# How to Get Rid of Cultural Stereotypes



## Edgar Dario

Whats up ya'll, (jeje).  I lived 14 yrs in Atlanta so I have just a tad bit southern in me, but I'm originally from Barranquilla, Colombia, and now I'm here in my country getting to know it, and knowing it pretty well.  I wanted to open this thread to discuss ideas on how to defeat unwanted stereotypes.  Seeing as thought every country has them, good or bad, we will talk about the bad.  So I will start with my own country, and I will state a few theories on why things are the way they are, which are all taken from a friend here at work with whom I had a discussion with him a few days ago, and it struck me as very interesting, but Im' sure some of you are aware of this theory as well.

During the colonial times, there were new settlers in North America .  These new settlers came from Britain, and in those times, Britain was a civilized country, with manners and royalty not so corrupted.  When these settlers (who were regular people) came to N.A, they had plenty of things to teach the Indians who were already there.  They were tought honorable things, beside the other bad things that they did.  They did, however, do more good than bad, and in various ways learned from each other different trades and arts.  This is the history of the Unites States of America.  

Now in South America, in the year 1492, the settlers that popped up were from Spain, and Spain, in those times (now Spain is a beautiful country I hear), was not as civilized as Britain was.  In fact, they were full of criminals.  So full of criminals that the royalty gave them the opportunity to get the heck out of Spain and go off to uncharted lands.  This will benefit Spain in two ways, have explorers out in the Sea, and to be able to get rid of criminals.  Thus, the settlers in South America were in fact, criminals.  The Indians wore lots and lots Gold, but they gave it no monetary value.  When the settlers saw this they immedialty began to steal, kill, rob, plunder, etc....   This is what was taught to the Indians.  Centuries later, there is a huge excess of liars and cheaters here in our Southern continent.  

Corruption is everywhere, the difference is the visibility.  In the US, the politicians steal about 25% of the money and put to work the other 75%.  That 75% is visible to the Americans and it makes them happy.  Now here the politicians steal 75% and put to work the resting 25%, which is NOT visible to the population.  

The solution we discussed, is that we have to wait a good 500 yrs to wait for these corrupted familys to pass on and disappear.  These familys (political familys) have power, and they are not willing to give it away.  The hard working familys also have to do their part and teach their kids the correct way of doing things in life.  These kids are our future, so it is imperitive that we have a positive outlook on our familys, because these politicians are so involved with their status that they even marry within the family to keep the power from going out to anyone else.

I am hoping for more examples to be put our way, and I welcome any corrections, althought I should be writing in Spanish to practice it more, but anyways this is what I think and I welcome any feedback.  Aight Peaze.


----------



## astronauta

Your thoughts are nice, but just like racism, I think it will never go away.
  I think that until we ourselves traveled, stereotyped everithing we did not know.
  And since such a little percentage of people travel outside areas of their confort, it's best, for the sake of our health to ignore stereotypers.

 Now, what you say about history... I have my doubts about some of your statements; not everything is a simple as your theory, for starters, not all in British history has been civilized and they too, have sent prisioners abroad.


----------



## santi

Stereotypes are as old as cookies and like rock and roll is here to stay, in my opinion we should just ignore all the ignorance of those who think tirany is o.k. and just try to go on with the lives we live.Dude this country is the way it is cuz everyone wants to have power and power is money..peace


this is


----------



## Edgar Dario

Well, as I understand it, that is partly true.  The thing is that those prisoners weren't sent to N.A but actually sent to Australia to stay there for good, they werent welcome back to English soil.  The ones that went to America were Missionaries.


----------



## Fernando

Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> During the colonial times, there were new settlers in North America .  These new settlers came from Britain, and in those times, Britain was a civilized country, with manners and royalty not so corrupted.  When these settlers (who were regular people) came to N.A, they had plenty of things to teach the Indians who were already there.  They were tought honorable things, beside the other bad things that they did.  They did, however, do more good than bad, and in various ways learned from each other different trades and arts.  This is the history of the Unites States of America.
> 
> Now in South America, in the year 1492, the settlers that popped up were from Spain, and Spain, in those times (now Spain is a beautiful country I hear), was not as civilized as Britain was.  In fact, they were full of criminals.  So full of criminals that the royalty gave them the opportunity to get the heck out of Spain and go off to uncharted lands.  This will benefit Spain in two ways, have explorers out in the Sea, and to be able to get rid of criminals.  Thus, the settlers in South America were in fact, criminals.  The Indians wore lots and lots Gold, but they gave it no monetary value.  When the settlers saw this they immedialty began to steal, kill, rob, plunder, etc....   This is what was taught to the Indians.  Centuries later, there is a huge excess of liars and cheaters here in our Southern continent.



Sorry, Edgar Dario, but I am a bit dumb: The speech you have posted is your actual explanation to Colombia's comparative backwardness (compared to US)? Or you are posting what people in US have as a stereotype?


----------



## Outsider

Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> During the colonial times, there were new settlers in North America .  These new settlers came from Britain, and in those times, Britain was a civilized country, with manners and royalty not so corrupted.  When these settlers (who were regular people) came to N.A, they had plenty of things to teach the Indians who were already there.  They were tought honorable things, beside the other bad things that they did.  They did, however, do more good than bad, and in various ways learned from each other different trades and arts.  This is the history of the Unites States of America.
> 
> Now in South America, in the year 1492, the settlers that popped up were from Spain, and Spain, in those times (now Spain is a beautiful country I hear), was not as civilized as Britain was.  In fact, they were full of criminals.  So full of criminals that the royalty gave them the opportunity to get the heck out of Spain and go off to uncharted lands.  This will benefit Spain in two ways, have explorers out in the Sea, and to be able to get rid of criminals.  Thus, the settlers in South America were in fact, criminals.  The Indians wore lots and lots Gold, but they gave it no monetary value.  When the settlers saw this they immedialty began to steal, kill, rob, plunder, etc....   This is what was taught to the Indians.  Centuries later, there is a huge excess of liars and cheaters here in our Southern continent.


Anyone who believes that doesn't know their history. Colonialism was brutal and exploitative everywhere, period.



			
				Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> Corruption is everywhere, the difference is the visibility.  In the US, the politicians steal about 25% of the money and put to work the other 75%.  That 75% is visible to the Americans and it makes them happy.  Now here the politicians steal 75% and put to work the resting 25%, which is NOT visible to the population.


And anyone who thinks the problems of Colombia and the problems of the U.S. are completely independent animals needs to brush up their _recent_ history.


----------



## Edgar Dario

Ok man dont get sensitive on me .  If you read carefully I put in clearly that this is a theory, and that it was something I discussed with someone and I am just posting it to learn more about it.  It's an opinion.  What I would like is for people to post their own opinions to learn more, not criticism but information.  Im after knowledge.  Outsider please explain what you mean, and Fernando its just a theory on where stereotypes could originally have come from.  Come on guys feedback!! Thx


----------



## Outsider

Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> Outsider please explain what you mean, and Fernando its just a theory on where stereotypes could originally have come from.


Stereotypes don't need any realities to stand on.
I thought I had been clear enough in my previous post. The position you described in the first excerpt I quote is simply false. Don't take my word for it -- go see what historians have to say.
As for the second excerpt, while there is truth to it, I believe it's not the whole truth.


----------



## Edgar Dario

Ok Outsider, but could you please post some information as to why it is false.  Again, this is just a theory.  This thread is supposed to be for solutions and opinions like what austronauta or santi posted.  The solution I tought was simply to wait it out for a better future, which rests solely on families, on our chidren.


----------



## Outsider

To be quite honest, I don't feel like getting into too much detail, partly because I'm not the right person to do it. What I know of history is eclectic, but sparse and disconnected. I am not a historian or an anthropologist, etc.

Another reason is that I feel that this kind of discussion is doomed to get political, heated, and eventually ugly -- and that's against the forum rules.

My advice to anyone who's interested in comparing the various colonialisms in America is to study them outside the Net, in real books by serious historians and anthropologists. It's hard work, but it will pay off.


----------



## chula

Edgar Dario, I read your theory and I would advice you not to try to simplify history. First, colonialism was everwhere rude and ugly. Second, if you want to get rid of stereotypes start with yourself. The peyorative way you talk about the "indians" is full of stereotypes. They were not ignorants or were people who were "civilized" by the europeans, that is a very eurocentric way to see history. They did have their knowledge and their way of living, and religion. In Guatemala, for example, the spaniards burned all of the ancient "codices" of the mayans which contained valuable knowledge (only three of them survived).
Third, I dont think that the United States is the best example to talk about "no corruption" or "better than Colombia" or even better than the people in the country. One of the reasons why most of Latin America is ruined, specially  Central America, is thightly linked to US-foreign policy in the 50, 60, 70 and 80s.
I really like that you are trying to come up with a theory of your own, but I woould really recommend you to learn a little more about history and most of all, try not to simplify it.


----------



## Maria Juanita

Hola. I will do this in spanish because I'm not that fluent in english.

Me había abstenido de postear en esta thread puesto que no quería que sucediera lo mismo que en:

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=64613

Sin embargo, voy a expresar mi opinión, que en últimas, es lo más neutral posible, puesto que cualquier referencia a  estereotipos se presta para discusiones acaloradas. 
 En defensa de Edgar, tengo que decir que no considero que haya sido tan despectivo al referirse a los "indians", puesto que dice que "The Indians wore lots and lots of Gold, but they gave it no monetary value" por lo que no pienso que se haya referido en una mala manera a nuestros antepasados indígenas. 
He leído que existen varias teorías que tratan de explicar nuestra idiosincracia como pueblo. Historiadores como German Arciniegas y escritores como Carlos Fuentes se han ocupado del tema; una de ellas apunta a que en Europa hubo Edad Media y Renacimiento y aquí en América tuvimos un prematuro desarrollo que eliminó estas etapas. Anyway, los estereotipos existen sólo para que tengamos la oportunidad de comprobar que no son ciertos.
Sin embargo, no puedo decir que estoy de acuerdo en todo con la thread, ya que lejos de las estadísticas, dudo mucho que el gobierno de US sea mejor que el de acá. Las estadísticas son como los estereotipos: miden muy bien, pero sólo en teoría.
Quizá el hecho de que hayamos sido colonizados mayormente por bandidos influyó muchísimo en nuestro modo de vida, o solo es un mal chiste. Solemos celebrar nuestro "día de la independencia" sin darnos cuenta que en realidad, dicha independencia aún no ha llegado para nosotros y seguimos atados a fantasmas como la deuda externa, por ejemplo. Volveríamos al mismo problema planteado por Rousseau desde tiempos de la ilustración pero eso no tiene cabida aquí, así que eso es todo lo que quería decir.

Saludillos...


----------



## Fernando

I do not want to be harsh, only to point out some gross mistakes in your view (which I am afraid is shared by many Anglosaxons and therefore by many people).


			
				Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> During the colonial times, there were new settlers in North America .


As a matter of fact two centuries later than Spanish/Portuguese colonization.



			
				Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> These new settlers came from Britain, and in those times, Britain was a civilized country,


 If you talk about 16th century, you are basically wrong. In this times, the forefront of W civilization was Italy and then Iberic peninsula. 



			
				Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> with manners and royalty not so corrupted.


Mmm... you mean Henry the 8th?? Bloody Mary? Mary Stuart? Elizabeth the 2nd? or Charles I, beheaded by their people?



			
				Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> When these settlers (who were regular people) came to N.A, they had plenty of things to teach the Indians who were already there.  They were tought honorable things, beside the other bad things that they did.  They did, however, do more good than bad, and in various ways learned from each other different trades and arts.  This is the history of the Unites States of America.


Well, I do not really think any US citizen has this naive idea of British colonization in US. Of course, civilization of indians in N.A. was less developed than in South and Central America but, well, there is virtually no indians E of the Appalaches and just a few W so, I assume anything colonists would teach Pocahontas have been lost.



			
				Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> Now in South America, in the year 1492, the settlers that popped up were from Spain, and Spain, in those times (now Spain is a beautiful country I hear), was not as civilized as Britain was.


I have discussed this yet.



			
				Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> In fact, they were full of criminals.  So full of criminals that the royalty gave them the opportunity to get the heck out of Spain and go off to uncharted lands.  This will benefit Spain in two ways, have explorers out in the Sea, and to be able to get rid of criminals.


You have perfectly described how England got to have a huge pirate fleet. Exactly this way.



			
				Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> Thus, the settlers in South America were in fact, criminals.


Of course, people arriving to 'las Indias' was not exactly 'la crême' of the Spanish society but most of them were unemployed soldiers. As an example, Cortés studied in Salamanca University (one of the best in Europe at the time).

In Australia and New Zealand the British were, in fact, criminals. They were penintentiary (does it exist such English word?) colonies.



			
				Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> The Indians wore lots and lots Gold, but they gave it no monetary value.


They did. They could be used (and they were) as cheap labor force in farms and mines. So they were not killed.



			
				Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> When the settlers saw this they immedialty began to steal, kill, rob, plunder, etc....   This is what was taught to the Indians.  Centuries later, there is a huge excess of liars and cheaters here in our Southern continent.


Yes, and we the Spaniards, were liars because Romans and Arabs had taught that to us 8 centuries before. 



			
				Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> Corruption is everywhere, the difference is the visibility.  In the US, the politicians steal about 25% of the money and put to work the other 75%.  That 75% is visible to the Americans and it makes them happy.  Now here the politicians steal 75% and put to work the resting 25%, which is NOT visible to the population.


So, the difference is quantity not visibility.


----------



## Edgar Dario

I wont dispute or defend this theory because of all the mistakes.  I'm actually going to fix it and make the necessary corrections to it.  Thanks Fernando I greatly appreciate you taking the time to make all these corrections, now I know!.   I especially like what you said about the Romans and Arabs teaching you guys the same thing centuries ago.  It seems that its true that History repeats itself in many ways.  Eventhought there must be a way to not let it repeat.


----------



## Fernando

Edgar, I am afraid I have badly expressed. The point is the people (and the peoples) have the ability not to repeat what they have been taught to.

I can not discharge my country mates (partly yours) by slaughtering or enslaving Indians because of Arab colonization.

You are not conditioned by things that happened (at best) 2 hundred year ago. I can not see no Cortés ruling Mexico nor Pizarro ruling Perú.

Spain was a 3rd-world country ruled by a dictator in the 1940s and nowadays we are a wealthy (to a point) democracy. People and culture is the same. The same can be said by Irish, Koreans or Japanese. I can see no reason why S America should perform worse.

Of course the same way in the wrong direction can be done. But I feel there is nothing in your heritage that avoids economic growth or political integrity


----------



## Roi Marphille

I completely agree with Fernando.


----------



## Laia

I think that is very difficult (almost impossible) to get rid of stereoypes. 

It's interesting to know why they exist. 

For some theories, they are one component of the "social prejudices". I'll try to explain... 
Prejudices have 3 components:
- cognitive component --> STEREOTYPE (beliefs about features (_rasgos_) of the members of one group) Example: xxxx are lazy
- evaluate/affective component --> PREJUDICE. Example: I don't like xxxx (remember, they were lazy!)
- behaviorist component --> DISCRIMINATION. Example: one person of xxxx is looking for a job. I'm not going to hire him because he is xxxx, and xxxx are lazy people.

(Notice that not all stereotipes are wrong and unfavourables. "Hay de todo".)

But they exist because they have a social function: they are useful for the positive differentiation of our group. We build our identity in part because of the groups we are in. We define our group (and ourselves) by (positive) differences with the others groups. It's identity stuff. It's an "us" vs. "you" thing. More or less.

Well, that's what I remember now about what I studied last year...


----------



## Edgar Dario

Hey Laia, wow thats interesting.  I'm the kind of person that doesnt understand why people are bad in this world, I'm not saying that I'm an angel, but I find myself thinking very different than your average Joe.  So you're saying that they are positive and negative, you're also saying that Discrimination (racism), comes from stereotypes. Also thats kinda the way it is with lots of other things, theres a good side and a bad side to everything.  It is true that not all stereotypes are wrong, some are a positive way to describe a culture.  The world would be a dull place if we were all the same, it could never be so, we have to be different.  But not to the point that we have to talk crap about each other.  We have similarities in every culture.  I mean every culture has its own share of lazy people, drunks, party addicts, and many other types personalities.  I truly believe that if there exists a way to get rid of negative stereotypes, then we would have to begin with changing the way we think.  Which goes back to our children, and our children's children.  The future starts at home.



			
				Laia said:
			
		

> I think that is very difficult (almost impossible) to get rid of stereoypes.
> 
> It's interesting to know why they exist.
> 
> For some theories, they are one component of the "social prejudices". I'll try to explain...
> Prejudices have 3 components:
> - cognitive component --> STEREOTYPE (beliefs about features (_rasgos_) of the members of one group) Example: xxxx are lazy
> - evaluate/affective component --> PREJUDICE. Example: I don't like xxxx (remember, they were lazy!)
> - behaviorist component --> DISCRIMINATION. Example: one person of xxxx is looking for a job. I'm not going to hire him because he is xxxx, and xxxx are lazy people.
> 
> (Notice that not all stereotipes are wrong and unfavourables. "Hay de todo".)
> 
> But they exist because they have a social function: they are useful for the positive differentiation of our group. We build our identity in part because of the groups we are in. We define our group (and ourselves) by (positive) differences with the others groups. It's identity stuff. It's an "us" vs. "you" thing. More or less.
> 
> Well, that's what I remember now about what I studied last year...


----------



## Laia

Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> *1 *The world would be a dull place if we were all the same, it could never be so, we have to be different. But not to the point that we have to talk crap about each other. We have similarities in every culture. I mean every culture has its own share of lazy people, drunks, party addicts, and many other types personalities.
> 
> 
> *2 *I truly believe that if there exists a way to get rid of negative stereotypes, then we would have to begin with changing the way we think. Which goes back to our children, and our children's children. The future starts at home.


 
*1* Sí, tienes razón. Por supuesto que hay gente de todo tipo en todas las culturas, pero precisamente los estereotipos "se lo pasan por el forro", esto... 
(Te voy a contestar en castellano, que voy más rápido... )
Resulta que hay otro concepto que se llama "categorización social", ahora no me acuerdo muy bien, pero en parte explica esto.
Piensa que el hecho de "etiquetar" a la gente nos supone un "ahorro cognitivo", un pensar menos e ir más rápido... bueno, es igual, voy directa a la conclusión jejeje... en la mayoría de las ocasiones este proceso sucede automáticamente, y la persona no se entera, no tiene consciencia de lo que está haciendo. No es que la persona sea buena o mala, porque hay discriminaciones taaaan sutiles, que no te das ni cuenta de que están ocurriendo. He puesto un ejemplo muy tonto, pero en la realidad todo esto sucede de forma muy sutil, a veces imperceptible... (excepto en los casos bestias, como el racismo), pero yo me estaba refiriendo a discriminaciones más sutiles.


*2* Por supuesto estoy de acuerdo contigo en esto


----------



## Laia

A veces son cosas tan sutiles como esta: ¿porque hay más mujeres que hombres en las profesiones asistenciales (enfermería, psicología, también últimamente medicina, etc)? pues en parte, puedes pensar en los estereotipos que existen de las mujeres (son más comprensibles, son más emotivas, etc). Esto, como se puede ver, es sutil.


----------



## Edgar Dario

Si, yo te entiendo, yo hago eso (ser grocero) mucho, y sin saberlo.  Algunas veces ni me doy cuenta de lo que hago, hasta que alguien me dice que lo que dije era muy extremo. Que estudiaste??  Ahora, los chistes pueden ser otra causa.  Ahora hay muchos comediantes, como Chris Rock, y otros que usan esto para hacer burlas, y tengo que admitir que son chistosas (Chris Rock is hilarious) pero tenemos que darnos cuenta de lo que decimos.  Hasta en los average Joes que no tienen nada gracioso que decir, entonces dicen cosas que son muy estereotipadas.


----------



## Laia

Edgar Dario said:
			
		

> Si, yo te entiendo, yo hago eso (ser grocero) mucho, y sin saberlo. Algunas veces ni me doy cuenta de lo que hago, hasta que alguien me dice que lo que dije era muy extremo. Que estudiaste?? Ahora, los chistes pueden ser otra causa. Ahora hay muchos comediantes, como Chris Rock, y otros que usan esto para hacer burlas, y tengo que admitir que son chistosas (Chris Rock is hilarious) pero tenemos que darnos cuenta de lo que decimos. Hasta en los average Joes que no tienen nada gracioso que decir, entonces dicen cosas que son muy estereotipadas.


 
Todo en esta vida es relativo 

buenas noches!!


----------



## natasha2000

Hola, escribiré en castellano, ya que veo que todos aquí son hispanoparlantes, y a mi me resulta más fácil y más rapido expresarme en este idioma.

Edagar Dario, me gusta tu idea, hablar de estereotipos y cómo quitárselos encima es un tema muy interesante, y para la mayoría de la gente de este mundo, un poco dolorosa, ya que la mayoría se ve afectada, donde me incluyo yo misma. Mira, hace 15 años, yo no necesitaba visado para casi ningún país de este mundo, simplemente compraba billete de avión y me iba donde me daba la gana. La gente en otros países ni siquiera sabía donde estaba mi país, y si lo sabían, la primera asociación era un jugador de fúdbol o baloncesto. Entonces, en los años 90 empezó la locura balcánica, y mi país se demembró en un baño de sangre. El resultado de todo esto es que ahora, Serbia ya no se reconoce por los nombres de deportistas, sino por los nombres de la gente odiada incluso en la misma Serbia (Miloshevic), y por las atrocidades que han hecho algunos Serbios que en ningún momento representaban el pueblo serbio sino siempre sus propios intereses (Srebrenica, Kosovo). Desgraciadamente, nos hemos hecho conocidos por las cosas que han hecho algunas personas que afirman que todo lo que han hecho han hecho por el pueblo serbio, y sin embargo no merecen llamarse ni Serbios ni seres humanos. Como siempre en las guerras, y aún más en las guerras civiles, suele salir a la superficie la cal y la más canalla de una sociedad, y la gente normal se queda mucho tiempo paralizada de horror que presencia y necesita tiempo para recuperarse organizarse y luchar contra el mal. Pero mientras tanto, y como siempre, la mala voz llega lejos y muy rápido, y el esteretipo ya está formado y no hay quien se lo quite. Lo que la gente en el mundo no sabe que en Serbia tambien existe una gente normal, que Serbia tiene una historia muy rica, la gente sabia y la gente tierna, abierta y hospitalaria, y que no todos somos los "animales  que comen los niños"... Ahora, si quiero que me visite uno de mis amigos o alguien de mi familia, tengo que prepararme a pagar mucho, y los que quieren visitarme, tienen que armarse con una paciencia de hierro, ya que obtener un visado no solo  para  España, sino para cualquier país en este mundo es una cosa casi imposible. Pero a pesar de todo eso, tengo esperanza que un día todo esto va a cambiar, ya que hay muchos Serbios emigrados en todo el mundo, y la gente de este mundo puede ver con sus propios ojos que no hay que creer en todo lo que dicen en la tele. Además, creo que los obstáculos que se te ponen en la vida sirven para fortalecerte, y toda esta gente que ahora vive en otros países si que ha tenido muchisimos obstáculos para superar y hacer su vida mejor. 

En cuanto a tu teoría de las raíces de problemas en tu país y en el resto de Sudamérica, no creo que sea una teoría correcta. No busques las respuestas en la historia tan remota como los tiempos de colonias, sino como alguien aqui dijo, en la política de EEUU del siglo 20....
Y en cuanto a la historia...
Tanto españoles como ingléses exterminaron a los indígenas, que hasta la llegada del curioso de Colón, vivían su vida tranquila y tenían su cultura, pero completamente diferente, y la intolerancia de la "cultura europea" e iglesia católica lo exterminó precisamente por eso - porque eran diferentes. Y robaron todos. No solo españoles, sino también los ingleses y holandeses, y portugueses, y todos los que vinieron a América como colonizadores... Sí, los españoles se llevaron el oro, porque en Sudamérica los indígenas tenían oro. Los Británicos robaban también - no oro, pero sí la tierra. Luego también descubrieron que la tierra de Ameérica de Norte tambien guardaba oro, pero los indígenas del Norte no sacaban el oro de la tierra pque su filosofía de la vida no los permitía - pensaban que si excavas la tierra, haces daño a la Madre Tierra. en cuanto descubrieron que había oro allí, enviaron a las indígenas a sacarlo. Pero los indígenas tenian una constitución muy frágil y no soportaban el trabajo duro en las minas, y morían como moscas. aparte de duro trabajo, les mataba un simple gripe que trajeron los europeos a América, y como los indígenas nunca experimentaron esta enfermedad, no tenían anticuerpos que defenderían sus cuerpos de una simple gripe!!! y se morían. Por eso, empezaron a traer los negros de Africa porque ellos tenían una constutción más fuerte que podía aguantar el trabajo en las minas... Y en los campos... Y así empezó la era de esclavitud que duró hasta la guerra civil de EEUU... Y eso es el siglo 19... Todos estos esclavos que fueron capturados como animales u traídos en los barcos, son los antecsores de los Afroamericanos de hoy de  EEUU... No creo que la historia de la población precolombiana en América de Norte era menos dolorosa y sangrienta que la historia de los indígenas de Sudamérica... Los británicos no enseñaron nada a los indígenas. Los extingieron. Y qué decir de los africanos? 
Pero todo eso es historia muy remota, y de verdad no creo que tiene que ver con el estereotipo de tu país de hoy... Las raíces de los problemas de hoy hay que buscarlas en otro sitio. 
Saludos,
Natasha


----------



## GONTA

I think TRAVELLING is an important resource...because you get to know the facts for yourself and not only what you've been told.

And the other way might be just thinking what the person hates that someone assumes about him and then he'll figure out he's doing the same with others...
hopefully!


----------



## Macunaíma

Outsider said:


> My advice to anyone who's interested in comparing the various colonialisms in America is to study them outside the Net, in real books by serious historians and anthropologists. It's hard work, but it will pay off.


 
Bravo, Outsider, bravo!

I have my own "theory" on where stereotypes come from too: a deficient education. That's why I am so sceptical about changing stereotypes _not everybody is receptive to complex arguments and information. It's easier to stick to what you see on TV or vaguely remember from your high-school "History" lessons. What really gets on my nerves is that very often semi-educated people try to disguise their ignorance by having an "opinion" about everything. That's where stereotypes and the most persistent kinds of prejudice come from. 

On the other hand, the most educated and cultured people I have known have exactly the opposite attitude, they don't seem have a definite opinion about anything. People should not be ashamed of not having a "theory" on this, a "theory" on that...

Well, as Outsiders pointed out, it may not be easy but it's available to anyone to try to go beyond such a poor and limited view of things as that of stereotypes and "historical" clichés ( in that respect, university education is almost all about unlearning what you've learnt at school, although it's by no means a garantee that you won't fall victim to other simplisms ).


----------

