released hostage has FALLEN IN LUV with hamas "terrorist"

Depends on the country, in Brazil is mostly whites (descendants of either of european settlers and 19th/20th century when 5 million europeans migrated to Brazil) and pardos (mixed people who are a combination of all, portuguese settler, indigenous and african, with portuguese component still dominating. Pure blacks are a single digit minority and pure indigenous make like 1% of the population. The whole “mamelucos” “mulatos” thing does not exist anymore and has not existed since the 1800s when the current category racial system was implemented.

Argentina and Uruguay were mestizo majority countries with influent white minorities until the 1870s when the great european migration began altering their demographics, modern Chile and Paraguay are probably what pre migration Argentina looked like (both these countries are mestizo majority leaning towards european but still received large numbers of german, italian and slavic immigrants, just not as massive as a wave as Argentina/Uruguay and Brazil and almost non-existent african influence).

Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela have a larger african component than their neighbors South genetically and culturally. Peru and Bolivia are the only ones with large indigenous populations but even so they're like 25-30%. However Peruvian and Bolivian mestizos are more indigenous leaning unlike the Southern cone.

!macacos

In Brazil it depends on the region

North: Highest native mix

North East: Highest black population

Midwest: nobody cares about them

South East: white > native ~ black. Also lots of japs

South: white > native > black

Almost all of LatAm the predominant genetic origin of majority population is mayo/mayo-Injun, including places like Brazil where Indians were smaller in number.

Native American societal collapse is overstated tbh depending on what you mean by collapse. Demographically there was a drop but most of the people and customs survived, both in the pre-Colombian cities and kingdoms as well as the periphery tribal farmers and hunter in Northern Mexico, eastern Central America and Amazonian and Southern Cone South America (who then became sedentary because of the Spanish and the Portuguese). The Amerindian population recovered over time but slowly as many places within Americas merged/mestizajed with the Spanish and Portuguese society so population growth was disproportionately towards the ethnically Latinx population.

Some ethnic groups completely metizajed like the Mexica/Aztecs to the point that almost everyone Mexican descends from them, while others were only partially/left in tact like most Maya groups. In Brazil, the majority of Indians were completely absorbed, probably helped that most were small tribes.

African ancestry in LatAm is very smaller in comparison because unlike Amerindians and Spanish/Portuguese, they were primarily restricted to specific regions like the Caribbean Islands, the Caribbean coast, the Pacific coast of Colombia and northwest Ecuador, the Isthmus of Mexico, northern Chile and northeastern Brazil, so African ancestry is common there though primarily among the black population

It's natives, settlers, and immigrants. Places like Peru are basically just genetically the same as they used to be, places like Argentina are basically Italian, and and places like Chile are mixes of the settler and natives. Actual African influence is much smaller than native influence

Depends on a country to country basis

Colombia, Bolivia and Peru has a lot of indios, in Brazil they are mostly left on reservation-like areas, not exactly the same as the US, but close enough for you guys to grasp

Giving an indigenous woman the knot refers to rope while giving a white woman the knot refers to . I see.

It wouldn't be Brazil without some degree of degeneracy