Argentina players singing racist chant targeting French players after Copa America final

Off the top of my head I replied to this statement:

Even after checking his source the answer was correct as far as the statement goes. No relevant Argentinian cities had 50% and the few 50%+ readings are from regions (not cities) far up north where there was more mining and intensive agricultural activity.

I'm not being pedantic with the distinction between cities and regions as the former implies urban population which is what immediately looked completely off to me.

But a few did, as pointed out above? And Black Argentinians did once make up a much more significant percentage than you were initially willing to admit?

One of your initial points seemed to be that Afro argentines are a miniscule percentage of the population and always have been. Which....doesn't really seem fully accurate does it, plantation or no plantation?

Am I also misreading that the original Argentina constitution which opened the doors to the mass European migration which made the black population an irrelevance explicitly made the provision for open European migration only?

The thing is of course, nobody would even be bringing up such old historical factors if it weren't for people, including the Argentinians, attempting to claim their society is racism free.
 
It's pretty clear what you're suggesting here. So, let's test it.

Here is the quote where specific regions are named:



Your claim is that Buenos Aires is deliberately left out of this list because it contradicts the narrative. From what I can find, in 1778 the population of Buenos Aires consisted of 17 % black people. It seems to me that would fit very nicely into the list, and moreover, is perfectly consistent with the claim that the national average was 30 %, don't you think?

And for context the province of Buenos Aires currently represents and iirc represented more than 40% of the entire population. So it matches with your earlier point about densily populated areas being the main driver of the afro-argentines population. It's the opposite that makes no sense, if the afro-argentines were concentrated in rural areas it would mean that these areas were extremely homogeneous and very difficult to naturally alter but in a context where Argentina is maybe a very open minded country, if afro-argentines were a large minority in for example Buenos Aires, it would only take a few generations to make them less visible.

And to me that's the irony of these points and pushbacks, there is actually a scenario that could support the idea of Argentina being originally open minded which would lead to two things, a generally mixed society(at a biological level) and also a fairly white society because European immigrants were still the vast majority.
 
Don’t know how you have the patience :lol:

I start off assuming they're discussing in good faith and eventually give up after 3/4 times if it's obvious they're not.

Probably a total waste of time all things considered!
 
I agree with your assesment specially with the part of radicalising everything.

Anti-racism is not radical. At least it shouldn't be. There has been an insane shift lately where a demand for equality is extremist. Have a sit down and a think folks.
 
I start off assuming they're discussing in good faith and eventually give up after 3/4 times if it's obvious they're not.

Probably a total waste of time all things considered!
Aye, your intentions are good. So I guess don’t let it wear you down - others might be reading and find good perspective from yours (& many others’) posting, like me. I like reading through these threads, learn from others’ views etc but I barely post in them because they can quickly become out of hand.

Being born and raised here in South Africa as mixed race has certainly given us a bit of a unique context around racism and oppression as well - as I’m sure many others in their countries would have as well.
 
Anti-racism is not radical. At least it shouldn't be. There has been an insane shift lately where a demand for equality is extremist. Have a sit down and a think folks.

It's extremist if you are a staunch bigot. It's one of those things where people tell you where they are on that spectrum without realizing it.
 
The intention of the song is to "offend" the French because they take advantage of the virtues and physical advantages that Africans have to play soccer, as a way to touch their pride.
This is still the craziest line in this whole thread.
 
It's pretty clear what you're suggesting here. So, let's test it.

Here is the quote where specific regions are named:

Your claim is that Buenos Aires is deliberately left out of this list because it contradicts the narrative. From what I can find, in 1778 the population of Buenos Aires consisted of 17 % black people. It seems to me that would fit very nicely into the list, and moreover, is perfectly consistent with the claim that the national average was 30 %, don't you think?
17% both sounds plausible and is correct for the source you used (i.e. the same census as the other figures).

Demographic data from that time presents several issues given the lack of standards. White and coloured can be defined very differently. Locals would usually account mixed race as white, Europeans would do the opposite. That directly affects the rest, where, again, sometimes you get "coloured" which is a statistical salad and other times a more detailed breakdown.

A separate issue is execution, as whites were usually counted (actual census) and coloured were estimated. Even the white counts are often questioned as one of the most useful demographic records for that (church statistics on births, deaths and marriages) indicates whites were a lot more in absolute terms. My take on that is that churches charged for inscriptions so the discrepancies that can't be explained by net migration estimates are likely down to a lot of deaths not being registered as there's no real value in that.

I'm sure you also noticed the wikipedia link to the census data takes you nowhere. While you persevered in finding the cited data, the average person would have made a quick Google or ask ChatGPT for the share of black people in Buenos Aires, which as a result of all the lack of standards and complexity will largely hit you back with 30% or one third of the population.

So yes, you would exclude the 17% datapoint if you have an agenda and you would not if you are a contributor focused on providing people with relevant/useful information (the data point for the main city no less).
 
Anti-racism is not radical. At least it shouldn't be. There has been an insane shift lately where a demand for equality is extremist. Have a sit down and a think folks.
It's not the subject but the way people go about it that is radical.
 
Man, I would just use your words as a trigger, Im' not judging your view or yourself, just in case.

"In Conclusion, is the song bad? YES, IT IS VERY OFFENSIVE"

The song comes from a very misguided Football Lore, yes it's true. YET in that Lore, there are no rules or limits regarding xenophobia, racism, digs on genre, sexual orientation, social "level", etc...in that sense it's quite low key, it could have been way worse sadly.

So in the same way few people raises a hand if players/clubs are called cnuts, your wife is a whore, fecking midget, sudaca, paleto, retard, etc etc without involving a race or xenophobic slurr, ALL OF THEM have a "bad origin": The ONE that believes that a certain group, country, social background, genre, sexual orientation or ethnicity belongs to an inferior "place".
The song itself has a racist, xenophobic social component involved in it...and I explain it why down below...

Is the song racist? NO, AT ALL, IT WAS NEVER CREATED WITH THAT PURPOSE

It's true that at a certain degree, it wasn't created for that purpose, for chanting against black fellas, in fact in some way it's a dig against white French people. The idea is to mock the French for not using French players and using their old or current Colonies to snatch players from those areas since very young (or their fathers) and later "use" them for the NT.
A very debateable thing to say, even if it has some traction behind it too.
So at the end of the day the idea that runs under the whole concept, it's that French people CAN't be black, there IS the racial component of the song that black people in France or the world can feel offended by. Therefore there is an underlying racist/xenophobic component under it.

This football LORE should be adress? yes. If it's a song sang by fellow footballers? more. It's Enzo a racist? very much doubt it.

How should be adress the Football Lore? not precisly in a very silly way that it was portraited here in many posts I've read. But I don't have a real answer to that. And I do think also that there are lots of other "groups" included in such lore that should be analyzed and actually try to rethink the whole thing not just by the surface.


JUST AS A SIDE NOTE: Seeing lots of posts regarding how it's the deal down here, I'll give my input. So a final rant about social and ethnical and background in Argentina:

Regarding the silly armchair debate if Argentina it's racist or not, the country has it's racist/xenophobic component as any country in the world but its' not normally focus on black people. Like most cases in the world it's more social related and associate to a certain ethnical background with poor origins and their menace to society than anything, the usual inmigration it's the scapegoat (even the migration from inside, meaning the one from the rural areas to the Metropolis).

In fact as silly as it might sound, people like Enzo, with an amerindian look, are the ones that deal on daily basis with more prejudiced even if nowadays this ethnical background it's by far the more predominant in Argentina. The suppose predominant white Argentina does not exist anymore since time and this sometimes triggers some of the real racist fellas down here, like it happens in the USA or other Eruopean countries when certain countries and their ethnical origin it's not considered desireable or closer to the establishment.

Back to football, the Lore of course would involve chants or mockery against black people, but in a way that it's sadly a default in the whole world, hundreds of years of slavery and the status of black people are still present as an easy target, even if in every day life down here, black people are more prone to be seen as cool, rare and not a menace to "the society".

On the other hand inmigrant people from neigbour countries, more if they have some amerindian look and people from inside the country with an amerindian background are normally more stigmatized.
To the extremely silly point that you can easily see fans from rivals clubs with such ethnical origin giving shyte to each other with chants regarding that "brown" origin...pretty fecking stupid, but also an example of how societies divdide people that belong to people that do not belong. Sad to say the least.

Historically there are two reasons why black people aren't normally bad treated, mostly there are more scarce, (as a side note some of them have been Independence War Heroes, yet let's not dig too much why many black people have been involved In many Independence wars in the world), but mostly because they were never view as the scapegoat of financial problems, delicuency or a certain menacing religion carriers, etc due to massive inmigration.

Finally even if there still exist prejudiced towards an amerindian look that I've mentioned above and it's the main racial/xenophobic issue. The society itself it's quite diverse, the Spanniards since day one and the main Religion: Catholicism didn't went against mixed race relantionships, nor mixed religion marriages and a large etc.

There isn't a puritan Religious vein in the Country, even if the inmigration from Europe also involved lots of French, German, Russian, Polish, Croat, and even Anglo people...once here those type of prejudices were sort of diluted.

It become such a melting pot, of so many people escaping tragedy, even lately there are lots of Russians and Ukranians arriving and also quite a lot of people from many Africans countries trying to reset their lifes, that mostly people just get along. Laso from Asian counties like Korea and China mostly.
This melting pot enviroment made people call Armenians a "Turco (a Turkish, yeap you've heard it), an Italian from the North can be called a "Tano" (related to be from Naple), every single Spanniard is a "Gallego", a jewish origin person is a "Ruso (Russian)", a blond fella was a "Polaco (Polish, no matter if he was Spanniard, Italian, German, English or whatever)" and "Negrito or Negro (black or blacky)" its a term of endearment, no matter if you are brown, black, white or whatever.

So it is what it is, there are mostly xenophobic waves, deep worldwide racial issues, but mostly quite a melting pot without major issues regarding Religions and race, like Apartheid or Segregattion by Law and such.
Sorry for the long post, just a very on the fly and superficial view on the subject.
Interesting thread. There are differences in attitudes between continents and cultures, as we saw with Cavani. Chant was vile, of course, and I hope no United players involved. But also good and helps understanding to tease out the issues, and think aloud about all the implications.
 
Again, no. It's the resistance and mitigation that fuels the 'debate'. Anti-racism being framed as radical is absurd.

Exactly. The song itself is inappropriate and grounded in racism, as long as we all agree on that there is no drama, the vast majority of people didn't ask for sanctions and won't because these things are bound to happen in 2024 and the ideal answer is acknowledgement and education. The problem starts when a large amount of people try to make the wildest excuses for it or deny the nature of the song.
 
It's not the subject but the way people go about it that is radical.

The failure to acknowledge what is obvious and construction of nonsense, excuses, mitigation and whatabout others is more offensive and dangerous than the original act as it creates a culture where the unacceptable becomes normal, even desirable. All it really takes is to recognize that something bad has happened, understand why it is bad and try your best not to do it in the future.
 
Last edited:


Had this been posted? It's a poor statement imo

Indeed. There's a homophobic chant that many Utd fans sing about Chelsea that many (myself included in the past) don't see for what it is. Most of those that sing it probably wouldn't consider themselves homophobes. When someone explains the effect the chant has in the real world by contributing to a culture that allows homophobia to exist it becomes distasteful to continue engaging in such behaviour. I don't see how I would be able to claim I wasn't a homophobe if I continued to do something that was homophobic.

If the people who are singing these songs about the French didn't know they were racist before (I'm fairly sure they did), then they surely do now. What is so difficult about apologising and trying to do better ffs.
 


Had this been posted? It's a poor statement imo

Mocking the French after winning the Copa AMERICA (that France has nothing to do with) is terrible in itself, even considering that they played the WC final. Doing that with clear racist chants against players, born and raised in France, is another level of ignorance and racism. It’s like saying African American/black players in the U.S. are not real Americans and should play for African teams. Ridiculous and uncivilized.

Enzo and others knew the chants by heart. That tells you about his intentions. Go fix the lingering Economic and corruption problems in your country before talking this way about one of the greatest nations on the planet.

Vive la France ! A symbol of freedom, civilization and tolerance, forever!
 
At the end of the day, Enzo has apologized, and the issue will be dealt with by Chelsea. I invite everyone who wants to visit Argentina. You will find us to be very different from what some random opinion makes us out to be, and hopefully, you can form your own opinion. It is also a good opportunity for a budget holiday because it is pretty cheap.

Yeah it’s a great country mate absolutely. I’ve visited but I’m actually thinking about a longer stay for my next visit. Like with any country it’s the people that make great.

I was in Qatar for the world cup and the Argentinian fans brought so much joy and positive energy they made it a better experience for everyone.

The vast vast vast majority of people will look at a racist incident and not extrapolate that to an entire population and think everyone there is racist, and I am sure almost everyone posting in this thread feels that way too. Always a few dickheads of course.

The reaction of some ( not all ) Argentinians has been a bit disappointing, mind you. No matter what our views on the song at the core of this issue is a group of people who felt hurt by it, and felt it was racist, and I think we should all respect that first and foremost.
 
Mocking the French after winning the Copa AMERICA (that France has nothing to do with) is terrible in itself, even considering that they played the WC final. Doing that with clear racist chants against players, born and raised in France, is another level of ignorance and racism. It’s like saying African American/black players in the U.S. are not real Americans and should play for African teams. Ridiculous and uncivilized.

Enzo and others knew the chants by heart. That tells you about his intentions. Go fix the lingering Economic and corruption problems in your country before talking this way about one of the greatest nations on the planet.

Vive la France ! A symbol of freedom, civilization and tolerance, forever!
Next time the French win, they should just chant "your grandad was a nazi"
 
Next time the French win, they should just chant "your grandad was a nazi"
That’s not how it should be. Two wrongs don’t make it right.

For me, I would take the worst of France over the best of Argentina just like I would take the worst of France over the best of Russia and North Korea. I hope that helps to understand my view.
 
That’s not how it should be. Two wrongs don’t make it right.


For me, I would take the worst of France over the best of Argentina just like I would take the worst of France over the best of Russia and North Korea. I hope that helps to understand my view.

I don't know about that, the worst of France is as bad as the worst in countries with the worst reputations. The only difference is that the vast majority doesn't tolerate them at all, they exist, they are sometimes vocal but they are also vocally told to shut up and behave, they are listed as extremist/terrorists groups.
 
I don't know about that, the worst of France is as bad as the worst in countries with the worst reputations. The only difference is that the vast majority doesn't tolerate them at all, they exist, they are sometimes vocal but they are also vocally told to shut up and behave, they are listed as extremist/terrorists groups.
It’s a matter of choice. Others have the right to make different choices. That’s part what the French Revolution had brought to the world. Liberty.

I wouldn’t want to live in tough places in France (or anywhere for that matter). But, if given the choice between those places and the best places in Russia, North Korea or Argentina, I would choose the former.

OK Lisandro is transfering out of United and Martial is being re-signed.
I wouldn’t necessarily object to that either, especially the first part.
 
That’s not how it should be. Two wrongs don’t make it right.


For me, I would take the worst of France over the best of Argentina just like I would take the worst of France over the best of Russia and North Korea. I hope that helps to understand my view.

I see what you're trying to say even though I disagree vehemently. Like JP just said the worst in any country is the worst and the best in any country is the best. A core tenet about anti racism is judge a person as an individual and not part of a group with pre set qualities attributed to that group. I hope you meet 'the best' Argentinian/Russian/North korean one day just so you understand the craziness of your position.
 
I see what you're trying to say even though I disagree vehemently. Like JP just said the worst in any country is the worst and the best in any country is the best. A core tenet about anti racism is judge a person as an individual and not part of a group with pre set qualities attributed to that group. I hope you meet 'the best' Argentinian/Russian/North korean one day just so you understand the craziness of your position.
I didn’t talk about the people, but the places. Read my posts again, please. It’s a matter of preference. I rather live/visit some places than others. Nothing about the people.
 
It’s a matter of choice. Others have the right to make different choices. That’s part what the French Revolution had brought to the world. Liberty.

I wouldn’t want to live in tough places in France (or anywhere for that matter). But, if given the choice between those places and the best places in Russia, North Korea or Argentina, I would choose the former.

I don't agree with that because there are beautiful people and communities everywhere and awful people and communities everywhere. I know that the worst of France isn't better than the best of North Korea, Argentina or Russia, I would defintely take the average french life but to me it's extremely insulting to suggest that the worst of France is better than the best of what these countries and people have to offer.
 
For me, I would take the worst of France over the best of Argentina just like I would take the worst of France over the best of Russia and North Korea. I hope that helps to understand my view.
A poll last year found that 91% of black people in France had experienced racial discrimination there… so maybe the over the top stuff is going a tad bit too far?

And I am someone who likes France, but facts are facts.
 
A poll last year found that 91% of black people in France had experienced racial discrimination there… so maybe the over the top stuff is going a tad bit too far?

And I am someone who likes France, but facts are facts.

The problem with these polls is in the way they will be interpreted. The poll is likely representative but it doesn't tell you anything about France and racism, as an example in France the racisms that I have experienced has been rare, basically 3 or 5 occurences and they came english holidayers, North Africans and the latter have been by far the main source of racisms done to others that I have witnessed.
 
The problem with these polls is in the way they will be interpreted. The poll is likely representative but it doesn't tell you anything about France and racism, as an example in France the racisms that I have experienced has been rare, basically 3 or 5 occurences and they came english holidayers, North Africans and the latter have been by far the main source of racisms done to others that I have witnessed.
I’m just using it to prove the point that the worst of France still has racism, so his “I’ll take the worst of France over the best of Argentina” is a silly comment.
 
I didn’t talk about the people, but the places. Read my posts again, please. It’s a matter of preference. I rather live/visit some places than others. Nothing about the people.

If you accept that there are good and bad people in every country then we agree. Go all out with your geographical preferences
 
Not to mention that the poster you've quoted has no link to the UK whatsoever.
He has been a mod in a Manchester United forum for ages.

I'm sure he is aware that the fact that it took 57 years for the government to apologise, then retract the apology two years later, is in no way representative of British people being in two minds about that for absolute ages now. Not even when those are the very people they elect to run the country.

Just as much as whatever Argentinian polticians did 150-200 years ago (or their Spanish rulers before that) is in no way an appropraite basis to namecall today's Argentina as a country and Argentinians as a nation.

But a few did, as pointed out above? And Black Argentinians did once make up a much more significant percentage than you were initially willing to admit?

One of your initial points seemed to be that Afro argentines are a miniscule percentage of the population and always have been. Which....doesn't really seem fully accurate does it, plantation or no plantation?
You should probably drop the "willing to admit" angle, this is not a contest.

I AM willing to admit that my first instinct when thinking about 18th/early 19th Century "Argentina" revolves around knowledge of its main cities/power centres in the "Virreinato del Río de la Plata". I bunch all their northern provinces with the Andean region, the "Virreinato del Perú". They were different colonial circunscriptions with very different economic models (livestock and commerce vs extractive industries).

So yeah, missed those northern regions entirely when I replied.

Am I also misreading that the original Argentina constitution which opened the doors to the mass European migration which made the black population an irrelevance explicitly made the provision for open European migration only?
Never read it, but very likely.

Alberdi, the architect of that Constitution championed the free market and wanted to promote trade. Nothing promotes trade like having established communities from your trading partners. In fact, he would have much rather had a greater share of British/French migration than the Spanish/Italian one that overwhelmingly materialised. I wouldn't be surprised if he was racist either, geopolitical orchestrors usually have very strong views on nations, cultures, their "worth", etc.

They simply had no reason to be particularly interested in African immigration as the trade still routed via European colonial powers.

Is the exclusion of non-Europeans an indication they are all racist? Nah, simply not a worthy hill to die on when it took a few decades for the provinces to agree on a constitution and another decade of scuffles for Buenos Aires to submit to it.

Was the entire point of it to dilute the coloured contingent? Don't think that would have been a cardinal point in their agenda but a by-product.

The thing is of course, nobody would even be bringing up such old historical factors if it weren't for people, including the Argentinians, attempting to claim their society is racism free.
I don't think anyone believes that, but they are being portrayed at the complete opposite end of the spectrum. So much so that I've felt compelled to get stuck in here because I find much of the posting outrageous and as hateful as the song.

As @Just Hope mentioned, their interpretation of racism is Mississippi Burning, Rodney King, BLM... They are miles away from that reality.

You can of course come back with "you are always in these discussions taking the other side", as many have. You know why? I worked for and got to lead an Equal Opportunities charity for a few years. I moved on when I started feeling my colleagues and stakeholders were getting radicalised and with blinkers on as much as those whose views we tried to change/nudge.

You will always find me on the other side of an onslaught. Ying-yang and all that.
 
If you accept that there are good and bad people in every country then we agree. Go all out with your geographical preferences
Exactly this. It’s geography, nothing against the people.

As a White American, I rather live in Urban or Suburban areas (with many minorities) than Rural areas, even though there are more whites in those rural areas. Last week, I talked about the tough life conditions that people in some areas in the U.S. live in. It hurts me seeing that and would like that to improve, but I choose not to live there.

Argentina has produced a lot of talent, from football to economics. The country, though, is struggling, and has been struggling for decades. I know that partly due to my profession and partly due to the pain that I see from Argentinian friends that I know. Argentina is having more than 200% inflation rates. It’s shocking, and I want that improved.
 
I’m just using it to prove the point that the worst of France still has racism, so his “I’ll take the worst of France over the best of Argentina” is a silly comment.
1. I said that I “would” not “will”.
2. I also said that “ I wouldn’t want to live in tough places in France (or anywhere for that matter). But, if given the choice between those places and the best places in Russia, North Korea or Argentina, I would choose the former.”

To put it differently, if forced to choose between the above, I choose France. That’s perhaps a better way to put it.
 
As @Just Hope mentioned, their interpretation of racism is Mississippi Burning, Rodney King, BLM... They are miles away from that reality.

Perhaps those folk need to re-evaluate their interpretation of racism and how it manifests in the current reality.
 
Perhaps those folk need to re-evaluate their interpretation of racism and how it manifests in the current reality.

I'm not racist, I haven't hanged or burned anyone recently.
 
He has been a mod in a Manchester United forum for ages.

I'm sure he is aware that the fact that it took 57 years for the government to apologise, then retract the apology two years later, is in no way representative of British people being in two minds about that for absolute ages now. Not even when those are the very people they elect to run the country.

Just as much as whatever Argentinian polticians did 150-200 years ago (or their Spanish rulers before that) is in no way an appropraite basis to namecall today's Argentina as a country and Argentinians as a nation.


You should probably drop the "willing to admit" angle, this is not a contest.

I AM willing to admit that my first instinct when thinking about 18th/early 19th Century "Argentina" revolves around knowledge of its main cities/power centres in the "Virreinato del Río de la Plata". I bunch all their northern provinces with the Andean region, the "Virreinato del Perú". They were different colonial circunscriptions with very different economic models (livestock and commerce vs extractive industries).

So yeah, missed those northern regions entirely when I replied.


Never read it, but very likely.

Alberdi, the architect of that Constitution championed the free market and wanted to promote trade. Nothing promotes trade like having established communities from your trading partners. In fact, he would have much rather had a greater share of British/French migration than the Spanish/Italian one that overwhelmingly materialised. I wouldn't be surprised if he was racist either, geopolitical orchestrors usually have very strong views on nations, cultures, their "worth", etc.

They simply had no reason to be particularly interested in African immigration as the trade still routed via European colonial powers.

Is the exclusion of non-Europeans an indication they are all racist? Nah, simply not a worthy hill to die on when it took a few decades for the provinces to agree on a constitution and another decade of scuffles for Buenos Aires to submit to it.

Was the entire point of it to dilute the coloured contingent? Don't think that would have been a cardinal point in their agenda but a by-product.


I don't think anyone believes that, but they are being portrayed at the complete opposite end of the spectrum. So much so that I've felt compelled to get stuck in here because I find much of the posting outrageous and as hateful as the song.

As @Just Hope mentioned, their interpretation of racism is Mississippi Burning, Rodney King, BLM... They are miles away from that reality.

You can of course come back with "you are always in these discussions taking the other side", as many have. You know why? I worked for and got to lead an Equal Opportunities charity for a few years. I moved on when I started feeling my colleagues and stakeholders were getting radicalised and with blinkers on as much as those whose views we tried to change/nudge.

You will always find me on the other side of an onslaught. Ying-yang and all that.

He or she is a Dutch Canadian. Being a mod on a man utd forum does not at all mean they have some deep connection with the country and it would be about as relavent as me bringing up policies enacted by the Cuban government in this discussion with you. Regardless, as I said, British society was deeply homophobic at the time, remained so for quite a while after and still has work to do even now. The Turing castration and subsequent suicide is a literally perfect representation of this. Just as statements and decisions made by Argentine politicians in the 1800s.....also reflects the outlook of the society at the time. It's OK to admit that. You don't need to double down on every point.

I don't really understand how we can come to a shared understanding here when you won't even admit that a constitution which explicitly calls for European migration only doesn't have at least partial racist origins, at best. I understand and accept that trade and nation building will have been a huge factor but the inability to even accept that is genuinely so far from my own viewpoint that I don't understand the common ground there.

Unless you're going to stand on all. In which case I don't think anyone has claimed (or only some silly people) that all argentines were and are racist.

People most certainly do believe that. Mascherano seems to believe it. Pocho and the Brazilian guy who said that black people are just being overly sensitive about it. And this is exactly the problem that myself, @JPRouve etc have been trying to outline. It's great that Argentines don't lynch black people on the streets but we're looking for a little more than that really.

And don't worry, this isn't some unique attack on south Americans (as I already said earlier in this thread, its an incredible continent with incredible people and I love it there). As JPR mentions, a lot of the anti black racism in France actually comes from the north Africans, who see themselves as higher on the racial pyramid than the sub Saharan Africans. I get the same when I visit the Egyptian branch of my wife's family. I'll be followed around in shops, called the Arabic word for slave. Some of the family asked my wife if she wouldn't be worried about the kids being dark.

When challenged on it, they'll immediately clam up. How can we be racist? We are also Africans! We are the targets of racism! People have been living here peacefully in this country regardless of race for millenia. You are importing western racism debates here where it's not needed!

Sound familiar?

In the UK, the equivalent of the French Magrehbis are the South Asians so it's by no means unique to France. I've heard similar of the German Turks as well. We've had the same on here every time it's brought up regarding south America or southern European countries (in that case, white is replaced by 'Anglo Saxon'.

So yeah it's great that I don't have to worry about being lugged in chains or being burned by a man in a white hood. That doesn't mean racism shouldn't be called out where and when it does exist. And unfortunately many people from non white/ Anglo saxon backgrounds refuse to even acknowledge it's an issue, unless someone is being lynched like you said.