A Case for Opening US Gates to the World and Saving Brazil’s Amazon

US border with Mexico The immigration issue will net the GOP little, remember that the compromise that was recently shot down in the Senate had both bipartisan support and opposition, a fact that best illustrates how little U.S. policymakers understood the issues over which they squabbled so tenaciously.

Many arguments have been made against illegal immigration to this country, especially by the more conservative anti-immigration activists and Hill lawmakers.

Instead of taking a moral and logical stand in support of America's rich heritage of immigration, even some of the more "liberal" politicians have practically ceded the issue to their ideological foes and are being led in circles around watered-down guest worker programs and other tepid substitutes to a full-throated immigration strategy which this nation patently requires and which is inherently humane.

It is hard to blame humble citizens however, given the massive amount of misinformation and heavy duty propaganda being thrown against the most controversial aspects of immigration. In the absence of a level-headed coverage of the issue, many Americans have fallen back upon crude nativism to guide their understanding of immigration; a dangerous pattern of simplification that politicians help to fuel with paranoid sound bites reminiscent of the worst sci-fi films such as "no amnesty for criminals!," and an "alien invasion is occurring around you."

What then is the truth about the immigration invasion? No matter what scare tactics have been employed to caricature the debate up to now, regulated immigration is good for the United States. Open door immigration – the legalization of any and all immigrants who wish to come to the country, (which is what I am advocating), is a policy that has become so far removed from the recent political trends as to appear at first glance to be impossible to attain or unwise to seek.

Yet open unrestricted immigration was the U.S. law of the land from its founding up until 1924, and is the only policy that is both ethically acceptable and which is financially beneficial to the United States. Yet the demonization of immigrants has sharpened as the debate has heated up, fueled not only by illegal immigrants but by legal ones as well.

Five Myths about Immigration:

Though it might seem that the ethical dimensions behind maintaining our American heritage as a melting pot would be self-evident and therefore given priority, there are an unfortunate number of straw-man arguments that deserve to be properly burned down. The following are the five most prominent anti-immigrant bromides and a refutation of each of them.

"Immigrants take jobs from American workers!"

This is perhaps the most commonly cited rationale for anti-immigrant sentiment which was cynically mobilized by the foes of open immigration. The oversimplified logic behind this claim asserts that an unrestricted ingress of any alien wanting to come here would dangerously increase competition for jobs as well as cause grave social unrest.

This presumption is predicated on the assumption that not only is competition bad for an economy, but that an influx of immigrants would take jobs away without providing any new employment opportunities. In reality, jobs are not sacred or reserved for anyone in particular. In a capitalist society, one which conservatives claim to uphold, free competition is the lifeblood of economic prosperity.

The irony of supposedly "protecting" American jobs by denying free competition is that it inevitably encourages U.S. corporations to move the jobs out of the country in a process of outsourcing. If a nation is to remain competitive, it has to be based on a meritocracy – how well a worker can work at a job, and not on naked xenophobia.

The main problem over job "loss" to illegal immigrants is not due so much to their being immigrants, as much as their illegal status. Fearful of being deported, and usually in a desperate daily search for a job, illegal immigrants are not protected by minimum wage laws and thus become attractive targets for employers looking to cut costs by paying inhumane salaries.

If the illegal immigrants were legalized, and not in constant fear of deportation, they would be able to join labor unions, make investments, participate in civic society and work in relative security – just like other Americans.

If all immigrants were legalized, the threat of losing one's job to an immigrant who would work for next to nothing, would be nullified by the intrinsic protections they have as citizens, such as banning sub-minimum wage salaries, and eliminating any incentive employers might have to favor immigrants.

Moreover, an influx of legalized immigrants into the American economy will likely create as many new jobs for legal employees, as would be occupied by the new immigrants. Consider the beneficial results of a large pool of legal and naturalized immigrants: suddenly there will be millions of new Americans who will be buying food, consumer goods, furniture, housing, insurance, cars, electronics and appliances, not to mention creating a new generation of jobs in the service sector. Immigrants will need to be employed, but at the same time their mere presence will lead to the creation of still additional jobs.

Anti-immigrant militants who claim they want to "protect" American jobs from foreigners rarely take the above factors into consideration, and often propose the most radical "solutions" to the supposed problems that await being cured.

For example, Congressman Dana Rohrabacher of California claimed in one of his speeches, "Why don't we use our brains and use those people who are available to the United States, for example, the millions of young men, who are prisoners throughout our country, can pick the fruit and vegetables. I say, let the prisoners pick the fruits, let's not bid down the wages of the American worker with the guest worker program."

Forgetting entirely that the supposed point of his rabid anti-immigrant stance was to protect American workers, Rohrabacher's proposal in fact had nothing to do with protecting workers from having their jobs stolen, but instead sought to deny immigrants from working at unoccupied jobs by turning American prisoners into slaves!

Hostile lawmakers like Rohrabacher don't seem to understand what they are fighting for, because it certainly isn't the public weal of American workers. If anything, they would be supporting a counter-intuitive nativist policy of "protecting" unoccupied jobs from foreigners simply because they are foreign, and would rather see those fruits and vegetables rot than let an immigrant do a job no native or naturalized American was inclined to do.

"Immigrants depress our wages and are bad for the American Worker!"

This argument is usually used in tandem with the fear that immigrants will steal Americans' jobs. Much as is the case with claims of job theft, the problem is not that illegal immigrants are immigrants, but that they are illegal. Wages are depressed by illegal immigration because in most instances such refugees are not protected by labor laws or minimum wage regulations.

If the immigrants were legalized and future immigrants registered with an open door immigration mechanism, then they would be protected by the law, and would no longer be a threat to prevailing wages by working for less than minimum pay. What is truly a burden on American workers today is the current status quo: the maintenance of a de facto underclass of illegal immigrants who are unable to join labor unions or seek other protections under the law for fear of being outed.

Keeping the immigrants in constant fear and denying them the protections other workers automatically get is not only keeping the illegals more vulnerable, but is also threatening American workers whose labor protections make them less desirable to unscrupulous employers. The legalization of all immigrants would kill two birds with one stone, protecting both current American workers from the unbeatable competition from illegal immigrants and the immigrants from being manipulated and exploited by employers.

"But they are criminals! How can you grant them amnesty?"

"Illegal immigrants" are considered criminals because U.S. nativists and Washington policymakers have intentionally criminalized them in order to degrade their status and justify that an entire swath of the population is being stripped of protections and a political voice. As evidenced by past injustices perpetuated by skewed legal systems, one cannot be a true criminal in the context of unethical laws.

If a slave escaped from the anti-bellum south he/she was legally a criminal, but that was just because of the racist laws that had been set up to maintain the slave-owner's hegemony. The solution then, as now, is not to assault the immigrants as criminals, but to amend our laws to decriminalize those who are unjustly lumped with real wrongdoers.

Immigration Restrictions of Recent Ancestry

It is important to remember that up until the 20th century the U.S. had benefited from its near open-door immigration policy which, like democracy, was supported by most Americans even as Europe and much of the rest of the world remained under the thumb of entrenched authoritarian monarchies and oligarchs.

As the U.S. grew wealthy with the fruits of its swelling population's labor, the now substantially-better-off population had less incentive to favor populist and humanitarian causes as they began to climb out of poverty and as they forget about their own impoverished immigrant backgrounds.

In 1921 Congress passed the Emergency Quota Act, which was reinforced by the Immigration Act of 1924, limiting immigration to the U.S. from any country to two percent of the existing nationality/ethnic group in the country at the time. This legislation was specifically targeted to racially select Western European immigrants – namely Northern European Protestants- over migrants from less favored parts of the world, as well as favoring Protestant immigrants over Catholics, Jews and other unwanted religious denominations.

This bigoted legislation led to many tragedies, most famously the banning of hundreds of thousands of European Jews leading up to and during the 1930's and 1940's from immigrating to the U.S., leading to their inevitable destruction in the Holocaust.

Though the earlier legislation was overturned in 1965 with the Hart-Cellar Act, the nativist prejudice enforced for four decades by the 1924 Immigration Act extracted an intellectual toll on our long-standing self conception of the United States as a beacon of liberty.

After the tragedy of 9/11, anti-immigrant fervor again surged and has lead to irrational and jingoistic patriotism. Though after 9/11, more than half of Americans surveyed felt that tighter immigration controls would be very effective at enhancing U.S. security; logic seems to have been lost in translation.

How else can one explain what causes a populace attacked by an almost purely Saudi Arabian extremist movement that had been in the pay of the Reagan administration, and hailing from a nation that has been one of the White House's key allies, to decide that the Mexican-American border urgently requires better enforcement?

The notion that America should only allow a small number of immigrants to enter the country, and should use the admissions process to socially engineer American society, is a purely 20th century invention and flies in the face of past precedent. Amnesty for any and all "illegal" immigrants in this country is long overdue, and should be predicated merely upon their being registered as citizens or permanent residents like any legal immigrant would be, and have no felonious record.

The real wrongdoers are not immigrants, but the local politicians and nativists who have betrayed our nation's long heritage of being a haven for the hardworking, desperate masses.

"Immigrants will corrupt our culture or fail to assimilate."

The irrational xenophobia gripping American politics has led many to fear for their culture and lifestyle in the face of an immigrant "invasion." For some, America has reached its cultural limit, and any additional contribution of divergent mores – especially if its practices and customs are at odds with the prevailing Anglo-Teutonic value system – will somehow damage the existing cultural milieu.

The reality is that American culture and society has historically only been enriched by immigrants. Abandoning the melting pot doctrine out of fear of diversity is inherently opposed to the founding concept of the United States, as a free nation where no specific ideology or culture is supposed to dominate.

An American can walk the streets of almost any U.S. city and have Chinese, Italian, Thai, French, Mexican, Malaysian or any other ethnic food. American staples, like hot dogs and hamburgers are of German origin, while Apple pie had been a prized dessert throughout Europe long before the Americans made it a national icon.

Our transcontinental railroads were largely built by immigrants, and even our U.S. dollar was modeled on the Mexican Peso. The civil and human rights protected by the U.S. Constitution and bill of rights were formulated by French and English enlightenment philosophers long before they ended up on the agenda of the Founding Fathers.

The very land the U.S. now occupies was acquired, by means of a self-declared right of conquest, from the continent's Native Americans, while California, New Mexico, Arizona, Texas and Oklahoma were snapped up in an act of sheer imperialism, from Mexico in the Mexican-American War.

The reality is that the multi-cultural heritage of the United States is irreversible and in fact a boon to each generation of its citizens, who enjoy the benefits of the world's plethora of cultures in many arenas.

Any attempt by a section of society to claim cultural hegemony and status as the "true" American culture is simply engaging in an attempt to consolidate power unjustly, or oppress those who are different from themselves, something that has no place in a free country, nor traditionally has been given much of an audience.

"There isn't enough room in America and immigrants are a negative pressure on our environment"

This argument, while less commonly cited than the others, has more substantive weight in intellectual circles and among environmentalists who would normally be more responsive to a humanitarian case made by refugees clamoring to enter this country.

Though it is true that overpopulation is a real problem in the modern world, immigration, both legal and illegal, has little to do with it. Overpopulation in the United States is caused mostly by this country's own population, which grew from 76 million in 1900 to 300 million in 2000, with at no point more than 16 percent of its population being foreign born.

Even with this large internal growth, there is still far more room in the United States for prospective immigrants than many other potential receiving countries.

For an environmentalist concerned with the effects of overcrowding, it would be vastly preferable that an immigrant come to the United States over nations like India – whose population density is 10 times that of the U.S. – or Brazil, where crowded and impoverished citizens have resorted to harvesting swaths of the country's rainforest in order to clear more room for farming.

Environmental concerns are global: what happens in one part of the world will rapidly affect the global environment. As ecological health is a zero-sum situation, denying immigrants access to our country to help reduce local environmental strain will only cause environmental disaster in countries with less stringent green regulations.

Ironically, the greater the share of the world's population that resides in the U.S., the more control the authorities will have over their ecological footprint and the better their ability to enforce pro-environmental laws. If U.S. citizens try to harvest rainforests or damage other valuable natural resources, it is within this country's legal jurisdiction to stop them, whereas what occurs in third world nations experiencing crushing poverty is far from Washington's control.

The Real War on Terror

If most Americans took the time to look at the realities behind contemporary trends affecting immigration movement and the boon that such population swells have had on American society, then there wouldn't even be a debate, and the "issue" of immigration would disappear entirely.

Unfortunately, most Americans have long been intentionally misled by fear-mongering politicians who will use nativist, isolationist, and to a large extent, racist arguments to attract undeserved votes and as a base to achieve personal power. The bigoted isolationism to which many Americans subscribe is usually out of a concern for their own self interest, fear for their jobs, their communities, and their first world comforts, as well as the simple fear of the unknown.

Many citizens of the most powerful nation in the world live in constant fear which is exploited and fed by politicians, while corporations want all the illegal immigrants that they can get, because low wages and marginal life styles are good for business.

The above arguments attempt to derail some of the fears that drive many Americans to act against their own best interests, albeit unknowingly. By denying mass immigration into the wealthiest country in the world, the U.S. has essentially created a reverse Berlin Wall.

If the U.S. creates an artificially high density of labor in other countries by denying access to our shores (and the labor protections that U.S. citizenship entails), we will contribute to a situation of guaranteed poverty where local workers will be desperate enough to work for less than subsistence wages.

With the rise of globalization and the spread of multi-national corporations, the impulsive sealing of national borders is being turned to in order to help secure a nation's livelihood, despite the fact that it will only hinder the working populace on both sides of the border.

National economic strength greatly depends upon the international economic wellbeing and a free migration of labor that allows for the diffusion of both poverty and prosperity on a global scale, facilitating a blending of regional living conditions, no matter how scary the concept sounds.

The real war on terror needs to start at home, and shouldn't just be aimed at catching terrorists. U.S. citizens must break free from the fear and terror that has been used to shackle and manipulate them and realize that any resort to nativism is not only ethically wrong, but is against their self interest.

Fear not the immigrant whose life and priorities are much the same as your own. The only thing we have to fear is being used to achieve the ends of the political-industrial complex, which has no qualms with exploiting the huddled masses yearning to breathe free, and who will gladly sow misinformation and prejudice when it suits their needs.

The above opinion piece on the U.S. Immigration Issue provides a somewhat radical assessment of the question, "Who should be allowed to enter the country?" It does not have the official imprimatur of either COHA or a number of the author's colleagues who feel that its thesis will be considered to be too controversial. Though some may see it as radical, the essay is being presented here because of the clarity and intellectual merit of its argument, the boldness of its position, and the courage of its thesis.

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Alex Racheotes.

The Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) – www.coha.org – is a think tank established in 1975 to discuss and promote inter-American relationship. Email: coha@coha.org.


  • Show Comments (13)

  • O Velhinho

    [quote]Isn’t it interesting: Most of the European countries welcome back and give citzenship to most descendents of their migrants, while the USA at the same time build a new wall in the frontier with Mexico… Sign of the times.

    It is an interesting point you made that most of the European countries welcome back and give citizenship to most descendents of their migrants. Of course they need young people to do the hard work,as their population is getting old and the birth rate is almost zero. No wonder the wife of our President has got Italian citizenship for her and all the children “para um futuro melhor para os meus filhos”.

    I think that you should apply for the citizenship of the country your ancestors emigrated from .If they came from U.S., I do not think that the Americans would mind letting you in.

    As for me, my friend, I am perfectly happy to be in my country and contribute to its growth in my own way. Have no intention of going back to the country where my ancestors came from. Mine has got lots of problems,but which country doesnt have?

  • forrest Brown

    we could beat this horse till it is hambuger
    i did not say whites would be the miniorty whitch they will be as they are in europe ,i ment born in country leagle imgrants.
    all of europ is facing the same fate as the USA and it was shown in france durning the riots in france over jobs for muslims , and jobs .
    in germany over the old russian union peoples invading them and working in all trades and pushing the system to the breaking point .
    england , go there and you will find indans , and the people from all over the old empire working and living and in some cases draining
    the resorces of the people that work to get ahead .
    what we are seeing is a movement from contries that dont suport there people to countries that do and in the middle are the working class people of the host nation
    whom pay the bills whitch pays the taxes , for all the people to get all the free medical , food , housing , and to live the way the people should be able to live in there own countries .
    the UN ,WTO,WORLD BANK, needs to step up and make the goverments of thies countries do something for the people instead of linning there own pockets with money from
    the US and other donnor countries ,

    as far as the US being Xenophobic look at it this way in most cases people are given a court date to explain why they should be able to stay in the USA,
    i use my own case in brasil i was deported , my wife was a brasilian , i had a boat worth over $350.000 that under int law i should have been able to stay .
    NO just get on a plane was all i was told , whitch i then lost my boat and spent the next 3 years getting my wife a visa .

    so why should the some odd 500,000 US citisen that are married non resedent alians have to stand in line to do it the right way when people feel
    we should open up our borders to just any one with a want to come here and live free , and spong off what they can and then go back when it is found they have broken the law .

    the goverments fo all countries collect taxes from there people to do for them what the goverment does with the money is there own fault for doing them wrong
    not the goverments and peoples of first world natitions that try half ass in most cases to do right thing

  • lucas R.

    Europe X USA
    Isn’t it interesting: Most of the European countries welcome back and give citzenship to most descendents of their migrants, while the USA at the same time build a new wall in the frontier with Mexico… Sign of the times.
    Nobody can refuse the fact that Euro is becoming more and more strong while USA Dollar is down the hill; USA is target of international terror while Europe is not, except for those countries (England and Spain) that gives (or used to give) blind support to the USA; USA live in a constant nightmare trying to defend their life standards and are pretty much concerned with the “invasion” of the non white people.
    All signs show something is wrong in the USA policy against migrants, and what we see, more and more, are “invaders” inflating their country. Like Forest says above, in less than two decades, “white” (!) people will be minority…
    The policy USA is implementing is proven to be wrong, and unless they change it and become more friendly to other cultures and other people, exorcizing forever their Xenophobic way of thinking, maybe in five decades, “white people” in USA will be expelled from that land forever…

  • forrest Brown

    ALEX ALEX ALEX what were you thinking
    so what an idea for empty out every 3 world stink hole as the rush of people comming to the US .

    by the numbers i can come up with the population of the US would jump to over 500.000.000 in two years .
    we would not be able to water feed or house them much less keep law and order .
    and the medical witch doctors would be working in the streest .

    our sewer , gas , compaines would have to fold to the on slaut of people robing them along with phone and ele services .

    the persons that wrote this need to set back and think
    about what if .

    would it not be easer for brasil to enforce its own laws about clear cutting the amazon
    and to make the goverment start working for its people not for themselves

  • Ric

    Àƒ“h What a Feeling
    ItÀ‚´s losers revenge against the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, passed 38-14 in the senate, resented even though, unusually, the winner of the war (USA) paid the losers (Mexico) $18,250,000 in indemnity.

    Has anyone revoked the principle of Manifest Destiny? IÀ‚´ve been out of the office for awhile so might have missed it.

  • Jay Glenn

    Illegal is illegal
    Once again itˢ۪s all Americas fault. It Hugo Chavez invaded the Amazon because his people needed land to live on that would be illegal. But he should be rewarded after he did it and not punished, but made legal after the fact? Letˢ۪s let any one into the USA. That is if they can pass the Brazilian Standards for Permanent visa. $50,000. USD or Income > $2,000.00 / month from there home country. If America is so short sighted why is it so desirable?

  • João da Silva

    [quote]it took me over 3 years to get my wife up to the us the right way while the rich Brazilians come up on a tourist visa and never go back ,right or wrong

    At least, the U.S. received ( and still) is receiving the immigrants with “Brain Power” from all over the world. Cant say about Brazil nor the other countries in Latin America. We are sending plenty of muscle power and few brain power. We dont want to import “Brain Power”, which of course is a threat to our soverignity!

    Thank God,Van Braun decided to go over to U.S. instead of escaping to Argentina.

    What is surprising is that we have a large land mass, with less population than that of U.S. Still we are sending the unskilled labor to other countries en masse.

    Quite disgusting.

  • forrest Brown

    me thinks the tank is not so smart
    or Brazil, where crowded and impoverished citizens have resorted to harvesting swaths of the country’s rainforest in order to clear more room for farming.
    used to make money not feed the people of brasil

    If the U.S. creates an artificially high density of labor in other countries by denying access to our shores (and the labor protections that U.S. citizenship entails), we will contribute to a situation of guaranteed poverty where local workers will be desperate enough to work for less than subsistence wages.
    it should be the home countries that make jobs for there own people as we have sent 1/3 of our jobs are outsorced now

    The very land the U.S. now occupies was acquired, by means of a self-declared right of conquest, from the continent’s Native Americans, while California, New Mexico, Arizona, Texas and Oklahoma were snapped up in an act of sheer imperialism, from Mexico in the Mexican-American War.

    from where i look that has been done for the past 5000 years why now this country.

    t is important to remember that up until the 20th century the U.S. had benefited from its near open-door immigration policy which, like democracy, was supported by most Americans even as Europe and much of the rest of the world remained under the thumb of entrenched authoritarian monarchies and oligarchs.

    things change as people and countries grow up

    If all immigrants were legalized, the threat of losing one’s job to an immigrant who would work for next to nothing, would be nullified by the intrinsic protections they have as citizens, such as banning sub-minimum wage salaries, and eliminating any incentive employers might have to favor immigrants.

    i think you dump 8 million people into the job force than that smart business man would see how much less he could hire people for to do the same job

  • forrest Brown

    that is so it is easer to slide it in DD
    the other side

    it took me over 3 years to get my wife up to the us the right way while the rich Brazilians come up on a tourist visa and never go back ,right or wrong

    the average wage paid today to working class people is the same a it was in the mid 80
    as the aliens will work for a lower wage even after they get papers , right or wrong

    the us spends millions of dollars a year translating paperwork into Spanish and 24 other languages , as people that have been here 20 years claim if they learn English it would cause them to loose there cultures , right or wrong

    if you loose your job to outsourcing you cannot go to Mexico or India and get it back you arnt allowed to work in there country, right or wrong

    30 % of the people in jail are eagle immigrants , in the US when the US wants to send them to there home countries to finish out there jail terms they sue to stay in the US
    right or wrong

    40 % of all Babbie’s born on welfare in the US were to illegal immigrants , right or wrong

    at the present rate of child birth the Spanish race will be larger than the black race in 8 years and 16 years more than the white race Right or wrong

    in the past 3 years poi lo , yellow fever , TB and cognitive itus have reemerged in the US Right or wrong

    I do blame the US government and big business for this problem , and it has spread all over the world all the first world countries are having the same problem ,

    why should we as citizens have to put up with the increased taxes , burden on health care , housing , schooling , social welfare programs for those whom have broken the law
    right or wrong

    and now the government wants to reward them by letting them stay and paying a small fine , it has been proven the amount of the fine would not even cover the salaries of the government employees that it would take to make them legal .

  • Ric

    Goody Goody
    COHA has finally done something positive in publishing this article, although IÀ‚´m not sure if many American voters will be able to read it.

    The people whose opinions will determine policy in this debate are the American voters. No matter how sincere, convinced, angry, or determined non-US citizens are regarding this issue, the effect of their opinions will have almost zero effect on policy.

    And what the author has done here is basically insult the intelligence, motives and morality of the American voters. I wish they all could read it. Because if they could his cause would lose votes rather than convince anyone to side with his position. ThatÀ‚´s what normally happens when one emotes, engages in hyperbole, and foams at the mouth literarily.

    He says that policymakers are stupid (“donÀ‚´t understand”); Americans are driven by a “crude nativism”; “rabid’, “hostile”, “bigoted legislation”;…..

    He blames the USA in part for the Holocaust; “nativist”; irrational and jingositic patriotism, xenophobia, etc.

    Keep the rhetoric coming, you misguided blowhard, you are doing more for Buchananism than he could ever do himself. Thanks.

  • doggydaddy

    I can’t believe its really butter!
    This article is margarine, what a fake piece of dribble this is. aes is right, it not the history but an opinion….

  • ch.c.

    More stupid article…there is not !
    If uncontrolled immigration is as good as the article want us to swallow, why then Brazil doesnt open its doors to less wealthy countries ifrom Latin America AND …..Africa ??????

    What does Brazil when they arrest a foreigner without visa and/or without work permit ???????
    What do the Brazils customs when someone wants to enter Brazil without a visa ??????

    If what 0razil does is good, why then it becomes bad when others are doing the same as you do ?

  • aes

    Criminality is not criminality, tresspassing is not tresspassing, breaking and entering is not breaking and entering, and pigs can fly. Let the Mexicans stand in line like the rest of the world. What gives them the right to crash the gate? Because they did? What about the ten million people that could not get in because their place was stolen? The arguments presented are specious, and falacious. The history presented is not history, but opinion. It is a prescription for selfdestruction. It is a chronicle for lemmings.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

comment *

  • name *

  • email *

  • website *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


You May Also Like

Milton Hatoum: Author from Brazil, Voice of Many Cultures

Good literature is not always a synonym of immediate success with the public. There ...

Brazil Fearing Repatriation of Green to the US

Brazil’s markets recovered somewhat on bargain hunting, as U.S. equities benefited from easing concerns ...

All Bullish on Brazil: Central Banks Sees 5.8% Growth, Finance Minister, 5.2%

In 2010, after stagnation last year, Brazil’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) should grow 5.2%. ...

In Brazilian Courts Little Has Changed Since US Nun’s Murder

Social movements and human rights groups suffered yet another defeat this month at the ...

Brazil Strikes Light Oil Under 2 Kms of Salt

Petrobras, Brazil’s state-owned oil company, confirmed  in a press statement, the existence of light ...

Brazilian Airline Gol Celebrates 7th Birthday Flying 7 Million

Brazil Airline Gol, which also owns Varig Airline, has released passenger statistics for the ...

Fighting Poverty Protects Democracy, Brazil and Mercosur Agree

Eight foreign ministers and 11 undersecretaries from the Rio Group of Latin American nations ...

Good Prospects for Brazil Don’t Prevent Market Fall

Latin American stocks slumped again this Wednesday, March 8, amid ongoing concerns over rising ...

Brazilian Congress Might Consider Lula’s Impeachment

Brazil’s ruling party, the PT (Workers’ Party) was shaken by accusations that it bribed ...

Brazil Sees Cape Verde as Warehouse for Its Products

In addition to the various cooperation agreements signed on January 14 with Cape Verde, ...