Group Dominance and the Myth of Racial Democracy: Antiracism Attitudes in Brazil

The ideologic construct referred to as the myth of racial democracy continues to constitute the central framework for understanding the “racial commonsense” in Brazil (Warren 2002; Winant 2001), as well as in much of Latin America (de la Fuente 2002; Wade 1997). The dominant trend in Brazilianist literature faults this construct for masking racism (Guimarães 2001; Winant 1999), discouraging positive black identification (Hanchard 1994), and neutralizing support for antiracism strategies (Twine 1998). However, some individuals question this wholly negative view, arguing that the myth of racial democracy can be harnessed in ways that promote subordinate populations (Andrews 2000; de la Fuente 2002; Segato 1998). This myth endorses the utopian dream of a less discriminatory society (Sheriff 2001) and can act as a “charter for social action” (Fry 2000:97). By viewing it as a positive cultural value, Da Matta (1997:74) wrote that we should “|.|.|.|elevate the myth of racial democracy as a patrimony capable of helping Brazil in .|.|. honoring its commitment to equalitarianism.” Whether the myth of racial democracy is viewed favorably or critically, a key issue is how it affects public opinion on important racial issues, such as explanations regarding racial inequality and attitudes toward antiracism strategies. Bailey (2002) tested the question concerning explanations for racial inequality using a 1995 data set. The test is replicated in this article with recent data, and my previous argument is extended through testing of the effects that racial inequality beliefs have on support for antiracism in Brazil. To explore these issues, I use a “general group dominance perspective” (Sidanius, Pratto, and Bobo 1996). The theories clustered under this label emphasize the functional role Group Dominance and the Myth of Racial Democracy: Antiracism Attitudes in Brazil