"Racism in Brazil is veiled": the discourse of miscegenation and the concealment of the obvious
The discourse that racism in Brazil is veiled or that racism does not exist in this country formed by miscegenation: whose interests does it serve? This discourse exists in Brazilian society, media and political leaders disseminate it, and it has gained ground in recent controversies. Based on that...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) |
| Repositorio: | Temáticas (Campinas. Online) |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:inpec.econtents.bc.unicamp.br:article/13823 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://econtents.bc.unicamp.br/inpec/index.php/tematicas/article/view/13823 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Mestizaje Discurso político Discurso mediático Interpretaciones de Brasil Miscigenação Discurso midiático Interpretações do Brasil Miscegenation Media discourse Political discourse Interpretations of Brazil |
| Sumario: | The discourse that racism in Brazil is veiled or that racism does not exist in this country formed by miscegenation: whose interests does it serve? This discourse exists in Brazilian society, media and political leaders disseminate it, and it has gained ground in recent controversies. Based on that question, this article proposes a qualitative-interpretative analysis of four tweets by a political representative and of speeches and texts broadcasted in national media, seeking to understand the roots of this discourse and its implications for Brazilian society. Therefore, we started from a historical bibliographic review on interpreters of Brazil (Sílvio Romero, Gilberto Freyre, Sérgio Buarque de Holanda, Euclides da Cunha, Antonio Candido and others) that played a significant role in both consolidating the discourse of miscegenation as a core element of national identity and popularizing this conception. In dialogue with the current conjuncture, it is possible to see revoicings and ruptures in the discursive polemics and interests surrounding the hegemonic discourses on race and miscegenation. |
|---|