Mmmm... Off topic, but it depends where and what religion. The various Bible belts are extremely intolerant to other religions , even other denominations get looked at suspiciously. Also atheism and paganism still get looked at suspiciously in the US, I highly doubt the country would vote for an openly pagan president. Would any country in Europe vote for a pagan?On the other hand, Protestantism paved the way toward religious toleration in the West, due to the stalemate between it and the Catholic Church after decades of bloody religious conflict. I think it's slightly less likely that the modern concept of religious and cultural tolerance would be so prominent and ingrained in Western culture if it was united under Catholicism.
Well Argentina, is quite mixed, it's just people identify as white, but on a genetic level people on average do have Native and African ancestry. Cuba and Hispaniola don't have Natives, but the Spaniards and blacks mixed and don't have segregation or big discrimination. Look at Puerto Rico, people there are mixed a lot.
Yeah, but they still didn't segregate people like Georgia, which also has little to no Natives. Not to mention the disease thing. I don't know the population of those areas before colonization, so it's hard to tell if them being decimated could be prevented. Also religion won't affect the carribean, US South, Brazil, as those make too much Money to prevent exploitation in the beginning.They don't have natives now.
Yeah, but they still didn't segregate people like Georgia, which also has little to no Natives. Not to mention the disease thing. I don't know the population of those areas before colonization, so it's hard to tell if them being decimated could be prevented. Also religion won't affect the carribean, US South, Brazil, as those make too much Money to prevent exploitation in the beginning.
You are spanish?Judging by the intricate Spanish and Portuguese racial casta system, the actions of people like Domingo Sarmiento, the mejorando de la raza ideal, and the enduring criollo v. mestizo v. cholo v. black problems seen across Latin America, I'd say no.
Well, it does. Money influences everything. Also Cuba was still a colony of Spain until that time I believe, so Cuba itself couldn't decide it's stuff.Cuba may not have had Jim Crow, but it wasn't an egalitarian society. Slavery wasn't abolished until the 1880s!
And now your argument is that money will trump religion.
It still stands that, if the United States were somehow founded by a religiously homogenous society, freedom of religion would not be enshrined as one of the foremost rights, and constitutional government aimed to protect the rights of the citizen began with the United States (as far as written constitutions go).Mmmm... Off topic, but it depends where and what religion. The various Bible belts are extremely intolerant to other religions , even other denominations get looked at suspiciously. Also atheism and paganism still get looked at suspiciously in the US, I highly doubt the country would vote for an openly pagan president. Would any country in Europe vote for a pagan?
You would get less, since racism was often married to religion so that even Europeans could look upon other Europeans as base and debauched racially on grounds of being Catholic and Catholicism was one of the first to openly oppose social darwinism (while many protestant divisions whole-heartedly accepted it)So, would it?
Judging by the intricate Spanish and Portuguese racial casta system, the actions of people like Domingo Sarmiento, the mejorando de la raza ideal, and the enduring criollo v. mestizo v. cholo v. black problems seen across Latin America, I'd say no.
you are aware that quite few bits and bobs of the early us constitution and declaration of independence was inspired by the dutch declaration independence of 1581?It still stands that, if the United States were somehow founded by a religiously homogenous society, freedom of religion would not be enshrined as one of the foremost rights, and constitutional government aimed to protect the rights of the citizen began with the United States (as far as written constitutions go).
Modern concepts of race didn't exist until the 19th century at least. Also the Spanish had just finished driving out the moors. And you have to understand the reasons were complex but medieval Europeans had a lot of reasons to be suspicious of the Jews.I don't see that Catholics would be lesser racist than Protestants. Spaniards expelled all Jews and Muslims (clearly racist act) and there was several racist regimes speciality on 20th century. And in many Catholic countries is ultranationalist/racist parties/people.
And racism has always been part of human kind. And whites not be only ones who can be such.
Modern concepts of race didn't exist until the 19th century at least. Also the Spanish had just finished driving out the moors. And you have to understand the reasons were complex but medieval Europeans had a lot of reasons to be suspicious of the Jews.I don't see that Catholics would be lesser racist than Protestants. Spaniards expelled all Jews and Muslims (clearly racist act) and there was several racist regimes speciality on 20th century. And in many Catholic countries is ultranationalist/racist parties/people.
And racism has always been part of human kind. And whites not be only ones who can be such.
The modern written constitution had its origins in the American Revolution and its aftermath, which was disseminated more widely by the French Revolution. Is this controversial?you are aware that quite few bits and bobs of the early us constitution and declaration of independence was inspired by the dutch declaration independence of 1581?
as far as i know written laws to protect citizens go back way far for the netherlands alone as early as 500AD
Well, that's a week on the beach.but but brazil did keep slavery the longest of all nations in the americas.
that segregation seems to me is more cultural than religious (maybe a anglo-saxon thing?)
even though the current pope seems to be a good man you won't hear me say anything positive about that misogynist little boy raping institution called the catholic church.