Chile Forum

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Carlos,

Things are not nearly so simple as portrayed by any English publication, written or verbal, that I have ever seen. Specifically, everything I've seen written in English is very friendly to the left at the expense of facts. Why? Because this sort of comparatively dry writing (e.g., history, poli- sci) is pretty much exclusive to university people and reporters....and unfortunately, university and media have long-since out-McCarthy'ed the Senator from Wisconsin & purged their ranks of intellectual diversity. Try getting a job in University humanities field after admitting to being a <gasp!> - Republican. The result: A consistently leftist worldview that permeates everything those people do (Example - the move "Missing", agitprop at its finest). Witness what you've read about Chile so far. If you are interested in some Spanish titles that give the other side's perspective, I can cull through my library to find them. Another way to get some perspective - talk to Chileans IN Chile. A disproportionate percentage of the Chilean diaspora tends left, as they were the ones who thought it advisable to leave Chile, so their average opinion will be skewed. "Average" opinion changes once you are there. A very large plurality (40 - 46% or so) did and still do support Pinochet.

A few pointers, from a guy who, unlike university leftists and press pinkos, won't dessemble on his on politics (I'm fairly libertarian on most domestic issues, fairly "hawkish" on foreign policy and thought Ronald Reagan was one of our best presidents), which allows you to take my bias into account:

1) In terms of body-count, Communists/Marxists make Hitler look like a gifted amateur. The prospect of their taking over total power in Chile rightly frightened many people into thinking they would be up agianst a wall;

2) As Tom Brad (and several Chilean publications) correctly notes elsewhere on this site, Allende had < NO EMAIL > 30% of the vote on his own and won because one of the parties threw their < NO EMAIL > 30% vote over to him. He (and his allies, whom he was unable, perhaps unwilling, to control) then started to take his "mandate" and radically transform Chile's long established political norms, with the stated goal of creating a Marxist state.

3) Allende's govt, as noted by Tom Brad, was also very selective about enforcing laws, allowing illegal expropriations to occur on a wide basis. FYI, the act of expropriation (and the counter-reaction), also known as "theft", is generally a violent act. Avoiding such violence is one of the primary reasons we have government (at least under classic Lockean social contract theory). What Allende couldn't get via a pretence of law (transformation to Marxist state), he was willing to obtain via extra-legal, violent means. Any chascone a$$hole wearing a “Che” T-Shirt could, and did, walk in and start making demands, such as, this house is too big, you are getting some campesinos as new co-owners, you can only keep these two rooms, your daughter is very attractive, etc.

4) Allende killed the economy. There was an initial "boom" based on truly massive increases in spending, which spending was in fact “eating the seed corn”. Afterwards, massive inflation & shortages occurred. Similar to USSR, people connected with ruling party could literally get to the front of the line, while others would wait in line all day and get nothing. To this day, my father in law rages that he could not get milk for my then infant wife, and that the only trouble he has ever had with the law was with Allende’s goons. You didn’t think I’d marry into a family of Commies, did you? It got so bad that the women were marching in streets, banging the empty pots & pans. Hungry people who are used to not being hungry & see others who are "connected" doing fine get violent.

5) The MIR and others were arming up. Weeks long visits by Castro and gift of AK-47 by same to Allende were not exactly positive signs. Remember, we were in the collectivist 70’s, when freedom was on the retreat and smelly, Birkenstock-wearing gringos in Ponchos & Che T-Shirts were showing up in Chile to help encourage the same results as achieved in Eastern Europe….and soon, SE Asia, with all of the blood-letting that implied. The threat of total Marxist takeover was very, very real.

6) Legislature asked the military to step-in, I will leave the details of that (including foolish threats by a popular socialist senator that frightened others in Senate & military) to your reading. There were Senators and officers’ wives scattering chicken feed in front of military bases….Chilean military had (and I think still has, to a large degree) a strong Prussian tradition of being apolitical…..but when things get bad enough, military dictatorship seemed (and ultimately, was) less bad.

7) Yes, Pinochet whacked < NO EMAIL > 3,000 people & disappeared about the same number, with more being tortured. I’m sure some of them were innocent. Most of them were not. The reason the Leftists cry is that the apparatus of their beloved God, The State, was turned on them. Evidently, being on the barrel end of a gun isn’t nearly so "romantic" as having one’s hand on the trigger. I have ZERO tears for the Communists, Marxists and MIR people who Pinochet killed. Zero. They got what they and their brethren are only to happy to dish out. Same goes for Che.

In my opinion, Pinochet kept Chile from going into civil war. For a frame of reference, El Salvador (where my mom’s side of the family is from), was utterly destroyed by a vicious civil war – one where the Left and the Right were indistinguishable, both being utterly savage in the extreme. In a country whose population is < NO EMAIL > 1/3 of Chile’s, 75,000 died and the country was left in ruins. 6,000 or so dead Leftists (mostly) is a much “less bad” (as opposed to better) result. I only wish that El Salvador had had a Pinochet, several of my relatives might still be alive. And the country might even be a place where one would want to live, like, say, Chile.

9) Pinochet turned the county around economically. Ultimate testament to that fact – all of the left-leaning governments since he left have tampered very little with his economic model. The stability and prosperity that attracts many expats to Chile were no accident. Would it have been ideal to get the same results in a liberal democracy? Sure. But we do not live in an ideal world, and any real chance for liberal democracy died for a time once Allende pushed his plurality of votes into an extra-legal transformation into a Marxist state.

10) Pinochet stepped down. How many dictators, left or right, do that? Ever? Bueller? Bueller?.....

The guy wasn’t perfect. Power corrupts, and he was no exception. On the whole, his dictatorship was as good as a dictatorship could be, and occurred when other options were likely to fail and lead to civil war. On the whole, Chile was better off for having had him. Next time some Che-T-Shirt wearer (read: publicly proud of holding a philosophy similar to, and much deadlier than, Nazi-ism) wants to talk about Pinochet, ask them when Castro will step down, how the people of Cuba live (health of the average guy in Cuba is lousy, Mr. Moore, which is why you do not go there except to make mendacious films), how many died there under his lash and how many political prisoners lounge in his dungeons TODAY. Certainly, human rights abuses are relevant in a discussion of Pinochet – but a discussion limited to that wouldn’t begin to tell the whole story.

John Hyre, open about his bias

First, if I had to claim a part of the political spectrum I would say I am more on the left (internationally, not Chilean or United States versions). I am all for Government providing for its citizens. A government that does not provide for its citizens needs, serves no purpose and is little more than a criminal organization; but, what Allende was doing was just plain stupid in the grandest tradition of the millions of philosophically ignorant that have managed to read the first page of Marx's writings and think they understand it. Marx is and always has been a joke among philosophers (even when he was alive). He wrote bad pop philosophy that got turned in to a political movement by criminals hungry for power..

A couple of years ago the head of the Chinese communist party was giving an interview to a Chinese reporter and was asked about the contradiction between Marx's teaching and what China is doing now. He said, "no one understands Marx".

Perhaps there are few out there, but I have never run in to anyone that speak with fond memories of Allende's presidency, poor or rich. We are still trying to fix the mess that Allende created. For example, last year I bought property that was taken under the agricultural reform act, and then given back to the owners (in much smaller size) 30 years ago. The people it was taken from where not rich people, then or now. Allende's agrarian land reforms where nothing but a cover for theft and corruption, as those sorts of expropriations always end up being anywhere in the world.

The only thing I have heard from people talking about that era where the long lines, food shortages, and out of control inflation. The whole country was on the verge of starving to death.

Regarding Don el puelche's credentials on the issue, Carlos I think you need to spend some time searching through the forum archives. Puelche has written more about that time than anyone else on the forum. I believe there is likely a couple hundred postings by P on the subject, perhaps sufficient to fill a short history book.

Here is one I found with a quick search:
http://www.allchile.net/chileforum/viewtopic.php?t=306
There are at least 2 or 3 other big threads by P on the topic I can even remember, and perhaps more. I think he just does not want to retype everything. You got some reading to do before you can have proper debate with P.

In my feelings in the 73 we actually WAS into a civil war, not so bloody because there was not much arms and both left and rigth was afraid from military reaction. Nobody knew in 1972 what side military will support. Aditionally the "real" rigth in Chile was very small those years, just a few tycoons, most of them was very social democrat inclined. Most of Allende oposition in Chile was from people from center, angry against the -also minoritary leftist- decided to take the power by force, if necesary.

Nowadays all people who was engaged in politic has turn into hypocrital and deny their real behavior, both rigth and leftists has rewriting the story because they are ashamed from all they did this time. Short after the coup and during many years, all opositords to Allende (some 60% of chileans) was very happy with repression and endorsed entusiatically the murders and tortures, calling as "necesary" to "clean" the country. People from left was also radicalized, waiting for support from Cuba to establish the first full comunist regime in America del Sur. Now all of them deny and blame to unexistent "exalted minorities", there was not such minorities, we was all engaged in a war logic to kill the contrary.

The now so-called "defensores de la democracia" endorsed very entusiastically the fascism and comunism dictatorship in the 70s, is a very hypocrital game to hide a shameful past. There was a huve "vacio de poder" and it was only matter of time that military filled, the only uncertainly was if they will incline balance to left or rigth. General Carlos Prats was decided to endorse a comunist regime, but when he realized that he was completly alone in his choice, he resigned. Later, after coup, in one of the most stupid actions from head of DINA General Contreras, Prats was assesinated.

I really doubt that CIA-USA has been some influence in the coup against Allende, the endorsement to opositors was very mild, however I think they infiltrate deeply the Gobierno Militar and DINA after the coup, they was decissive to put Pinochet out of power.

Nowaday we can see an exact picture of how was Chile in the Unidad Popular years with Bolivias Evo Morales, It is almost exactly the same process, there are a lot of identical situations

tombrad2 wrote:. . . . I really doubt that CIA-USA has been some influence in the coup against Allende, the endorsement to opositors was very mild, however I think they infiltrate deeply the Gobierno Militar and DINA after the coup, they was decissive to put Pinochet out of power.

Amazingly insightful, Tomás, from one who (I assume) has not read the fairly extensive materials now declassified.

Nowaday we can see an exact picture of how was Chile in the Unidad Popular years with Bolivias Evo Morales, It is almost exactly the same process, there are a lot of identical situations

Which has influenced both my sympathy for the poorer Bolivians and my hope that Chile will be able to prevent illegal immigration and resultant societal unrest.

Since there is a dearth of English language materials supporting a more rounded view of what really happened in Chile during that time, I though I'd pass along an article written by noted columnist Paul Craig Roberts who is coauthor of the recent book printed in Spanish by the Universidad Nacional Andrés Bello.

Chile: Two Visions, The Allende-Pinochet Era
by Karen Araujo and Paul Craig Roberts

LINK describing the book:
http://www.policyofliberty.net/HPdA/RobertsAraujo.html

Unfortunately, the English version still has yet to be printed.

The article:

June 8, 2005
If Pinochet Is Guilty, so Is Bush
by Paul Craig Roberts

http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=6254
_____________________________

PCR is my favorite USA columnist. A supply side policy maker under Reagan, he is now one the most vocal critics of what the neocons have done to the USA socially, politically, economically and to her standing in the world.

-eeuunikkeiexpat

Hi RWS, I am very supportive to inmigration from Peru and Bolivia, even ilegal, note that in Chile there are not a welfare net as in USA, so everyone who come in to the country has to earn their daily bread or die in starving!, peruvian and bolivian inmigrants are hard workers and supply many of task than chilean dont willing to do (sounds familiar? .-) ) I dislike all those claims "they come to thieve us job posts", that is rubbish, chilean must learn to compete and specialize, I think that peruvian inmigration has enriched a lot the chilean society and contributed to improve relations between both countries.

Living in a city whith a huge amount of peruvians/bolivians coming and going we in Arica are not afraid of inmigration, provided the politician dont start with welfare and stupid regulations who left us out of competition. Without peruvians/bolivian workers Arica agriculture simply would not exist.

In my opinio Chile may open borders for inmigration from everywere, we have lot of space.

Thanks for the links, EE.UU. The book looks especially interesting. Though I never was foolhardy enough to think Allende much better than a rigid "conformatarian" (one who through force or other coercion obliges other people to comply with his own desires), it's good to be reminded that Pinochet's own group may reasonably be seen to have been comparatively selfless.

Was Roosevelt a war criminal for bombing Dresden & Hamburg? Was Truman a war criminal for bombing Nagasaki & Hiroshima? Just curious to see where/if you draw the line.

Also, how does Israel treat its own people? Now let's compare Iraq under Hussein or Afganistan - how did/do they treat their own people? How about Palestine - what happens to moderates who want peace & disagree with Hamas or old Arafat? How are dissidents treated in Israel? Just comparing moralities, seeing as how columnist seems to view US/Israel as inferior, or at best equal to Palestine et al.

Columnist's tone alone is rather hysterical (and I mean that literally, not as merely "funny"), I'll bet his PC monitor screen is simply covered with spittle....yuck. I'm of course sending this email from a super-secret location b/c freedom is obviously dead in Bush's Amerika. Uh-oh, Homeland Security (admittedly a stupid name with unfortunate connotations in German) goons are at the door, gotta go!

John Hyre

Jajajaja

And the truth may set you free.

I really don't give a damn what happens up North anymore. Better for the blood pressure and mental health or maybe it's the locally grown organic food, ample vino and pisco and absence of US TV, newspapers, mags, talkradio, etc.

eeuunikkeiexpat wrote:. . . . I really don't give a damn what happens up North anymore. . . .

"Ah, but we know where your family are . . . ."

JHyre wrote:. . . . Homeland Security (admittedly a stupid name with unfortunate connotations in German) . . . .

Nothing wrong with Heimatland, and enough time has passed that even Sicherheit probably wouldn't trouble many young folk today (well, the concept, maybe, but not the connotations).