RIO DE JANEIRO — The executive manager for institutional relations at a Brazilian state bank took the microphone before roughly 150 people at a forum on slavery’s legacy in his country, which kidnapped more Africans for forced labor than any other nation.
“Today’s Bank of Brazil asks Black people for forgiveness,” André Machado said to the mostly Black audience at the Portela samba school in Rio de Janeiro.
“Directly or indirectly, all of Brazilian society should apologize to Black people for that sad moment in our history,” he said, reading a statement to audience members who sat watching from plastic chairs, their eyes fixed upon him.
Models wear outfits designed by students from Afro-Brazilian communities on Nov. 19, 2021, as part of Black Consciousness Awareness Month in Sao Paulo, Brazil. In Brazil, more than half the population self-identifies as Black or biracial.
Brazil — where more than half the population self-identifies as Black or biracial — has long resisted reckoning with its past. That reluctance has started loosening.
People are also reading…
Public prosecutors have begun probing Bank of Brazil, Latin America’s second-largest financial institution by assets, with $380 billion, for its historical links to the slave trade. Their investigation could yield a recommendation, an agreement or filing of legal action, and they invited Bank of Brazil to start a dialogue with Black people at the Portela school in the working-class Madureira neighborhood.
Ghyslaine Almeida e Cunha, a spiritual leader of the Afro-Brazilian religion Umbanda, traveled from the Amazonian city of Belem for what she called “an historic moment.” She welcomed the apology and announcement of measures, though the bank stopped short of pledging compensation.
“I came to say — on Portela’s sacred soil — that, yes, we do want reparations,” said Cunha.
People visit the archeological site Valongo Wharf, the main port of entry for enslaved Africans to Brazil and the Americas, on Nov. 13, 2021, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. UNESCO calls the wharf “the most important physical trace of the arrival of African slaves on the American continent.”
Brazil enslaved more people from Africa than any other country; nearly 5 million kidnapped Africans disembarked in Brazil, more than 12 times the number taken to mainland North America, according to estimates from the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade database. Brazil was the last country in the Western Hemisphere to abolish slavery, in 1888.
Valongo Wharf in Rio, which UNESCO calls “the most important physical trace of the arrival of African slaves on the American continent,” was only excavated in 2011.
Discrimination remains, and Black and biracial Brazilians are more likely to be poor, imprisoned and die violently. Fewer than a third of managerial positions are held by those groups, and they comprise one quarter of representatives in Brazil’s Lower House of Congress.
On Dec. 7, a Senate committee heard experts arguing that Brazil needs to prioritize compensation. And when Carnival kicks off next week, a samba school parading before tens of thousands of spectators and millions more TV viewers will present the story of a Black man whose family is seeking reparations.
A woman raises her fist while holding a sign with a visage of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva during a July 31, 2022, Black Women’s March in Rio de Janeiro. Da Silva, the leftist new president, took office in January 2023.
Brazil’s nascent clamor for reparations joins existing movements abroad. In the U.S., New York, California and Illinois have established task forces on the issue. In November, the African Union partnered with Caribbean countries to form a “united front” to persuade European nations to pay for “historical mass crimes.” Institutions such as Harvard University and the Bank of England have been confronting their historical ties to the slave trade, although neither has endorsed direct financial reparations.
And in 2021, President Joe Biden expressed support for a federal commission to study a national plan for reparations for Black Americans, but he has not supported any of the efforts at the state level.
Such discussions in the U.S. inspired Brazilian nonprofit Educafro to sue the federal government in May 2022, said Irapuã Santana, the lawyer who filed the suit. The organization, which fights for better access to education for Black and biracial Brazilians, is demanding an apology and a fund to combat racism, among other measures.
Brazil long projected itself as a inclusive democracy that had left racism behind. Only in recent decades has there been a concerted effort to publicly debunk that myth. The country has so far mostly dealt with slavery’s legacy through affirmative action, particularly its 2012 law obliging public universities to reserve a certain number of spaces for Black people.
Bank of Brazil President Tarciana Medeiros speaks during her swearing-in ceremony, backdropped by a screen that shows family members watching from the audience, on Jan. 16, 2023, in Brasilia, Brazil. Medeiros is the bank’s first Black president.
A pedestrian walks past the Sonhos de Liberdade mural created by artist Acme, which honors leaders in the fight for racial equality, on Nov. 17, 2021, in the Porto art district of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
But many on the right argue the past is irrelevant, and deny that any compensation is due. They are likely to fight any widespread push for reparations.
“What debt? I have never enslaved anyone in my life,” Jair Bolsonaro said in 2018, months before he won the presidency. The former leader and current standard-bearer for the right has questioned the basis for quotas, saying Black and white people should be treated equally. In October, his son proposed ending race-based quotas, and almost one-third of senators supported the measure.
Advocates for further atonement disagree.
“Faced with the horror of 350 years of slavery, quotas are insufficient. We need to expand the discussion on reparations,” said lawyer Humberto Adami, president of the Racial Equality Commission of the Brazilian Lawyers Institute.
That demands for reparations are for the first time being heard in public, prominent places is partly a reflection of the political climate ushered in by leftist President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who took office in January 2023. Last year, prosecutors started investigating Bank of Brazil, which is cooperating. The institution once allowed clients to declare enslaved Black people as financial assets to guarantee loans that built the economy — one example of how “slavery is central to Brazil’s formation,” said Thiago Campos Pessoa.
The Emancipation Proclamation in practice: A timeline
1863: The Emancipation Proclamation is issued
On Jan. 1, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation—but despite popular cultural opinion, it did not actually end slavery in the United States. This was partially because of its limited wording: Though it stated that “all persons held as slaves … are, and henceforward shall be free,” this only applied to states that had seceded from the Union. Loyal states and some members of the Confederacy the Union had captured were exempt.
Perhaps most importantly, the promised freedom of enslaved people was conditional. It would only be granted if the Union won the Civil War, which, at the time of the Proclamation, was in its third year.
The Emancipation Proclamation also stated men of color would be allowed to join the Union army, an invitation they gladly accepted. By the end of the Civil War, nearly 200,000 Black men had fought as soldiers for the Union.
1863: Lincoln meets with Frederick Douglass
Famed freedom champion Frederick Douglass, a formerly enslaved man, had a particular gripe concerning the abolition of slavery: He believed enslaved people could only find full liberation by participating in the Civil War.
After the Emancipation Proclamation was declared, Douglass finally had the go-ahead to begin recruiting the first official regiments of Black soldiers into the Union Army, including his two sons. During the war, many of these soldiers faced torture and reenslavement by the Confederate army. Douglass was so enraged he publicly criticized President Lincoln for neglecting to protect them, resulting in the two meeting at the White House for the first time on Aug. 10, 1863.
The meeting went reasonably well. Though Lincoln couldn’t address Douglass’ grievance on equal pay for Black soldiers, he agreed to sign any commission for Black soldiers the secretary of war recommended.
Douglass was invited to the White House at least three more times by Lincoln and was present at the president’s swearing-in for his second term, during which he publicly declared that slavery was “one of those offenses which in the providence of God must needs come.”
1863: The Conkling letter
Just a few weeks after meeting with Frederick Douglass, a letter from Lincoln to old friend James C. Conkling was read publicly at a mass meeting of Unionists in Springfield, Illinois. The location was timely and deliberate: Lincoln knew Union Democrats and Republicans were becoming concerningly polarized in Illinois, divided over varying opinions on the cause of the Civil War and the emancipation of enslaved people. The Conkling letter addressed this directly and bluntly, defending the Emancipation Proclamation in no uncertain terms.
In it, Lincoln wrote, “You say you will not fight to free negroes. Some of them seem willing to fight for you; but, no matter. Fight you, then exclusively to save the Union. I issued the proclamation on purpose to aid you in saving the Union. Whenever you shall have conquered all resistence to the Union, if I shall urge you to continue fighting, it will be an apt time then for you to declare you will not fight to free negroes.”
Reception to the public reading was enthusiastic and widespread: The entire letter was printed in its entirety in national letters in the days following, and it sparked a rally of over 50,000 in Springfield who met Lincoln’s words with cheers and tears.
1863: The Gettysburg Address
On Nov. 19, 1863, Lincoln delivered a remarkably short but undeniably impactful speech at the cemetery’s dedication at Gettysburg, the site of the deadliest battle of the Civil War. Lincoln’s speech followed the words of famous orator Edward Everett, who spoke for more than two hours beforehand. He later lamented that he failed to have as much impact as Lincoln achieved in just two minutes.
In his speech, Lincoln famously remarked that the “great task remaining before us, that from these honored dead we take increased devotion” to ensure “this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom.” Though he only referred to slavery opaquely as it fell under the umbrella of ‘freedom,’ the speech still marked the first time he noted the abolition of slavery as a stated goal of the Civil War.
His speech resulted in mixed reviews from papers that both panned and praised this speech. While Republicans (Lincoln’s party) mostly stayed loyal to the president, more radical Democrats felt Lincoln’s words reframed the justification for war, not to keep states from seceding but to free enslaved people.
Just a year after Lincoln publicly delivered the Gettysburg Address, a version of it was published and spread nationally in “Autograph Leaves of Our Country’s Authors.” It is remembered as one of America’s most pivotal speeches.
1865: Congress proposes the Thirteenth Amendment
Lincoln realized the Emancipation Proclamation alone would not be enough to ensure the full liberation of the enslaved; it would have to be accompanied by a constitutional amendment. The Thirteenth Amendment, which proposed the abolition of slavery, was first passed through the Senate in April 1864; it did not initially pass through the House, however, causing Lincoln to add it to the Republican Party platform for his 1864 bid for reelection. This strategy worked, and the House passed the bill proposing the amendment in January 1865, after which Lincoln submitted the Amendment for ratification by state governments.
The Thirteenth Amendment was officially ratified on Dec. 6, 1865. It stated, “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” This action marked, at least, a constitutional answer to the question of slavery—although cultural, economic, and social acceptance would still be years in the making.
1866: Civil Rights Act
Following Lincoln’s assassination, Andrew Johnson assumed the presidency. Johnson, however, had much less progressive views regarding slavery than Lincoln and thought the Civil War was to preserve the Union, which dramatically altered the path ahead for reconstruction.
Johnson advocated for a policy of “Presidential Reconstruction,” which did not mandate that Southern states guarantee African Americans the right to vote or participate in writing new state constitutions.
When the Civil Rights Act was first proposed in 1866, offering equal rights and citizenship to formerly enslaved people, Johnson vetoed it. Congress met him with opposition, overriding his veto shortly after.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866 officially granted African Americans citizenship and equal rights. It also theoretically barred discrimination in significant areas like housing or employment, but officials hardly enforced these protections. It would take another century, during the Civil Rights Movement, for these rights to be fully embraced. However, the Civil Rights Act of 1866 would lay the groundwork for the Fourteenth Amendment.
1867: Reconstruction Acts
As the reconstruction progressed, Congress passed a series of acts aimed at solving some of the central questions of how to integrate formerly enslaved people into society, as well as reintegrate Confederate states, despite continued objections from President Johnson.
Congress passed the First Reconstruction Act in February 1867 and proposed the full enfranchisement of all citizens (except for Confederates). When it arrived on Johnson’s desk for review, he attempted to veto it, claiming it would “coerce the people into the adoption of principles and measures to which it is known that they are opposed.”
Frustrated by former Confederate officials attempting to organize governments and undermine Reconstruction in the South, Congress overrode him.
The rest of the Reconstruction Acts would divide the Confederacy into military districts to oversee the establishment of new governments, limit former high-ranking Confederate military officials’ rights to vote and hold office, and, conversely, grant formerly enslaved males those same rights.
1868: The Fourteenth Amendment is ratified
In 1857, the Supreme Court ruled in Scott v. Sanford that African Americans—whether free or enslaved—were not U.S. citizens. This ruling was not overturned effectively until the Fourteenth Amendment, which was passed by Congress in June 1866 and ratified in July 1868.
When sending the amendment to the states for ratification, President Johnson declared openly to Congress that his doing so should “be considered as purely ministerial, and in no sense whatever committing the Executive to an approval or a recommendation” of its contents.
The Fourteenth Amendment granted citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States”—including formerly enslaved people—as well as equal protection under the law, stating, “nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
The amendment was a landmark in expanding civil rights beyond federal protections by directly addressing states. Its success was limited during the Reconstruction era, however. For years after its passing, the Supreme Court ruled the Fourteenth Amendment did not extend the rights of the first eight amendments to the states. Despite this, it did mobilize Black and white citizens with the promise of what could be.
The amendment’s legacy is more prominently apparent in the 20th century. Its phrase “equal protection of the law” has been used across court cases and enabled several historic civil rights protections in more modern eras, including Brown v. Board of Education (on racial segregation in public schools) and the University of California v. Bakke (on racial quotas in education).
The struggle didn’t end with the Fourteenth Amendment.
The country continues to work for freedom in the 21st century. It is a challenge that continually plays out in modern-day society and politics. As author, poet, and writer Elizabeth Alexander points out, “…freedom does have to do with the condition of being enslaved or not being enslaved. I think we also all know and experience that there is much more to it than that.”
Vote by vote, legislation by legislation, conversation by conversation, the country continues to contentiously make its way toward a truer sense of freedom and a society where all are truly equal.
Story editing by Carren Jao. Copy editing by Kristen Wegrzyn.