Really? These claims seem a bit hard to believe. Mind giving a source?This is nonsense. Allende destroyed freedom of the press in Chile, punched children who heckled him, tried to prosecute his political opponents, had disastrous economic policies that led to inflation reaching 600%, and tried to dissolve Parliament. The people of Chile hated him by 1973. If the military coup is prevented, Allende is still a goner. Parliament will remove him from power, and pro-democracy President of the Senate Eduardo Frei (who was President of Chile before Allende) likely becomes President instead. Allende was doomed no matter what. If the military didn't take him out, Parliament would have impeached him. If that failed, the Chilean people would have overthrown him themselves at some point.
Cared to elaborate on that?he was surrounded by people who were deeply antithetical to the idea, and by the time of the coupe was setting up a Cuban armed and trained pretoriate guard under his son in law ( A known DSG agent).
I see we're spreading conspiracy theories now. Tell me how Allende punching young protesters is a smear to prepare for a coup, I'm very interested in your analysis that totally won't be nonsense.Considering who backed the coup, english sources are only a hammer blow if the hammer is inflatable.
Conspiracy theories? The coup happened, and it was us backed, lmaoI see we're spreading conspiracy theories now. Tell me how Allende punching young protesters is a smear to prepare for a coup, I'm very interested in your analysis that totally won't be nonsense.
No one's saying it didn't happen. But the coup was motivated by the fact that Allende was eroding Chilean institutions and the country was teetering on the brink of oblivion. The US helped in the coup itself, yes, but the Chilean military made the decision to overthrow Allende on their own and requested US support in doing so. You're ignoring that the Chileans fucking hated Allende by the time the coup happened.Conspiracy theories? The coup happened, and it was us backed, lmao
Saving eroding institutions by eroding the foremost institution of the state.No one's saying it didn't happen. But the coup was motivated by the fact that Allende was eroding Chilean institutions and the country was teetering on the brink of oblivion. The US helped in the coup itself, yes, but the Chilean military made the decision to overthrow Allende on their own and requested US support in doing so. You're ignoring that the Chileans fucking hated Allende by the time the coup happened.
And you sound like someone who can’t rebut the reality that Allende, while no where near as bad as his killer and successor, was hardly a saint himself.Saving eroding institutions by eroding the foremost institution of the state.
You sound like a mises institute article.
Cared to elaborate on that?
As I cannot read Spanish, I seek your help on who are the Leftist (and rightist) militias in pre-coup Chile, how strong are they, what’s their connection to Cuba, what are their respective agendas, and how connected are they to the President.
I thing was, despite emphasis on their threat to Chilean democracy, post coup, the Army had little difficulties in defeating all of them within a short time.
I think how much President Allende was willing to involve himself with the leftist militia determines what would happen to Chilean democracy after the coup.
Oh, I see now - everything bad is just a smear, those newspapers are a US plot, yada ya. Just take the L. Allende was an authoritarian. You're ignoring that Allende LITERALLY THREATENED TO DISSOLVE PARLIAMENT, and that Allende is on the record as saying that newspapers should serve the revolution rather than report the facts. He wasn't as bad as Pinochet, not by a long shot, but to claim that he was a moderate who believed in democracy is laughable.Please, I don't want repeat myself so read my previous post about the subject. But:
- saying that Allende was hated by Chilean people is ridiculous. Surely Chile was a polarized country as many during Cold War but Allende had the support of a large part of Chilean population, as an other large parte was opposed or not supportive of him. But it's democracy and Allende never tried to suppress it. In 1973 Parliamentary Elections Unity Popular made gains, winning 44,2% of vote, surely a sign of popularity, but not a majority, surely a sign of democracy. Do you want to know who suppress democracy in Chile? General Augusto Pinochet and his fucking hitmen.
- the Parliament of Chile was controlled by opposition that won elections in 1969 and 1973. Not a sign of a growing dictatorship, I would say. His "terrible, red" reforms were actually voted by the opposition, especially by Christian Democrats, the main opposition party. Oh yeah, and Christian Democrats elected Allende President in 1969 during the Congressional Election.
- the Army was not so reactionary. Generals René Schneider and Carlos Prats, predecessors of Pinochet as Army Commander-in-Chief, were strongly opposed any coup or use of militar force. They were both assassinated in killings orchestrated by CIA and DINA to help Pinochet.
- defining a man as Eduardo Frei Montalva, who actively supported a coup that caused one of the most violent regime in modern history, thousands of deaths and others thousands of disappearances, a "pro-democracy" politician, well, it's hardly to say. I would say that he was a reactionary politician who chose to help a dictator to kill his people instead respect the Costitution which he had sworn to defend.
In conclusion Allende was not an angel and no one wants to paint him so: he was a politician and he played politics. Some of his policies were good, others bad, and we can agree his positions or not, but he was not a sort of Chilean Maduro. Never. It's a historical mistake or a historical false saying so: he respected the Constitution, respected a Parliament led by opposition, respected the Courts, he was elected democratically and was overthrowed by a plot of traitorous Generals, copper companies, rightwing politicians and industrials and US secret services. That's a historical fact. And do you want to make me believe that Allende was eroding Chilean democracy?
In 1973 Allende, a Costitutional President elected democratically who never commit criminal acts, was the Chilean democracy, that died with him with the Pinochet's coup.
Allende had red terrorism against him (what? But he was not an aspirant communist dictator?!? Actually far left considered him too moderate as he decided to respect Costitution and democratic processes), black terrorism against him, a continued rightwing press campaign against him (almost all Chilean newspapers, mainly linked to industrial networks, were against Allende, but, of course, Allende destroyed freedom of press), United States that tried to strike him every time they can, foreign companies that intentionally sabotaged Chilean markets, at least two failed coup attempts before Pinochet, but, although that, it's Allende the threat to Chilean democracy.
Do you want to know an other historical fact? Allende appointed a General, General Carlos Prats, as his Interior Minister. Yeah, the terrible Allende, the red monster, the communist menace, the democracy killing, nominated one of the most respect Generals of Chile, the head of (so much reactionary) Army as head of public order. That's not sound as a radical enemy ready to start a revolution, it's sound as a good choice of President willing to show national unity in a delicat moment for the country.
You can say many things about Allende but not he was a dangerous dictator. Pinochet was a dangerous dictator, not Allende. That's justifying Pinochet's coup and his mass murders and that is simply shameful.
Arbenz never identified as a Marxist during his presidency.Allende was more the Jacobo Arbenz of Chile: a popular leftwing leader that was shamefully overthrown when the US felt their economic interests threatened.