Learn Hardcore Portuguese (Brazil): Em um país livre, todas as pessoas poderiam amar quem quiserem. - In a free country, all people would be able to love whoever they want.

Because the sentence starts with Em um país livre (In a free country), it’s talking about a hypothetical situation, not the current reality. The conditional poderiam matches that idea of if the country were free, then they would be able to…

Why do we say em um país livre and not no país livre?

Em um país livre means in a free country (any free country, in general).

em + um = em um → in a (certain) free country, in any free country
em + o = no → no país livre would mean in the free country (a specific free country that both speaker and listener know about).

Here the idea is general and hypothetical: In a (hypothetical) free country…, so em um país livre is the natural choice.

Can we say num país livre instead of em um país livre?

Yes. Num is the contraction of em + um:

em um país livre = num país livre

In Brazilian Portuguese, num país livre is very common and sounds more colloquial / natural in speech.

em um país livre → slightly more formal or careful
num país livre → more everyday, fluent speech

Both are grammatically correct.

Why is it todas as pessoas and not todas pessoas?

With todo/toda/todos/todas plus a countable noun, Brazilian Portuguese almost always uses the article:

todas as pessoas = all the people / everyone
todos os dias = every day / all the days
todas as crianças = all the children

todas pessoas sounds wrong or at least very odd. The pattern is:

todo(s)/toda(s) + definite article (o/a/os/as) + noun
todas as pessoas, todos os alunos, toda a cidade, etc.

So todas as pessoas poderiam… is the natural, correct structure.

Could we say todo mundo poderia amar quem quisesse instead of todas as pessoas poderiam amar quem quiserem?

Yes, but it changes the style and a bit of the grammar:

todo mundo poderia amar quem quisesse
- todo mundo = everybody, more informal and colloquial
- quisesse = imperfect subjunctive (more hypothetical, less future-oriented)
todas as pessoas poderiam amar quem quiserem
- todas as pessoas = all people, more neutral/formal
- quiserem = future subjunctive (future, open-ended: whoever they might want in that context)

Both are understandable, but the original sounds slightly more formal and emphasizes a general principle in a hypothetical free country.

Why is amar in the infinitive (poderiam amar) and not conjugated like amariam?

The structure here is poder + infinitive:

poderiam amar = would be able to love / would be free to love

If you use amariam instead, the meaning shifts:

amariam quem quiserem = they would love whoever they wanted

Poderiam amar focuses on freedom / possibility / permission.
Amariam focuses on the action itself happening.

The original sentence is about freedom of choice (they would be allowed/able to love), not simply about what they would do.

What does quem mean here? Is it just “who”?

In this sentence, quem functions as an indefinite relative pronoun meaning:

whoever, anyone whom, whomever

So:

amar quem quiserem ≈ to love whoever they might want (to love)

It’s not referring to a specific person, but to any person they may choose.

What tense and mood is quiserem, and why is it used?

Quiserem is the future subjunctive of querer (3rd person plural).

Conjugation of querer in the future subjunctive:

quando eu quiser
quando você/ele/ela quiser
quando nós quisermos
quando vocês/eles/elas quiserem

It’s used because:

The choice (quem quiserem) is not specific and refers to a future or open-ended time (within that hypothetical free country).
After indefinite expressions like quem, quando, onde, etc., Portuguese often uses the future subjunctive to talk about whoever / whenever / wherever (in the future or in general).

So quem quiserem ≈ whoever they might want (now or in the future, in that scenario).

I learned that quem usually takes a singular verb. Why is it quem quiserem and not quem quiser?

This is a classic point of tension between grammar rules and real usage.

Traditional grammar often prefers quem with 3rd person singular:
- quem quiser (whoever wants)
In real Brazilian usage, speakers frequently make the verb agree with the logical antecedent:
- todas as pessoas … quem quiserem → verb in plural, agreeing with todas as pessoas.

So:

quem quiser = more normative / formal / school grammar
quem quiserem = very common in spoken Brazilian Portuguese, and many people accept it in writing too.

Your sentence is using the more natural, agreement-with-meaning pattern:
the subject is effectively all the people, so quiserem is plural.

Why is quiserem in the future subjunctive and not que queiram (present subjunctive) or quisessem (imperfect subjunctive)?

All three forms exist, but they carry different nuances:

quem quiserem (future subjunctive)
- open-ended, future-oriented or general: whoever they might want (at any time, in that context)
quem queiram (present subjunctive)
- can sound more like: whoever they want (right now); less typical after quem in this kind of general, hypothetical sentence.
quem quisessem (imperfect subjunctive)
- more remote / doubly hypothetical; would make the sentence heavier and often less natural.

In conditional, generic statements about possibility in a hypothetical world, Brazilian Portuguese strongly prefers the future subjunctive:
quem quiser(em), quando quiser(em), onde quiser(em), etc.

Do we need a preposition a before quem? For example, why not amar a quem quiserem?

Both are possible, but there is a nuance:

amar quem quiserem (without a)
- very common in everyday Brazilian Portuguese
- amar directly takes quem as its object: to love whoever they want
amar a quem quiserem (with a)
- sounds more formal / old-fashioned / literary
- uses the so‑called “personal a”, marking the direct object as a person more explicitly.

In modern spoken Brazilian Portuguese, amar quem quiserem is more natural and fully correct. The a is optional and usually omitted in casual speech.

Is the comma after livre necessary? Could we write Em um país livre todas as pessoas poderiam…?

The comma is recommended and normal, but in short sentences not absolutely mandatory:

Em um país livre, todas as pessoas poderiam amar…
- Introductory adverbial phrase (Em um país livre) separated by a comma → clearer, more standard.
Em um país livre todas as pessoas poderiam amar…
- Many people would still accept this, but it looks less polished.

In writing, especially in anything semi‑formal, you should keep the comma after Em um país livre.

Can we change the word order to Todas as pessoas, em um país livre, poderiam amar quem quiserem?

Yes, that word order is grammatically correct:

Todas as pessoas, em um país livre, poderiam amar quem quiserem.

But the emphasis changes:

Em um país livre, todas as pessoas…
- Starts by highlighting the condition (in a free country).
Todas as pessoas, em um país livre, poderiam…
- Starts by highlighting the people (all people), then adds the condition as extra information.

Both are valid; the original order is more typical when you want to strongly emphasize the hypothetical condition first.