There are a lot of Blacks in Mexico. They live mainly in the southeastern costal areas near Veracruz and Guerrero. Because of the large amerindian population and geologic and topographical conditions, slaves were imported in fewer quantities than Brazil or the Antilles. In other words, you couldn't grow sugar in most of Mexico were the Indians were, like you can in the Caribbean.
There are a few Blacks in Argentina. Remember, the Western Asian powers (Europe) brought African slaves to the important parts of their empires, and would not have brought amny to Buenos Aires in Argentina, because it was an economic and cultural backwater until the 1850's.
This is why Argentina was one of the first, if not the first republic in the Americas to become independent from Spain--it was far away, and very little useful came from it (no gold or silve or spice). It wasn't until the US Civil War, and England needing beef (and refrigeration just invented) that Argentina became an important beef and agricultural exporter.
It was at this time that Argentina became bent on European immigration and Indian Wars, purposefully mimicking the US pattern, believing that such racist Social Darwinist policies would actually create a superpower and not an exporter of soccer players.
2006-07-30 23:58:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by Professor Campos 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
One of the biggest reasons was that they were not needed in these countries.
Both had tremendous populations of native peoples - In mexico it was the aztecs. When "discovered" by the spanish, their capital city was the fifth largest city in the world - it was alrger than london in 1500.
The spaniards enslaved the native maricans in both of these countries and due to the large number of natives there was very little need to import slaves.
The other south amercian countries like Brazil did not have an civilizations when discovered, they had very small populations and so slave labor had to be brought in.
2006-07-31 04:28:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by urbanbulldogge 4
·
0⤊
0⤋