I still don't exactly understand what "latino" should mean as a "race". Tecnically, latinos are people born in Latin America, but that's so damn broad! There are people born in Latin America from every ethnic group.

I don't know, I'm aware it's one of the common uses, but last year I was in Italia and some guys called themselves latino. I think maybe saying it in english makes it more pejorative or something lol  

Why do people from countries with far more egregious human rights issues than the United States try to adopt a position of moral superiority when it comes to this topic? Is also a good question .

Brazil is probably at least as 'racist' as America but they are decades from even beginning to address an issue like this. America averages around 500 killings by police per year while Brazil is 3000.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_Brazil

So from what I can understand...

Comparisons between the Brazil and USA are valid in many regards. Comparable areas and populations, ended slavery latter in the 1800's, large surges of European immigrants around 1900, and so on.

Looking at it with lackluster knowledge of Brazil, I think that one benefit Brazil might have is the concept of a "Multiracial" group. In the USA, we've rarely ever acknowkledged one of these existing, outside of some recent censuses. Back in the day, somebody with mixed heritage in the USA was either treated as one race or the other, usually black or white, on a legal and social level. In Brazil, it seems the mixed race concept predated independence, and included aboriginal populations as well. Point being, there is a long social and legal history of races meeting, mixing, and so on. And it has historically been about as prominent as "White" Brazilians. In the USA, the binary continued until 1990, when the census first acknowledged that people with multiple races exist.

Thinking about it, even some things that improved quality of lives in the USA might have helped. Education of blacks in the USA from around 1870 into the 1950's was based around creating schools separate from those that taught white students. The black community largely supported this because they did not trust white teachers. And ultimately, these schools did a decent job at providing necessary education. But they closed no divides.

Ok, this thread is getting completely out of control. People seem to completely skip what I wrote and just answer to the title, and that's not what I want.

You don't need to tell me that the racists in the US are a minority, I know that. I also know that the US houses many different cultures, I actually wrote that in my text.

What I am referring to in this thread is the practice of dividing people into different races, caring way too much about skin color as using that as a character-defining thing, even unconsciously. Everything seems to be defined by skin color over nationality, ethnicity, etc.

By the way, why are so many people getting defensive saying that "racism is not exclusive to white people"? I never said that. I even used an example of thinking skin color creates a certain behavior by black people in the op (but I guess no one read that).

There are definitely bad eggs within every group, and racism can certainly spread, but I don't think it's quite right or fair to just say "everyone is racist, deal with it."

Racism is taught, racism is learned.  Just look at children.  Kids don't see color AT ALL.  It's not until we get older that we become influenced by the world and begin to develop racial biases.  I don't think people are just inherently racist.

Racism is a taught/learned concept.  It's a vicious cycle that started a long time ago, born out of fear and greed, and is still going on today.

All in all, you're on a site where the GAF politics rejects come to play. You won't find much constructive discussion here

The U.S is not inherently any more racist compared to other countries.

Rather, the United States has a history of trying to deal with uncomfortable things by pretending it doesn't exist. Pretending Racism doesn't exists exacerbates it. Combine this with the fact that the U.S is one of the most diverse nations on the planet, and the result is that there are more instances where diverse people interact and this suppressed racism can flare up.

In addition, Racism is not necessarily as tribalistic as most would argue it is. Rather it is used to justify institutionalized practices by appealing to the ego. For instance, consider Slavery, which on the surface seems motivated by Racism. As slavery is not unique to a specific "race", nearly every race has been enslaved at some time in history, a motivation of Racism isn't necessarily a justification.

Rather Racism served as, and can continue to serve as, a tool to justify immoral actions in pursuit of more concrete motivations. It is much easier to sugarcoat the pillaging and looting of valuable natural resources as "liberating the heart of darkness" and "bringing light and happiness to the savages".

To be honest both Argentina and Chile come first to mind when were talking about racism in Latin America. Despite that it's embarassing how nationalistic all of these Hispanic nations are always trashing the neighbor countries, insulting their women, comparing themselves to European countries atleast that's the impression i get when i read forums, news or even on Youtube.

Simon Bolivar wanted a United Latin America and he failed, yet a certain Brazilian company actually made his dream come true with bribes.

We're not.  This is a narrative created by the supposedly oppressed that should be thankful every day that they get to live here and thrive in this country, as opposed to living in the dirt eating insects their entire lives.  Instead they complain.

It's reverse racism, caused by the minorities.

Yep. That´s exactly what latino means. People born in Latin America, or also people born in latin countries (countries that have a romance language as their primarly language)

I do understand what you mean when you use the word "racist".  Maybe "segregative" would be a better word to describe their approach toward "races".

I personaly don´t like to use the word "race" related to human beings, after all such thing does not exist. "Ethinicity" suits the matter much better. That said, I really think it´s kind of weird how the U.S. census identify people. Latino is by no any means an ethinicity, yet it´s considered as one there.

I also find kind of weird how many Americans tend to stick to their ethinicity group in most situations. When walking around any university campus, we see that people tend to stick to people of the same ethinicity, like, white with white, black with black, Asian with Asian etc. Sometimes you visit a church and there are churches almost exclusively frequented by black people, or latinos, or white people.  I´ve seen many, many Brazilians who studied there to report situations like this. 

Racism exist all over the world and in the U.S. it seems to be related only to ethnicity or "color". 

In our country, discussing racism feels complex because it´s not just a matter of ethinicity, but also a matter of social conditions  and sometimes even xenophobia. Overall our socitey do not really cares about ethinicity that much, so it´s tricky for us to understand the U.S. approach to that.

Well in Brazil we do love to piss over Argentinian, but just joking =p

And I would say the 2 biggest multi national companies from Brazil "AB Imbev" and "Vale do Rio Doce" doesn't have cases of bribes as far as I know... but if you are talking about Latin America uniting in bribes, that I can agree.

Surely you've heard of Odebrecht? It's a Brazilian company and it was the buzzword last year in every media outlet in all Latin America and it's bribes scandal was made public by the United States. You said it correctly as far as you know... Because for all we know there are political bribes going as were typing.