Wich side do you support ?

wich side do you support ?

Attached: 1656291035243.png (600x400, 401.32K)

the one with me in it

BRICS chads

Latinos look so weird

If Chile were a ship it currently being captained by Francesco Schettino

Brazilians are proud that a Portuguese monarch has gone to live in Brazil (but he only did it because he was in danger in Europe, not because he liked Brazil). As soon as the danger passed, he took away their title and wanted to enslave them again.
Brazil liked the monarchy, so Pedro tried to rule again as his king now the empire of Brazil.

Chile, on the other hand, was discussing the relationship between State-citizens, regulating the functions of the powers of the State and its authorities; mechanisms for the formation of laws and constitutional reform. a bicameral Congress and an independent judiciary.
Argentina had the generation of 37, a list of intellectuals worried about copying Europe

Another difference between Brazil and the Southern Cone.
Chile was the second country in the world to abolish slavery in 1823 and in Brazil in 1887 slavery was still socially accepted among the population

After the empire of Brazil was overthrown (almost entering 1900), that same process we experienced in 1810.

Brazil just started to legislate a republican government, but it was a dictatorship xd

Brazil much of the first half of the 20th century was just chaos and riots, each oligarchy of different states did not deliver rights.

Getulio Vargas is the first to start ordering Brazil. Because he began to industrialize Brazil and organize it moderately. But it is overlooked that it was a dictatorship (that is how the Brazilian people got used to living because of monarchism).
It was the Hugo Chavez of Brazil.

Then came the Cold War in Brazil and the dictatorships. Just 1985 begins to have continuous democratic governments and almost all of them were corrupt, with huge inflations.

Chile would be the comfiest country if not for the regular earthquakes.

Brazil until 1994 recently, for the first time in its history, has a decent government. Fernando Henrique Cardoso, who reduced inflation from 80% to almost 0. The guy was a statesman, who organized a Brazil without resources, facing external crises, and for that he was elected several times.

Lula only copied it, he kept his privatizations,
He received a country without inflation and on top of that he had the advantage of the boom in raw materials.

We have always had a tradition of democratic presidents, except for Allende-Pinochet. we had 100 years of parliamentarism. Even Pinochet was based even though it was a dictatorship, because it was a neoliberal dictatorship xd

beyond was not as bad as it is said, he was the first Marxist to be democratically elected, he was internationally blocked

also Chilean trannies are much more pure and cute compared with brazilian ones.

Isn't Chile currently one of the best countries in latam?

o macaco

tranny side ofcourse

I'm just gonna stay in my shithole, at least here I won't get mutilated by the local macacos living in the favelas

It's the safest, but that's not saying much, because South America is full of coked up psychopaths.

bump

o brasil terra do macacos!

Attached: 1651888412840.jpg (720x870, 209.68K)

>xd
why are chilotes so fucking retarded to talk online, I've never met no one single Chilean that doesn't type like a goddamn fucking retard. No surprise it's filled with Japan obsessed manchilds that think they are "based" for paying to go through a fucking national roadway. Imagine being the most bootlicker country in the whole southern shitcone and calling out on Brazilians.

>As soon as the danger passed, he took away their title and wanted to enslave them again.
False. He didn't want to go back, he was forced to by the Portuguese revolutionaries. It was also them who wanted to lower the country status back to colony, not the monarch.
>Chile, on the other hand, was discussing the relationship between State-citizens, regulating the functions of the powers of the State and its authorities; mechanisms for the formation of laws and constitutional reform
All things Brazil did early on after the 1824 constitution, ignorance is not an argument
>Argentina had the generation of 37, a list of intellectuals worried about copying Europe
Argentina was a literal anarchy after their independence
>slavery was still socially accepted among the population
No, it was not, only among the landowning elite
>After the empire of Brazil was overthrown (almost entering 1900), that same process we experienced in 1810.
False
>Brazil just started to legislate a republican government, but it was a dictatorship xd
Republics are a dirty lesser form of government, more news at 7
>Brazil much of the first half of the 20th century was just chaos and riots, each oligarchy of different states did not deliver rights.
True, once again proving the superiority of the monarchy. The most stable era in Brazilian history and the most stable country in the Americas at the time.
>Getulio Vargas is the first to start ordering Brazil. Because he began to industrialize Brazil and organize it moderately.
False. Industrialization began in the 1850s. First railroad 1854, first shipyards building national warships, first telegraph line connecting South America to Europe (built by the Baron of Mauá), 1850 Commercial Code etc etc.
>Then came the Cold War in Brazil and the dictatorships. Just 1985 begins to have continuous democratic governments and almost all of them were corrupt, with huge inflations.
Exactly like Chile then.

Ignorant and proud Stupid and proud Your first post reads like you read the preface of a book for an introductory class in college and felt it was enough to do a presentation
Your second post is beyond salvation

Europeans or Native Americans?

Says the kraut who lives in the country with the highest rate of sexual crimes in Europe, done by all the inmigrants over there.

Firsties are just a bunch of sorry ass subhumans that talk shit about other countries to cope with the reality of their own shitholes.