancestry and mostly European.
One of the notable examples was Catalina de los Ríos y Lisperguer "La Quintrala"; paternally, she was of Spanish origin, while maternally, she was mixed German-Inca (75-25) ancestry.
 
Most people in Latin America are of European descent, even if they don't look like it. Now if you're asking if they could be majority European looking, which Chileans seem too not really appear as since their lighter than the stereotypical brown Latino, but darker than your average white American, I'm gonna Maybe.

For one thing This scenario would require that Latin America be much more stable and wealthy in order to attract large numbers of European immigrants. It also requires that large numbers of European are wealthy enough to head to Latin America, which is more expensive to travel to than the U.S., but who also desire to leave Europe for some reason. Mestizos need to be making money on their own and becoming rich, otherwise Euros will just marry the already whiter upper classes of Latin American society ( though if you're not picky, large numbers of Latino poor people can still be considered white). But, should brown mestizos get rich in this timeline, when they're usually poor in OTL, they'll probably try to get with European, and Levantine Arab, immigrants, so that they're children can be lighter, out of a firm of self hatred. As a result more people will be lighter skinned, but they're unlikely to be these translucent Nordic blondes to light brunettes that people imagine most Europe and white Americans to be.

The real impact of this will be less on the skin color, sort of , and more on how Latin America was already rich enough to attract Euro immigrants, even if they had to pay for their trips.

It means that the US is going to have more competition in terms of economy and that Latin America will be much more relevant to the world economy.

More scientific advancements are likely to emerge from Latin American nations, which could lead to more discoveries than otl being made.

Depending on things, Spanish and/or Portuguese will be pretty important languages, if even more important than OTL English, not only possessing a larger number of native speakers, but also a large number of second language learners.

The Latin American nations are likely to be more integrated with each other, at least economically, since they'd would be trading more often with each other rather than just having their elites siphoning the resources to Europe and U.S.

They'd be big consumers of electricity, so environmental degradation would be worse, though it could encourage earlier adaption of renewable energy, maybe.

To remind you though, this wouldn't occur because of European immigrants , but European immigrants would come because of all this.
 
@NiGHTS To take most mestizo as more European, does this not come from a sense of bias? Especially considering the countries in question, ruled generally by affluent European descendants, have an incentive in portraying everyone as either Mestizo or Castizo or otherwise mixed, despite this not being the case and certainly not the lived reality. This is a very clear cut issue.
 

Metaverse

Banned
Interesting insights @NiGHTS !

So I can think a planned development of colonies with an active participation and assimilation of the Natives along with good agricultural practices along with Technological developments would give this.

Not about the topic(European majority) but about what you said about the economic development, I wonder how USA and it's dominance would take shape in this world. Or would the Mega Latin American nation speaking Spanish be the superpower?
 
@NiGHTS To take most mestizo as more European, does this not come from a sense of bias? Especially considering the countries in question, ruled generally by affluent European descendants, have an incentive in portraying everyone as either Mestizo or Castizo or otherwise mixed, despite this not being the case and certainly not the lived reality. This is a very clear cut issue.
Last I saw, genetics test pointed to most Latinos having European ancestry, with the degree varying from area and class. I imagine it's like how most black people in the US have some form of European ancestry. The thing with the Mexican government is that it tends to portray everyone as mestizo, and they tend to erase erase both afro and euro looking Latinos, and even purely indigenous people are seen as mestizo, even if they aren't, since they speak Spanish. Of course, Euro Latinos and brown Latinos make up the upper and lower classes, but it's still true that many on each side are of a mixed ancestry. And there are unusual cases in which, unless I misread this, a group of people mostly looked European, but spoke indigenous languages as the majority. Overall, people in say Mexico, are really mixed and technically count as Mestizos, but it makes counting who looks white and who doesn't harder, which may be a good thing, depending on who you ask. The reason for why Mexico did that, was not out of malicious desires, but as a way to say everyone is equal, and that no group is superior to the other. Even today, you have weird cases in which really white Mexicans don't like Spaniards much, since they seem them as having colonial attitudes, while they're okay with other groups of Europeans.
 
I thought th Latin America developed a kind of Caste system and the Settler Colonies didn't assimilate the Natives by taking them in.
The caste system wasn't as rigid as often portrayed (and didn't exist in Brazil), mixing was very common across the region as most colonists didn't bring women so the only way was to marry natives, plus the Catholic Church was very keen on baptizing the natives and "bringing them to civilization".
 

Metaverse

Banned
I wonder if we could see an Eastern European descended pouplace in a particular nation, in this scenario. I mean, they may speak Spanish/Portuguese or French in the Modern era but mostly Eastern European descended like how Americans are largely descended from German, Irish, Dutch and Scottish settlers along with English but speak English in the Modern era. Just a curious question.
 
Interesting insights @NiGHTS !

So I can think a planned development of colonies with an active participation and assimilation of the Natives along with good agricultural practices along with Technological developments would give this.

Not about the topic(European majority) but about what you said about the economic development, I wonder how USA and it's dominance would take shape in this world. Or would the Mega Latin American nation speaking Spanish be the superpower?
I forgot to mention that as more people are affluent, social issues of brown being looked down upon, despite being wealthier, will still come up, so you may see movements of social justice that seek to celebrate brown skin, similar to the "Black is Beautiful" movement.

I'm imagining that these Latin American colonies will be given independence in the same way as Canada/Australia did, and that they will form their own Commonwealth type thing with Spain/Portugal/Iberia?( The scenario I'm imagining involves an earlier and longer lasting Iberian union Union and a stronger monarchy that acts like the Sun King, among other things). I don't think these various nations will become just one big nation, but imagine that they'll be like a EU type thing. I imagine they may all have monarchies though, with these monarchs all being apart of a single family. US would probably not form as otl without some butterfly nets, but if it won't be able to really do much in Latin America, and the Monroe doctrine would be laughed at, since these nations would be able to protect themselves, and they may still be considered as part of the Spanish Empire. They could essential have their own NATO like alliance, in which an attack on one, could be an attack on all. I could most certainly see that case in South America.

I'm not sure if superpowers would exist in this scenario, as those only came into existence when all the other powers were beaten and now reliant on them. It would probably still be a multipolar world.
 
I wonder if we could see an Eastern European descended pouplace in a particular nation, in this scenario. I mean, they may speak Spanish/Portuguese or French in the Modern era but mostly Eastern European descended like how Americans are largely descended from German, Irish, Dutch and Scottish settlers along with English but speak English in the Modern era. Just a curious question.
Probably lots of Polish, Czech, Slovakian, Croatian, and Hungarian immigrants, who would go to a Catholic Latin America, after being rejected by the usually anti Catholic US.
 
Last I saw, genetics test pointed to most Latinos having European ancestry, with the degree varying from area and class. I imagine it's like how most black people in the US have some form of European ancestry. The thing with the Mexican government is that it tends to portray everyone as mestizo, and they tend to erase erase both afro and euro looking Latinos, and even purely indigenous people are seen as mestizo, even if they aren't, since they speak Spanish. Of course, Euro Latinos and brown Latinos make up the upper and lower classes, but it's still true that many on each side are of a mixed ancestry. And there are unusual cases in which, unless I misread this, a group of people mostly looked European, but spoke indigenous languages as the majority. Overall, people in say Mexico, are really mixed and technically count as Mestizos, but it makes counting who looks white and who doesn't harder, which may be a good thing, depending on who you ask. The reason for why Mexico did that, was not out of malicious desires, but as a way to say everyone is equal, and that no group is superior to the other. Even today, you have weird cases in which really white Mexicans don't like Spaniards much, since they seem them as having colonial attitudes, while they're okay with other groups of Europeans.

No, Mexico did not do so out of making everyone equal, but did so as a way to screen existing caste and colorisms that are practiced currently within Mexico, both in media, politics, lifestyle and general discourse. It is an attempt to erase the existing lines and divisions that were the legacy of colonialism and henceforth have been attempted to be forgotten and hidden under the veneer of 'Mestizo nationalism'. When the legacy of colonialism is not addressed readily and is instead hidden, it does not point to remedies of the lived realities of the people in question; rather it benefits the ruling European class, who appease those with grievances whilst retaining their traditional division from the more 'Indian looks' and the traditional role of privilege and power in institutions of power, hence racism. The term Latino is an example of this system, which denies the indigenous and near relations of indigenous and the African diaspora in Latin America and identity and places them under an umbrella of what has been termed, 'white supremacy' and 'Eurosupremacy' within countries of the Western Hemisphere. So, when you say, so and so is a Euro Latino or a brown Latino, this is playing into that existing system which is denying the existence, grievances and the legacy of colonialism within these lands. Rather, the existence of European features within Mexico, is simply a result of colonialism and conquest.

I do not know of this idea of European looking peoples speaking indigenous tongues as their native tongue. Even so, there are many Boers who speak Xhosa, this does not mean that there was/is not a sense of colorism that prevails in general societal discourse within South Africa, the same is true for Mexico. We can even note the notion of the slave master children learning the language of their servants or slaves through being raised by them and being 'served' by them. This is a known situation in the past in Brazil, Louisiana, South Africa, etc etc etc...

Well part of the issue with the counting of Mestizo, is from what I am aware of, the system Spain implemented was a system of varying degrees of admixture that descended and ascended. Mestizo, traditionally referred to a seamless 50-50 ratio or roundabout mixture between Indigenous and European populaces. However, the system also counted many categories of 60% Indigenous, 75% Indigenous, and so forth and likewise, mixtures called 'Zambo' between Indigenous and African populaces (which do exist in Mexico, African minorities tend to be one of the most erased groups in the country of Mexico). The Mexican government intentionally assumes everyone is mixed and Mestizo, despite the colonial system denying this extrapolation and likewise, the general society of Mexico denying this system and formulation through its interactions of colorism and its bias toward the people of European ancestry or complete European features in positions of power/privilege.

There are many cases of Anglophobia in the US in the past, even from supposed English descent. Do we assume thus, that due to their dislike of the British Empire and its methods, that the European US peoples had some sort of solidarity with its existing populaces who were of non-European ancestry or of generally less than total European ancestry (see Louisiana)? Nay, rather the US displayed and still displays a similar custom and system as that of Mexico, in regards to the legacy of colonialism and colorism, whilst claiming equality and so forth.
 
Last edited:
The caste system wasn't as rigid as often portrayed (and didn't exist in Brazil), mixing was very common across the region as most colonists didn't bring women so the only way was to marry natives, plus the Catholic Church was very keen on baptizing the natives and "bringing them to civilization".

Maybe in 1550, but not in the totality of the history of what we call Brazil. To deny the heritage of intentional 'whitening' and the existing colorism within Brazil, is to be willful in its effects. Regarding the rigidity of the system, can you explain what is not rigid? You are likely setting a sort of implausible threshold for a caste system to be rigid, further have you inquired the people of the time under the system whether the rigidity was so? By what criteria are you stating this? On Catholicism, this bringing civilization was an effort of the Jesuits, as I understand, not necessarily the Catholic Church in totality, which upheld colonialism through its entire history within Brazil or other Hispano-American colonies. One need only see Louisiana and the Catholic Church's intentional ambivalence to the practice of non-marriage racial mixture as means to whiten the populace. Only whence the CS lost its war with the US, did the Catholic Church reign in its parishioners within Louisiana.
 
No, Mexico did not do so out of making everyone equal, but did so as a way to screen existing caste and colorisms that are practiced currently within Mexico, both in media, politics, lifestyle and general discourse. It is an attempt to erase the existing lines and divisions that were the legacy of colonialism and henceforth have been attempted to be forgotten and hidden under the veneer of 'Mestizo nationalism'. When the legacy of colonialism is not addressed readily and is instead hidden, it does not point to remedies of the lived realities of the people in question; rather it benefits the ruling European class, who appease those with grievances whilst retaining their traditional division from the more 'Indian looks' and the traditional role of privilege and power in institutions of power, hence racism. The term Latino is an example of this system, which denies the indigenous and near relations of indigenous and the African diaspora in Latin America and identity and places them under an umbrella of what has been termed, 'white supremacy' and 'Eurosupremacy' within countries of the Western Hemisphere. So, when you say, so and so is a Euro Latino or a brown Latino, this is playing into that existing system which is denying the existence, grievances and the legacy of colonialism within these lands. Rather, the existence of European features within Mexico, is simply a result of colonialism and conquest.

I do not know of this idea of European looking peoples speaking indigenous tongues as their native tongue. Even so, there are many Boers who speak Xhosa, this does not mean that there was/is not a sense of colorism that prevails in general societal discourse within South Africa, the same is true for Mexico.

Well part of the issue with the counting of Mestizo, is from what I am aware of, the system Spain implemented was a system of varying degrees of admixture that descended and ascended. Mestizo, traditionally referred to a seamless 50-50 ratio or roundabout mixture between Indigenous and European populaces. However, the system also counted many categories of 60% Indigenous, 75% Indigenous, and so forth and likewise, mixtures called 'Zambo' between Indigenous and African populaces (which do exist in Mexico, African minorities tend to be one of the most erased groups in the country of Mexico). The Mexican government intentionally assumes everyone is mixed and Mestizo, despite the colonial system denying this extrapolation and likewise, the general society of Mexico denying this system and formulation through its interactions of colorism and its bias toward the people of European ancestry or complete European features in positions of power/privilege.

There are many cases of Anglophobia in the US in the past, even from supposed English descent. Do we assume thus, that due to their dislike of the British Empire and its methods, that the European US peoples had some sort of solidarity with its existing populaces who were of non-European ancestry or of generally less than total European ancestry (see Louisiana)? Nay, rather the US displayed and still displays a similar custom and system as that of Mexico, in regards to the legacy of colonialism and colorism, whilst claiming equality and so forth.
I'm just repeating what I see in my relatives. One is super pale and always says stuff like " the Spanish took our gold and left it in the Vatican, and burned valuable texts. And while colorism is rampant in Mexico, nobody would deny a brown person anything as long as he has money, though they may still be considered ugly, but usually in the same way that obese people are considered ugly by society at large. The mestizo ideas , of everyone being classified as such, came in the aftermath of the Mexican revolution, in which the leaders of Mexico sought to make Mexico less divided, as it was before. Of course, these came with existing Eurocentric biased as it was thought that the best way to integrate the indigenous into Mexican society was by giving them education, and enforcing the use of Spanish, though this has changed now, and there are more attempts to officiate and accommodate indigenous languages.
 
Maybe in 1550, but not in the totality of the history of what we call Brazil. To deny the heritage of intentional 'whitening' and the existing colorism within Brazil, is to be willful in its effects.
I... know about all this? But the thread is about indigenous miscegenation, which is what happened in OTL, most of the Brazilian population has both European and Amerindian heritage. And the whitening was a post-independence development during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and that did involve race mixing
 
I'm just repeating what I see in my relatives. One is super pale and always says stuff like " the Spanish took our gold and left it in the Vatican, and burned valuable texts. And while colorism is rampant in Mexico, nobody would deny a brown person anything as long as he has money, though they may still be considered ugly, but usually in the same way that obese people are considered ugly by society at large. The mestizo ideas , of everyone being classified as such, came in the aftermath of the Mexican revolution, in which the leaders of Mexico sought to make Mexico less divided, as it was before. Of course, these came with existing Eurocentric biased as it was thought that the best way to integrate the indigenous into Mexican society was by giving them education, and enforcing the use of Spanish, though this has changed now, and there are more attempts to officiate and accommodate indigenous languages.

The issues go much deeper than 'they are seen as ugly,' especially when we look at wealth division, economic distribution across regions, lackings of autonomy, percentages of prison populace, etc... If one took the example of how we determine the legacy of colonialism in the US or Brazil and apply it to Mexico, we find the same examples, except in the case of Mexico, there is a veneer/deception of racial ambiguity. As we know too, regarding these Mexican founders, these were all Criollo who created a country in their own image and subsequent Mexican authorities violently opposed the autonomy of Indigenous regions such as Yucatan and other like situations wherein the central government of Mexico was ascendant. Do not be so revisionist to revise the history as Mexico being a country founded upon racial equity against Spanish colonialism. When in actuality, the realities of colonialism did not end or cease after the Mexican independence.

Regarding recent trends, these are via the actions and struggle of those who are oppressed and pushed to erasure by the Mexican society. It is not the action of the ruling class or those who benefit from the legacies of colonialism. It is akin to saying that the Boers are the authors of the system that ushered in the republic of South Africa. We know that progress is occurring, but to those who are at the margins, progress is never fast enough.
 
Top