These are notes from very long ago, a LARR issue on race, referring in part to Anthony Marx, “Making race and nation: a comparison of the U.S., S.A., and Brazil.” The modern state played a formative role in the development of racialized societies. It excluded Blacks to gain legitimacy among whites and is a racialized process (cf. Boer War).
Brazil did not need Jim Crow to restrict movement of Blacks and prepair rifts among whites because it had no Civil War and no Reconstruction. Instead, with a peaceful abolition, white unity robbed Blacks of political identity and agency. Politics weren’t explicitly racist which made their racialized nature harder to pin down.
The masses become the pueblo but they aren’t in the imagined communnity of the nation, aren’t baptized politically, have other imagined communities.
Violence of the letter/fetichization of writing, but slaves were not allowed to write. Also: fetichization of orality and non-literacy. In reality, “otros saberes” exist AND Indians learned to write well. Consider Lienhard, on non-white letrados, and Bendezú’s “otra literatura peruana,” among other comments.
Segato: “The color-blind subject of myth, or, where to find Africa in the nation.” Racism may be equally intense but still differ in the cognitive operations they imply, because of the different way Africanness is encoded.
Axé.
coldhearted scientist وداد 