Chile Forum

I referenced the 11 sept 73 only for an example of a major crisis; I was in no capacity linking the inequality in income distribution with the golpe militar. Just to clarify, sorry if it came off otherwise.

tombrad2 wrote:I changed my mind as soon as I had to earn my living
Really it was a slow process, the age I guess

Tom...if and only if you feel comfortable discussing it more at length, I would be curious to know what your political views were then and what they have become now. Also...again if you care to elaborate...why did you stay in Chile when so many socialist minded Chileans left the country.

It is interesting to note that many Chileans who left are coming back. I met a Chilean at the gym I go to the other day who told me that half the community of Chileans in Edmonton (and there were apparently thousands here at one time) have headed back to Chile. That's an incredible statement to make. He literally said half. It's as if there is a major migration back to Chile.

I wonder what affect all these Chileans will have in Chile given that they have tasted the "good" life in North America and have become accustomed to spending money in ways that most Chileans can only dream of. They have also lived in cities that have little if any stray dogs, machismo, little petty crime, and so forth.

It will be hard for many of them I think. I wonder if and how their socialist viewpoints have also changed.

Carlos

PS. By the way RWS was correct in surmising that I did not mean to say that the income inequality is THE problem in Chile. It is one of many but it is one of the bigger problems I think.

RWS wrote:Ahhh . . . you remind me, Tomás, of the remark which a wise Frenchman made a century ago: "the man is not a socialist when he is young, has no heart; the man who is a socialist when he is old, has no brain"!

Correct me if I am wrong RWS but I think you might have meant to say "the man who is a socialist when he is young, has no heart; the man who is a socialist when he is old, has no brain".

Carlos

You know I was surprised to read yesterday that the Chilean Parliament actually ASKED the military to intervene. Does anyone who lived through that time period in Chile or otherwise know if that is true? That would certainly paint the golpe militar in a better light I think.

Carlos

carlos wrote:. . . [T]he Chilean Parliament actually ASKED the military to intervene. . . .

So I have read, and so my Chilean kinsmen tell me (they are not military families, though they are well-off, but I find them intelligent and well-educated, too: so I believe them; one at the time was, if I remember correctly, a senador). The Congreso had become alarmed by the shortages of even basic foodstuffs and growing middle-class unrest, all induced by Allende's fiscal and confiscatory policies (deliberate? some said and say so, noting Marxist-Leninist actions in occupied Eastern Europe designed to wipe out the democratic middle classes), and apparently believed that a military ouster of Allende (no killing was contemplated, perhaps amazingly) would be in defense both of the constitution and of the nation.

Of course, probably no one in the congress foresaw that the coup would lead to harsh repression and a decade and a half of virtual dictatorship. On the other hand, the economic reforms instituted under Pinochet laid the foundation for the thriving nation of today. And the matter's even more complicated. I suppose that Pinochet, as Napoleon, will always be seen as a complex, conflicted man, both heroic and villainous.

carlos wrote:Correct me if I am wrong RWS but I think you might have meant to say "the man who is a socialist when he is young, has no heart; the man who is a socialist when he is old, has no brain".
Carlos

No, the Frenchman actually wrote something (I no longer remember either the French original or the author, though it might have been H. Taine) to the effect of, "the man is not a socialist when he is young, has no heart; the man who is a socialist when he is old, has no brain." The meaning, as I understand the aphorism, is that youth are ruled by emotions, the old, by wisdom and experience.

Well Carlos, the social process in Chile during Allendes era was very similar to the actual process in Bolivia, left parties tried to impose deep changes having not enough popular backup (in their best moment, Allende had almost 40% of votes and quickly the 60% remaining allied against him).

So, when left was in the presidency they realized that they had the goverment but not the power, they was legally impaired to introduce socialist reforms so they opted by two paralell courses of action:

1.-La rebelion popular: encourage their masses to take illegally properties and business, in 1972 there was around 40.000 business/factories ilegally taked in Chile, after this taking the govermente appointed an "interventor" to -supposedly- regularize the situation (in fact the industries was confiscated)

2.-La legalidad sobrepasada: this mean to stretch the interpretation of law to carry on several things that they was legally impaired.

Nothe that Unidad Popular was at first a very idealistic movement, many of us where a little fanatic about the historic mission of UP and we considered that legallity (la legalidad busguesa) was a barrier .imposed by burgeois to prevent that people take the power, so, to act illegally was completly legitimate.

Well the initial idealism turns on fanatism very quick, specially with the fierce reply of those confiscated (you know the machiavello quote: you can kill the father to a man and he forgive yopu, but if you confiscate him he will never fforget not forgive in their life). The levels of hate was enormeous by both sides, and here I think is good to clarify one issue.

The violence after coup was not a military excess as many people tends to consider, It was a deep fury sentiment between both parties and the violence, murders, tortures, fom 1973-74 was only a reflect of the hate between chileans those days, many people from rigth parties now forget that in those years endorsed the represiion with entusiamsm claiming that "el unico comunista bueno es el comunista muerto". The leftists by their side, if succeed had killed same or more people in massive executions because they was willing to do it, now all we act cinically blaming to "little groups" but that is not true, ALL we was full of hate, anger and very happy to see humilliated, torturated and killed the contraries.

On what you comment about migration, well, most migrants was out of Chile not pollitically prosecuted but looking for a good job and money from "solidaridad internacional", they used to think that inventing a good story of persecution will live as activists abroad with little work and far away of hated "milicos", but when they realized taht there was millions abroad with the same intentions and they was oblied to look for a real job they scared and tried to come back to Chile. Then Pinochet ordered to stamp a big "L" in their passports and they was forbiden to come back, this was most of "drama del exilio" abroad.

Why they want to come back? well, Im convinced that in Chile life is MUCH better than any other place in the world, specially for someone who has raised here, there are some few that never feel good in their own country but they are very few: just compare the mass of inmigrants from central america, Peru, Bolivia, Cuba or any other country with the chilean emigration to developed countries, chileans are neglitible. I will never change living in my country -and specifically my town- for USA or Europa, neither no one of my friends.

Money and entertaiment is not everything to me, there are lot of better and funniest things here.

Very good insight, Tomás. Thank you.

I must add that I admire your maturity and wisdom. Both are necessary to analyse a dearly held belief, then to change it.

[quote=[/quote]



I wonder what affect all these Chileans will have in Chile given that they have tasted the "good" life in North America and have become accustomed to spending money in ways that most Chileans can only dream of. They have also lived in cities that have little if any stray dogs, machismo, little petty crime, and so forth.
Carlos

[/quote]
I left Chile before the whole turmoil happened, and it all depends on the meaning of what "the good life"is.For some it may mean material things and for others a true meaningful life in the whole sense of the word,enjoying life and knowing your priorities. I worked constantly, sometimes without energy left to spend the money.I felt always out of place, in limbo if you will, although I spoke the language, like a person without a country, never comfortable.I always tried to keep my life in balance and I have been most of my life frugal, so going back after so many years it will take a little adjustment but I doubt it will be a drastic change.You make it sound like our paychecks are huge... not so, by the time you pay your bills, food, rent or mortgage, insurance, gas and few miscellaneous you end up with not much in your pocket. And if you have a family, less yet. The stray dog part, it does gets on my nerves but most of all....stepping on dog's crap is even worse but I will survive.For some reason I never had an easy life here in the States so to continue pounding the hammer won't be a big deal for me.I just look forward to make new friends and going back to my roots taking along with me a gringo "chilean wanna be".
It's obvious I can't never get right the quote part!

admin wrote:. . . . I would even go so far as to say that perhaps only Chile has a real democracy in Latin America (please name another).

Uruguay. Possibly Costa Rica. But I'd rather live in Chile.

. . . . Chile has had one of the oldest democracies in the Americas (less the 70's and 8-0's). . . .

A good point, yet one usually forgotten -- or ignored.

We chileans are "gatos escaldados" (dont know the englisgh expression for cats after receive boiling water, afraid to commit same mistakes), others such argentinians has been much worse, but it seems they never learn.

Order, economic grown, respect to legal system, honestity, etc. are important for us. Most of big cristicism on corruption and political ineficiency are due we think we deserved better people in charge, we havent lost the hope -yet- as it seems with citizen in many other LA countries

On the "State of the States Thread" you just posted the following:

"I believe the real mistake of Bush is that he is fighting a ground war, when he should be fighting a covert war. This should be similar to the cold war. A guy with a silencer in one hand, and aid package in the other hand. This is all for political show. We should never see anything ( I hope they really are doing it), this "war on terrorism". It should be small, strategic, covert, and cheap, cheap, cheap."

And now you are asserting (and I do stress "asserting") Bushie and other US enacted disappearances? I'm confused, do we want the guys with the silencers or not? For what it's worth, I like the idea that the CIA gets involved to keep small wars from becoming big wars & I agree that if we had a decent covert capacity AND the guts to use it, we needn't have sent half the military into peace-loving, law-abiding, harmless, misunderstand Iraq. Hey, I'll bet they even had free health-care. An effective CIA, with the political will to use it....that is of course a fantasy on my part.

I wish that the CIA was 1/10th as good as Latin Americans tend to think it is, I love listening to their theories on how every ailment known to them is a result CIA action....if only. That organization has never been the same after the post-Nixon gutting by US liberals in Congress. Instead of Will Bill Donovon or James Jesus Angleton, we now have politically-correct Valerie Plame bureaucrats, who abuse their power to engage in partisan-motivated nepotism & then cry "foul" when their own spouse outs them in the New York Times.

John "You Gotta Be Kidding" Hyre

Run a search for Ryogyong hotel in Pyongyang, North Korea, Esquire article by Eva Hagberg. Truth is always stranger than fiction. Massive, massive, empty building, ugly even by Commie standards, takes a measureable portion of GDP of starving country & is managed by two Germans.....who knew? Too bad NK didn't have a Pinochet to put a stop to that sort of thing.

John Hyre