Need help with FACTS on Chile

[Commie Girl]

:angry: On friday, the Premiere of Alberta, Ralph Klein, said Pinochet had to overthrow Allende, a "democratically elected communist" because he seized many U$ companies and made them public! He was within his rights to do this since Pinochet was fighting a communist. Klein was trying to defend his position on privitizing auto insurance and equated himself with the saviour, Pinochet. I was in high school when our city received many refugees from Chile. This is not the way they described things for me.

Please help with some facts, I seem to believe that Allende was a SOCIALIST, and did nationalize many companies FOR the people! And didnt the CIA back the assasination?

[DORRI]

I read a book namely "allende;a novel".It's not a quite historic book but a documentary novel about him.I hope it will help you.surely there are better books ,too.

[Louis Pio]

You should read these articles. They go quite indebt with what happened. Just read the preface and scrool down to the bottom and read "lessons of chile 1973"

Chile - Thirty years since the Pinochet coup (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/chile_30years.html)

But yes you are right about what you think about the nationalisations. The problem in Chile was that they didn't carry the revolution through but let big parts of the bourgiousie remain in crucial positions. A bit like the situation Venezuela is facing now.

[Salvador Allende]

I am from Chile and know a lot about the Pinochet-coup, if you need any info IM or e-mail me.

[Hitman47]

Or read my report on the event, in the history forum ;)

[NYC4Ever]

My mother is from Chile. She hated Allende but at the same time despised Pinochet. My family has been split down the middle because of this political warfare. One question to the Salvador Allende fans in here. Do you agree that the economy flourished because of Pinochet and his Chicago Boys, even though it came at a very high price? i.e. human lives? I dont respect the neo-liberalism at gunpoint like his regime instated, but how can anyone turn around and support the parallel to that being a totalitarian communist regime like Castro, Mao and Pol Pot? I know that Allende was a democratic socialist, and the list above were or are not practicing real communism but still, I mean Chile had an almost illusion of choice.
I dont wanna pick fights, because I know Allendenists are hardcore and can get on the defensive pretty quick, but I'm just asking in hope to debate without any vulgarity. I hear that most Chileans are even upset today with Lagos in office at the moment.

[Louis Pio]

Well the economy under Allende was deliberately sabotaged by the big companies. This they of course didn't under Pinochet. Also Allende never went forward with a planned economy but tried to make a hybrid. THIS NEVER WORKS!
The socalled recovery of the chilean economy was brought forth by superexploitation of the workers. In the document I linked too there is alot of numbers on this.

[NYC4Ever]

The thought of lives being lost is appalling and unjustified. But honestly would any Stalinists or Communist apologists not condemn the actions of the "dreamers" during their riegn? Considering that it was for the overall "good" of the nation?
I hear good thing from Pinochet and then I hear horrible things about Pinochet. It's a delicate subject for most chileans. One thing that alot can agree on is the growth of their nation.
Now the appalling things and human rights violations that occured during his time were unquestionable. But I couldn't deny seeing the nation at a high growth comparing it to other Latin American countries that I've visited. I mean immigration in the country is even at a high rate. What is the big mystery surounding Chile? Why is it not really an economic miracle? People are even upset today with Lagos and his semi-socialist plans.

[Louis Pio]

So basically you are saying that it is a good thing with the economy growing because workers are being exploitet to the max? Nice way of seeing it... Basically you think what is important is the "abstract" economy and not the living conditions of ordinary people.

[Louis Pio]

Here is something that is quite interesting. It is an excerpt from Lessons Of Chile 1973 (http://www.marxist.com/Latinam/chile73.html)



"Economic crisis

The misfortune of the Chilean dictatorship was that the coup d'etat took place on the eve of the most serious world recession since the end of World War Two. The Chilean economy, which has always been totally dependent on its exports, suffered very serious effects as a result of the falling-off of demand in outside markets, which brought about a steep fall in the price of copper.

In the years before the 1974-75 recession, the exports of copper represented almost 75% of the total exports of the country. The value of copper exports in 1975 was 45% lower than in 1974, and 34% lower than the average of 1973-4. The external deficit stood at around $400 million (436 million SDRs). Only the generosity of world imperialism saved the Junta from bankruptcy. In June 1976, the IMF approved a figure of 79 million SDRs (Special Drawing Rights) in aid to make up for the trade deficit of 1975. In December of the same year, the World Bank, at the instigation of the USA and West Germany, approved two loans of a total of $60 million for Chile - the fourth and fifth loans since the coup d'etat.

In May 1976, a group of 16 banks based on the USA and Canada gave Chile a loan of $125 million for 3-5 years. In July of the same year, the Inter American Development Bank approved a further loan of $20 million for a period of 20 years. Just in the first four years after the 11th September, the Junta received approximately 1 billion dollars in loans from private banks in the USA. All this contrasts with the systematic boycott of the Allende government by world imperialism.

The attitude of imperialism is not difficult to understand. No sooner in power, the Junta began the systematic destruction of the conquests of the working class, handing back the nationalised factories to their former owners and the land to the latifundistas. The Junta's economic policies are those of the notorious "Chicago school of economics" of Milton Friedman which, among other things, stands for the policy of the "open door" for foreign investments. Once more, Chile is subjugated to the humiliation of a double exploitation: that of the Chilean capitalists and latifundistas and that of the big US monopolies.

After the military take-over, Friedman visited Chile and coldly recommended a 20% cut in state expenditure and the sacking of large numbers of state employees. There was a devaluation of the escudo against the US dollar. Nevertheless, in 1975, the cost of living went up by 340%.

The "open door" policy and the efforts to attract foreign investments led to an open conflict with the other countries of the Andes Pact. This represented an attempt on behalf of a series of countries to protect them-selves against imperialist exploitation. Chile walked out of the Pact in October 1976.

The "austerity programme" of April 1975 led to a really catastrophic situation. According to official statistics published in 1976, there was a fall in the Gross national Product of 16.2% in 1975, and a fall in industrial production of 25%. Inflation stood at 340.7% as against 380% in 1974. By the end of 1976, the figure for inflation had fallen to 174.3%. But this relative improvement was due, more than anything, to the fall in demand and the completely depressed condition of the economy.

Unbearable conditions

Towards the middle of 1976, according to official calculations, the level of unemployment was more than 23% (in some sectors, 50%). The unemployment figures continue very high, despite the "economic recovery" of the last few years. In a report dated July 6th 1978, the president of the Central Bank of Chile, Alvaro Bardon, tries to show that there has been a certain improvement in this field. He gives the figures of unemployment for Santiago in the last few years, as follows:

June 1972: 2.3 %

June 1973: 2.3%

June 1974: 7.5 %

June 1975: 12.0%

June 1976: 13.4%

June 1977: 10.2%

June 1978: 9.4%

and he adds the following break-down of activities of workers and unemployed in greater Santiago in June 1978:

Trade Unemployed Working

Industry 84,900 325,000

Building 25,900 77,500

Others 3,500 20,000

Services 61,400 725,000

Others 8,500 95,300

This conservative banker states triumphantly that "we are drawing close to normal levels such as those of the year 1969". According to figures published in a survey of a department of the University of Chile, comparing date of 1974 and 1977, the level of unemployment went up from 9.7% to 13.2% and lay-offs increased from 6.l% to 9.9%. Nevertheless, the official figures are a distortion of the real state of affairs. According to a group of members of the West German SPDs parliamentary group who visited Chile recently, the real level of unemployment at this moment in time could be around 30% and not the 12-13% put out by the government.

One thing is beyond any doubt. The Chilean working class continues to live in absolutely unbearable conditions of poverty, hunger. unemployment and misery. The reduction of sections of the population to sub-proletarian conditions is shown by the increase of prostitution and begging in all the cities and towns of the country. All the economic and social conquests of the Popular Unity were destroyed after the 11th September. The constant rise of inflation (although at a lesser rate, for reasons already explained) makes the cost of living unbearable for the working class.

Despite all the economic measures taken by the government, the Chilean economy remains in a blind alley. In fact, the methods of the "Chicago school" have served to increase the unemployment and misery, laying waste the domestic market and undermining the base of the nation's industry.

The perspectives for Chilean capitalism at present are by no means hopeful. The external trade deficit was still $19h million in the first half of 1978, with an increase in imports and a decrease in exports. The most important markets for Chilean exports are Brazil, the l).SA, and Argentina. At this moment in time, Chile is in conflict with all these countries. In the case of Argentina, tensions have reached the point of the breaking-off of political and economic relations. The instability of the Junta is translated into a crisis of confidence of the Chilean bourgeoisie, the clearest expression of which was the fall of values on the stock exchange by 2% in one week in June of this year. The president of the Santiago Stock market, in an interview with La Segunda, confessed that the fall in share prices was "a reflection of the external and internal situation of our country". All this shows the nervousness of the Chilean capitalists, their lack of confidence and their pessimism as regards the future.

The bonapartist regime of Peron in Argentina lasted for many years and managed to get a base of support among the masses through the Peronist trade unions thanks to the post-war economic upswing which stimulated the demand for Argentine products on world markets (beef). But the Pinochet regime emerged precisely at the same time as the international recession and the collapse of the price of copper. The years 1972-74 were record years for the price of this product. But copper prices fell headlong in 1974-75. In the last two years there has been a slight recovery, but prices still have not reached their previous levels. The Times (4/4/78) commented:

"In real terms, the returns from copper are at their lowest level and the first real evidence of massive cut-backs in production are now coming to light".

The main copper-producing countries, organised in the CIPEC are in favour of a 15°70 cut-back in copper production to keep prices up. But Chile. the country which exports most copper, refused to enter the CIPEC. It is clear that the Junta is afraid of a drastic reduction of copper production because of the social effects this could have. The USA is still the most important market for Chilean copper. Paradoxically, the USA, as well as being the biggest copper-importing country, is also the biggest copper producer. The problem is that US produced copper is expensive and non-competitive. The US-based cop-per monopolies are putting pressure on Carter to restrict imports from Third-World countries. These protectionist tendencies will have catastrophic consequences for Chile. The devaluation of the dollar in recent months represents a disguised protectionist measure which will have very serious repercussions for Chilean exports, and for the Chilean economy in general, in the coming months."

[NYC4Ever]

And did you really think that Allende was going to do a better job? I would've loved to see his reign and how it would've helped the nation. If opposition became heavy and he was scorned to become a dictator himself, would that have been justified? I dont understand some of you. You do not agree with the Communist regimes that propped up around the Cold War era, but hate the way America came in to try and put an end to some of these regimes in Latin America. Is the big support for Allende these days simply because he wasn't given the chance to become like Castro? That he was taken out by his own countrymen and outside help, so that makes him a martyr? Yeah thats real pretty. Maybe we should all support that and buy bootleg Victor Jara cassettes. What would be the perfect example of change in Latin America to you guys? Do you support Chavez of Vene.?

[Louis Pio]

The point is Allende had the support of the majority of the Chilean population who were workers and poor. The people that killed him was the rich and their lackeys.
All I can read from your post is that you think it's ok removing democratic socialist regimes just because the rich are against it. You obviously don't even belive in your own form of democracy if it go against your wishes.
Also you think it's ok to let people starve and work under terrible conditions to give a small clique alot of profit. That's indeed disgusting.
Allende was to soft on the capitalist and that's what got him removed. It's pretty clear you always side with the rich and powerfull. I on the other hand side with the workers and poor. So I don't think we will get anywere with this.
But just one question: were did you get the dillusions that Allende was on the path of becoming a dictator? He was elected with a majority of the votes. The only ones with dictatorial tendencies in the case of Chile is Pinochet, the chilean capitalists and the USA. They were the ones who removed a democratically elected leader, and you obviously support that.

Now the USA is on the path of trying to remove yet another democratic elected leader in Latin America, Hugo Chavez. I guess you will support that too.

[NYC4Ever]

It's all about Ideologies:

Ok, do not make me out to be like a right wing cuban fresh of the boat on to Little Havana. I was asking IF the opposition was getting heavy and a revolt began and he stayed in power, would that be justified? I doubt that it was only the rich. Most of the half of my family that had no beef with Pinochet were and are not even in the rounds of being rich. At most you would say that they're a traitor for wanting an opportunity to join the ranks of the higher class provding for their families, by "exploiting workers".
During the Cold War. I would say that two ideologies were at war and it devastated the third world, considering they wer up for grabs. The US presented itself as this naive young evangelical missonary promoting democracy and free enterprise. The spread of communism in that form freaked national interests and rectionary politicians took action in Chile. I do not support this ideal, especially when the people in Latin American countries are so heavily close to communist ideals. They love the sound of it and dreamers like you promote your end of the story, while other ideolouge dreamers promote the other end of the stick, like me. I understand what the US was trying to do and now with its war on terrorism, but its getting to an ideological point to where we ignore the fact that people are stubborn and they do not want US enterprise. If it was up to me I would leave them to their ill concieved mantras but others in the white house saw it differently. Today the same with the War on Terror, but we were and may be attacked again. All jewish conspiracy theories aside, the cold war is not over and the ideolouges are back in the White House. Only this time we (the US) are alone. The struggle now is also between the EU and the US, and the control over the UN. Which I can see that the EU is all in control over, now. Our credibility has been lost over the years from our failed attempts at evangelizing the world with our form of living, which I regret was a mistake. Now, we're paying the price and we're trying to fix it and we get shut out because there maybe a hunch that its for oil.
Teis, while we are total opposites on the political spectrum I respect your views to a degree. You're a dreamer. As am I.

[Louis Pio]

Teis, while we are total opposites on the political spectrum I respect your views to a degree. You're a dreamer. As am I.

Well I just belive that everyone is entitled to a decent life, and not just a small clique.
As I showed you the Pinochet regime made a heavy exploitation of the workers with US backing. If that's what you prefer well ok then. You just need to realise that you are in a minority. The masses of the world who live in terrible conditions would of course like a better life. And are already reacting against the system who keep them in this position. Some unfortunately go to the fundamentalists, because they see no other alternative.
The whole history of the world is a history of clashes between interests. From the slave rebellions to the russian revolution and onwards. That's the point I see the chilean situation from.

[NYC4Ever]

I dont doubt this Teis, but why run with the lynch mob? Was America in the wrong doing to try and tumble the forces of Pol Pot and his communists? Or perhaps we should remove our troops from the borders of NK and SK? Why the appalling hatred towards even naive attempts by Americans to achieve a goal that is just as a dream as communism? Even with all of the failed attempts that has led to millions dead , why oh why continue? I would not call all of the other capitalist countries the same of that of the US style of capitalism. The US is shallow in a way to not stage a coup against the corrupt capitalist forces in Latin America, but in the end its not in our best interests. Thats about as much an inch that I would give you. Communism seems to be more of a threat because it not only fails every time but it is an evil vindictive malicious idelology that only exists in the minds of desperate individuals that dream of a better life under their current corrupt government. It creates mob mentality and I agree that its deserving of those corrupt bastards in Mexico and further south. But America's style has worked and can still work if we remember what got us to the top in the first place. We had a strong moral code and truth along with donations, contributions and good will kept this country alive. That is diminishing thanks to the likes of greedy corporations (yes I admit) but furthermore from liberal left wing thinking dominating our colleges, newsources and Hollywood. Soon we WILL be no different than the corrupt nations and soon will be providing bread and circuses to the masses. Concessions that Democrats give to the people that look to the EU and Canada as a role model. I hate government intervetion with a passion and its getting to be a position of every politician these days. Why trust the government to this appeal.
Communism is not even a political ideology. Its a dream. A utopian one that I would love to see happen, but know it wont considering power hungry people and leaders that stand at the fore front to dominate the culture. Will there or can there ever be a state less communist society without a Lenin, a Mao, a Castro?

[Louis Pio]

Now this discussion has come alittle of track. But just as far as I remember about Pol Pot, the USA were against Vietnam removing that bloody dictator.
Anyway I don't like liberals, like you don't. Also like the rest of the right they defend capitalism.

[Salvador Allende]

I hate Pinochet, and I have some good reasons too. A key factor in the economy during Allende was the oil crises, which resolved itself shortly after Pinochet came to power. Not to mention the fact that the US and the copper industry was trying to make sure Allende failed.

[Salvador Allende]

and about Pol Pot, he didn't kill nearly as many as it is made out to be. People say that millions in Cambodia in the 70's, but that number includes deaths because of civil war, invasions into cambodia and US bombings. Pol Pot in all reality only killed about 50,000. Mao was a hero to the masses as was Lenin. Allende had no dreams of getting rid of elections or parliament.