What went wrong?

brazilian geography is a bitch for development altought widespread public and private corruption play its part

They are not more relevant than Russia, France or the UK. Spain is a has been country.

Also, you do realize all the above nations have smaller populations than Brazil. Brazil should be on par with Russia, China, Japan or the US but it isn't.

And they could only achieve that thanks to airconditioning(seriously, don't underestimate just how important that is)

Brazil has a larger population and a larger economy than Russia, and they are very close in economy to France and UK. They are also growing faster than both France and UK.
You talk about "has been countries", and you think Russia or UK have a future as leaders?

t. Wladimir Koppen

>GDP of Russia - 1.283 trillion USD (2016)
>GDP of Brazil - 1.796 trillion USD (2016)

Not him but Russia used to have a gdp of 2 trillion, if brazil were to swing its weight around like Russia its GDP would have tanked too and possibly to even lower levels

>Brazil has a larger population and a larger economy than Russia
Yet it's more irrelevant on the global stage.

>They are also growing faster than both France and UK.
No they aren't, Brazil has been in recession for several years now.

>You talk about "has been countries", and you think Russia or UK have a future as leaders?
Yes.

The Russian graph looks the same, except instead of "rising dollar" meme, its "sanctions dont hurt" meme.
And the only reason Brazil isn't bullying small states around it is because they don't want nor need to. Unlike Russia, Brazil didn't implode and lost half its good land as the dying Russian empire and later Soviet Union did. Brazil won its wars, and has the lands it wants and needs, and there's no reason to throw military weight around.
If Brazil wanted to, they could afford a larger force than Russia, since they both have more money, more men, and access to more licenses and even have more automated factories.

Brazil is Mexico tier, drug addicts who live in slums and kill each other for shits and giggles
But yeah there's that one city in Brazil which doesn't looks like it was nuked yesterday so they are relevant in modern day world and not a definition of a shithole
livegore.com/923/shock-teenage-brutally-killed-with-an-axe

You keep missing the point, with 200 million people Brazil should be a rival to the US, on a per capita basis what they achieved is dismal.

lack of investment in tech, and incentive to tech development. Brazil is too dependent on other nations when it comes to that, it's been focused in the primary sector for centuries, and it struggles to advance. Add that to the political chaos that erupts every 20~30 years and you have Brazil, a country that develops at turtle's pace

>brazil has access to more human resources, thus being the 8th largest economy in the world isn't enough

Using the same retardo logic, with its large territory, Russia should be the rival of USA and China combined, yet is very far behind. Oh, whats that? Different states have access to different resources? Some have people, others have oil, and thus we compare them based on GDP to equalize differences? Yeah, I know, shocker.

Nope, pretty sure people is one of the main determinants. India and China were economic powers since they exist because they have so many people.
Mao's China was a world power that stopped America in the Korean War, yet they were a total underperformer compared to today.

Russia will never be as powerful as the USSR because it lost a third of its people in the collapse.

They tried to fight the Anglo

There are 60-80 million Irish alive right now. The population of Ireland is 6 million.
I guess there is more than just "how many dudes".

>Mao's China was a world power
Nevermind, closing thread.

>60-80 million Irish
Part Irish descent American larpers don't count. Also they aren't living in Ireland, what's your point?

>I guess there is more than just "how many dudes".
Of course there's more. You could say population is the basis. A 70 million people world power (ie. The UK) is punching above its weight (overachiever), a 200 million regional power (Brazil) is an underachiever.

This is the linear non-Med mind I come to expect from Veeky Forums

A 100 kilogram professional boxer beats the shit of a 40 kilogram schoolgirl. You say that the schoolgirl won that fight, because she didn't die, thus overachieved considering the stats.
You are being relative, when there is no need for relativity. Brazil is the larger economy. Brazil is stronger than Russia, or Bulgaria, or Bolivia, and scale and relative "per capita" or "per mile" stats don't matter whatsoever.
If Russia invaded Estonia, I doubt kill/death ratios, or "Estonians killed more per capita than the Russians did", or "considering the sizes of the armies, Estonia did better", would matter.

>A 100 kilogram professional boxer beats the shit of a 40 kilogram schoolgirl. You say that the schoolgirl won that fight, because she didn't die, thus overachieved considering the stats.
Like you said, a big boxer beating a little girl has little merit. Thus Brazil having a larger economy than Bulgaria or Russia is not a feat, it's to be expected.

And since the UK has a larger economy than Brazil, in that case we have a small girl beating a boxer, according to your analogy.

As a brazilian, i will atempt to give a reasonably understandable awnser to the average Veeky Forums poster.

I believe that the biggest hinderence to any brazilian advancement in any field could always be traced from an omnipresent lack of urgency in the minds of brazilians at large.

Brazil had never in its etire existence been directly threatened by and outside power/entity.

Even in the Paraguay War, the most devastating the countries history, it was isolated in the southern, mostly uninhabited part of the nation. Additionally, it wasnt Solano Lopez ambition to detroy Brazil or its people, it was simply a conflit over land in the direct interest of Paraguay. In WWII the conflict was so far away it had very little, to any impact in most civilians life.

For the rest of its history Brazil`s biggest enemy had always been itself. The mediterranian culture that came from Portugal favored habits that encouraged lazyness and corruption. The power of the catholic church greatly hindered scientific advancement and critical thinking. The huge amount of uneducated slaves that resorted to theft and murder for a living became the standard in most parts of the country. The huge distances made centralizing authority difficult. Brazil`s greatest leader, Dom Pedro II, was an exeption in the history of this nation`s leaders, most of which were either corrupt, self interested, idiots,semi-communists, or right wing dictators.

The preocess of Nation Building is clomplex since it requires the good performance of several different individuals over a long strech of time. No amount of natural resources matter if the ones harnesing them have little interest in the nation`s well being.

rekt

>le d.pedro ii monarchy was good meme

>le d.pedro ii monarchy wasn`t good meme

It used to be the 5th, our living standards are laughable, our corruption is rooted in ways that a 1st worlder wouldn't comprehend, our great minds often leave the country and this phenomenom is only growing, despite our huge population, we haven't won a single nobel prize, etc etc...

The meme about Brazil wasted potential is 100% right

Ok, now who has more influence in the international theater? Brazil's influence on the global stage is Africa country-tier

This.

t. brazilian

>close enough to world trade routes

At the time when that mattered, it was a long fucking way from world trade routes.

Low IQ.

This is retarded. Being tropical has nothing to do with it.

How would this map look if everyone on Earth was given a quality education?

Nigeria would be Wakanda level. Seriously, some of those people are really smart in the right conditions.

All the sub 80's would merge into 85 or something like that.
There is a genetic difference, its not as dramatic as the map insists, but its there and measured many times.

Note these are averages, so basically a measure of "how many engineers per 10000 people", not a blank statement that every person of that population is an imbecile.

Why are you posting Lynn's oldest map and not the newest? IQ has been rising worldwide.

I'd also watch out for Rawanda, they've already had their internal genocide which means that we'd be next.

inb4 retards post some falling IQ map, ignoring that the average world IQ falls because low IQ populations have a demographic boom, not because they are getting dumber.
We are all getting smarter, but the less smart among us are multiplying very fast as they get access to vaccines, condoms, etc.

>too hot
If only the fertile crescent and the nile weren't so toasty. Then maybe civilization would have evolved.
Oh wait.

Egypt and Iraq of a few thousand years ago aren't the Egypt and Iraq of today.
To get a scale of the huge climate changes since then, imagine that Ur used to be a coastal city with a deep natural port. It is in the middle of a desert today.

It's not perfect geographic location actually. It's too hot, and heat seems to have some connection with poverty.

Also disease. Tropical diseases wreck a lot of societies.

>heat seems to have some connection with poverty.
The Cayman Islands exist bud

Heat goes with "laziness", or the unwillingness to torture yourself for the sake of material possessions. In the modern world this looks bad in spreadsheets.

Who cares? Honestly what's the point of building a society if ageing hasn't been cured. You're going to die anyway and the universe will be over forever from your perspective.

So, what makes heat so damning?
It's harder to work?
They kept up the same work when it got hot - building monuments, buildings, raising armies.
Forgive my skepticism, but I hope you realize how crazy this sounds on the face of it.

take one look at the map, the shear topgraphy exhausted one of the greatest mightiest powers the worlds ever known. gg, worth? didnt even retain, btfod

Bad policy and low quality human capital, primarily low quality human capital basically.

A brazilian.

>colonization based on patrimonialism and mercantilism
>chronic cultural disinterest for education
>feudal culture of laziness against productive work and market capitalism
>lack of a culture of active democracy
>concentration of land ownership established by the Portuguese crown
>widespread economic dependency on slavery until late 19th century, preventing the development of free labour and European immigration
>empoverishment of the Northeastern region (nordeste) after the middle of the 19th century
>collapse of the monarchy in 1889 and the subsequent chaos of the early republic
>advent of a liberal oligarchic republic, the weakening of the federal government and the takeover of the country by rural landlords, preventing widespread industrialization
>general military indiscipline from 1884 to 1964, causing a long-standing political instability and preventing the creation of professional armed forces
>general political instability since 1889
>the negative side of Vargas' legacy (extreme labour bureaucracy and the the submission of the workers to politicized unions)
>extreme decline of the political elite since 1889
>takeover of universities and culture by leftists after 1964 and the subsequent extreme decline of the intellectual elite
>boom of corruption and criminality after the 80s caused by demagogic politicians and marxists intellectuals

I've seen decline of the poltical elite a few times. What does that mean exactly?

Education doesnt affect IQ

> heat seems to have some connection with poverty.
Its evolution. People in warm countries dont have to plan ahead for winter constantly, they dont have to cooperate as much and the limiting factor for population isnt the availability of food but the access to territory. So evolution favours aggression over intelligence, forward planning and cooperation.

*blocks your path*

Tourism + tax haven. I don't think that would work for a country as big and so populated as Brazil.

Agricultural land concentrated on huge properties held by a nasty rich upper class, who tried their hardest to keep the country away from industralization. When someone finally tried to industrialize in the 40s (Perón), not only did he turn out to be a maniac that destroyed the political balance of the nation, but also a retard that brought protectionist practices that didn't work. And of course since he was so popular with the (lower class) people, he had/has a stream of little rat succesors that use his image to prop themselves up and continue his policies in order to steal from the government.

I forgot to say that another way he fucked the political balance is that whoever ISN'T a Peronist (who I described above) is an anti-Peronist who ALSO uses his image (in the opposite direction) to get into power, install whatever policies are opposite to what the Peronists want and also steal from the nation.

Shit institutions and corruption

it does though. Granted not as much as nutrition and a healthy early development but still it can bump up a few points

>probably surpass France and United Kingdom

Not anymore. We messed up in 2012. Will be more another 10 years to thing start working fine again.

this.

Spanish economic traditions

too many niggers, anything else is a meme rube goldberg response

hurr, brazil's problem is esencially lazyness durrrrr

Memes aside, it's the most developed country in Latin America.

That would be Chile.

It's Britain actually, because the Falklands are in SA.

industrialized, not developed

no but seriously it's low iq and combativeness, not only are brown people dumb but they are also quick to anger and violent

It is a large generalization (as some other posters have pointed out), but the overthrow of the progressive, constitutional monarchy in 1889 represents the single greatest negative turning point in Brazilian history.

Dom Pedro II was one of history's great leaders and the system he created should have been preserved.

hurrrr low iq brown and violent durrrrr

Is this all you can do, Veeky Forums brainlet?

>muh pinochet memes
Chile has Africa-tier social inequality.

>kazakhstan
>amazing social equality
The world bank is fucking retarded.

Niggers
also Niggers

Same thing retard.

The country have too many basketball brazilians. When tried to fix the issue in the XXth century, by importing european colonists to work, was already too late. Proof is that negroes were in huezil for 350 years, but are still living in mudhuts and tinshacks.

>(((index)))
wow, I'm sure I'm looking on an objective map not manipulated at all with totally objective variables

>afghanistan
>great social equality

>objective variables
Yes it uses objective variables like life expectancy, literacy, GDP per capita and material poverty, good job dumbass.

well that's an easy answer

Afghanistan has great social equality. Everyone is poor.

To understand that map you probably have to compare it with a GDP per capita map.

High GDP per capita and high social equality = Best
Mid GDP per capita and high social equality = Good
High GDP per capita and low social equality = Bad
Mid GDP per capita and low social equality = Worse
Low GDP per capita and whatever inequality = Worst

Once Brazil Mexico and Argentina modernize and industrialise I'm certain they will be considered comparable to Canada, the US and maybe even some western european nations, fine additions to the list of powers in the Western World.

That's an utopia. Quality of life equals population stability. We have too many poor people, they breed like rabbits. The capitalists will never allow proper population control (hurr durr eugenics are nazi hurr) for the sake of keeping wages low.

arjentinos narizones were industrialized and first world but their economy collapsed in 2001 like the fucking greeks they are never getting back up fucking meseros.

mexico will be a world power and the hambrientino sluts will come here to suck my brown cock.

A frist world drug cartel

>What went wrong?

Niggers and mulattos.

el mejicANO

People have been saying that since the 1800s. The fathers of the Federal Republic of Central America envisioned a powerful trade nation that was able to take advantage of having both the pacific and Atlantic nearby by building a canal.

Nowadays, the best they have is Panama.

Read guns, germs and steel. TLDR: latin americans wer hard working but not innovative. even the whites there became spoiled due to ownership of land which made them rich and they didnt invest shit or focus on education and innovation unlike in the America's where whites were innovative due to lack of productive farmland for everybody which necessitated the need for industrialization.

TLDR. Latin America borrowed tons of cash and capital from foreign financial institutions to fund "industrialization drives". What happened was that people didnt fucking save to make up for the influx of foreign capital which will be an issue.

then what happened was that large scale corruption and inequality meant people didnt save the money back into the country's own financial institutions. which was made worse by lack of trust in domestic finance because of corruption problems.

plus a lot of latin american governments were ruled by corrupt dictators and/or military juntas who mismanaged the economy after borrowing it

then what happens is that foreign financial institutions realize that their loans to latin america were basically junk and pulled money out which led to economic decline in the 1980s.

argentine is a much nicer than the rest of south america its like comparing south korea with thailand

ive been on a cruise ship to patagonia and its a developed country, also great landscapes and food. Id kill to have some of that ice creme.

anyway it surprised me because we never hear any news from that part of south america in yurop
t. Dutchfag

>giving a fuck about income equality
Why not use a legitimate measurement

Its the same for Argentina, Mexico and Brazil:

1.- Insane big countries that are Federal only in name but are mostly semi feudal, the logic is always the center vs the provinces. The resources always go from the provinces to the center, and not vice-versa
2.- Rampant corruption because of their semi-european semi-native culture, the people never identified themselves with the state, who was never stable enough to provide for their people even having access to so much resources.
3.- Every chance of reforming the state trampled by US intervention in fear of communism
4.- Having so much resources, they developed a lazy culture, this is a reality of most latin-american countries. This create the space for their corruption.
5.-Because of the US intervention, lots of people fucking hate the gringos, so they tend to vote for the decadent Marxist left (gringos know shit about politics, they will never have Marxists like we have over here), Kirshner came into power because of this, Lula, the same.

6,. The decadent Marxist left (decadent after the fall of the Soviets) are corrupt as the right, so the people is fucked over even if they have more social programs and aid now.
7.- The Right is not nationalist, they are just gringo’s servants who have never developed independent ways of thinking the economy, the politics or anything, so the people is being fucked on a daily basis by both factions.
Venezuela its another example of these seven points, they are fucked because they have so much oil, and their culture is shit, they love to waste resources in meaningless stuff, policies and reforms.
But countries that never had so much resources are flourishing now, Chile, Costa Rica, Uruguay, are the best latin American countries right now because of their size, their work-oriented culture and the fact that their political right and left aren’t as retarded as their other latin American counterparts.

>Mexico-tier

Hey we were doing really fine trading, whoring out to multinationals and shit until you American idiots pit the entire world into the antithesis swing. Now we’re facing a US 2016-tier election.

>The resources always go from the provinces to the center,
I am Argentine and here it's the other way around. Why do people love to make these sweeping generalizations about Latin America?

Buenos Aires was the richest province and now it's in the middle of the table because it pays out of the ass in taxes that go to the "Federal Coparticipation Fund" which benefits smaller provinces like San Luis.

>their semi-european semi-native culture, the people never identified themselves with the state
Very little native culture here, unless you mean it in a different way. The problem here is being at the cultural crossroads between Europe and Latin America, thus we are a nation with identity problems. Sarmiento called this dilemma "civilization and barbarism".

>who was never stable enough to provide for their people even having access to so much resources.
On the contrary people here are addicted to welfare, it should be cut.

>every chance of reforming the state trampled by US intervention in fear of communism
We did that to ourselves. Don't blame the US boogeyman.

>Having so much resources, they developed a lazy culture, this is a reality of most latin-american countries
That's a meme, Latin Americans work more ours in average.

>so they tend to vote for the decadent Marxist left (gringos know shit about politics, they will never have Marxists like we have over here), Kirshner came into power because of this
Total nonsense. Kirchner was not a Marxist and Peronism is an anti-Marxist ideology at its root. Cristina Kirchner in 2007 campaigned on "getting investments" and "following the policies of Angela Merkel", all of it was a lie, she ended up betraying her campaign promises but people didn't vote for her being leftist, she betrayed her constituents.