[
It takes two to tango, the Chilean people have arrived to the conclusion that what Pinochet did was the bigger mistake, and I think it is reprehensible to say the the one that killed the opposition is deemed a savior.
How convenient.
Still that officer would be condemned by history.
Allende called for an election to take place due to all the pressure against him, but he was overthrown a few weeks/months before that election. Had the election taken place he probably would’ve been voted out of office and that would’ve been the end of it.
Allende barely won in 1970 with 36.3% of the vote. Some of his acts of tyranny are listed in wikipedia
ruling by decree, thus thwarting the normal system of adopting legislation.
refusing to enforce judicial decisions against its own partisans and “not carrying out sentences and judicial resolutions that contravene its objectives.”
ignoring the decrees of the independent General Comptroller’s Office.
various offenses related to the media, including usurping control of the National Television Network and “applying … economic pressure against those media organizations that are not unconditional supporters of the government…”
allowing its supporters to assemble even when armed, while preventing legal assembly by its opponents.
“…supporting more than 1,500 illegal ‘takings’ of farms…”
illegal repression of the El Teniente strike.
illegally limiting emigration.
In early September 1973, Allende floated the idea of resolving the crisis with a plebiscite.
Had things just kept going for a few months Allende would’ve been voted out of office and replaced by a moderate, seeing how he barely won in 1970.
So what? Obviously, both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. considered Chile a Cold War battleground. I won’t deny the Soviet Union was prone to ruthless methods. But in this particular instance, it appears that all they did was contribute money to the political process like gentlemen. 
Foreign business and political interests can do the same in D.C., if they have the money. It’s not against international law, for the most part it’s not even frowned upon, anywhere. Certainly it does not detract from Allende’s electoral mandate, such as it was (he got a plurality of 36.2% out of a three-candidate field; 27.8% went to a candidate with a similar platform). Whereas on the U.S. side, there was a perfectly criminal attempt to cripple Chile’s economy and disrupt its society, and, just possibly, active participation in overthrowing its government. There’s no comparison.
What “revolution”? Do you actually think there would have been a popular uprising, not led by the military, against Allende?
Or for him?
Nothing in your link supports that.
Likewise.
Likewise.
Likewise.
Likewise.
The article discusses Allende’s land reform policy (begun under his predecessor, Frei Montalva). But it does not say there was anything illegal about it.
Not mentioned.
Not mentioned.
Are you just making this stuff up, or did you post the wrong link?
And of course a bloodthirsty, corrupt, torturing, murdering, kidnapping military dictatorship was so much preferable to a democratically elected government.
aw. You really think so. Cause I don’t see no one else in here having said that and I have too much respect for you to ever imagine you would use strawmen.
Well I don’t see those bleating and wailing about Allende’s alleged crimes giving it any consideration or showing any understanding that he was by a long shot the lesser of 2 evils. All I see is justification for his removal by a military coup on vague conspiracy theory allegations of soviet involvement in his victory.
You will the means, you will the end, as the US’s vigorous support for the murdering junta showed.
I was addressing GIGIbuster’s quotes that said the US had funded Chilean opposition parties (The Christian Democratic Party, The Radical Party) which in following the quotes was “to try to undermind Allende’s government”. I.e. The US helped fund their parties, the KGB helped fund their communist alliance led by Allende. Now the allegations against the CIA certainly goes beyond merely funding parties, but those that have to do with funding parties will not help further the case that the CIA possible arranged and certainly backed the coup.
As I said, I expect another officer would have led the coup had not Pinochet done it. And since the parliament had directly urged the military to step in and assume power to defend the constitution and democracy, such might not have been so bad, if the military had just removed Allende from power, and itself hold on only for a short while until conditions were calm and a new election could have been carried out. Which was not what Pinochet did.
The revolution was Allende’s business. He saw himself as a revolutionary Marxist, and his project for the transition of Chile as a socialist revolution. It already had many of the hallmarks of a violent revolution; widespread unrest, armed gangs roaming the streets and violent clashes, forced and illegal expropriations, unwillingness to uphold the law, etc.
BTW. Who said “No city is ever more than three days away from revolution.” (the amount of days it can feed its inhabitants from existing stores) on September the 6., 1973 Allende proclaimed “We do not have the most minimal supply of flour, at most for three or four days”.
But it’s a false setup. For it never was a choice between two evil men. Without Allende there would have been no Pinochet. It was Allende’s incompetent and disastrous and increasingly more dictatorial rule and his undermining of democratic institutions that paved the way for Pinochet. Pinochet is the work of Allende. His own black harvest.
Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence. Certainly not from any of your posts in this thread.
It’s not the job of the USA to go around undermining or overthrowing democratically elected govts that it doesn’t like. Particularly when it then aids and abets murdering scum like Pinochet, Diem, Somoza, Hussein etc etc etc.
You have absolutely no idea how Allende’s rule truly was. It is admittedly true that Pinochet was a “bloodthirsty, corrupt, torturing, murdering, kidnapping” dictator, but the phrase “democratically elected government” is not apt for describing Allende’s rule. Allende’s economic polcies causing hyperinflation of around 300%. He ignored the crimes of the MIR.
The “fact” that Allende was democratically elected is also disputed. A study by the Political Sciences Institute of the Catholic University of Chile, one of the most prestigious in the coutnry, uncovered evidence of fraud. There were numerous cases of fake IDs and IDs belonging to other people. In the majority of the places were irregularities were reported, Allende won an overhwelming victory.
The coup against Allende was necessary. If Chile had waited for three more years for the scheduled elections, Chile’s infrastructure would have completely collapsed. The problem was that General Pinochet was too power-hungry, stayed on for too long, and comm
Based on what we’ve learned in this thread so far, that appears to have been the fault of the U.S. government, not Allende.
New Iskander’s post above mentions the MIR, but not its “crimes.” What were they, exactly?
You skipped a step in your chain of logic there, Rune. The bolded section does not follow from anything else in that paragraph.
OK, there’s something for the pro side of Allende’s record, but what follows . . .
We need a lot more support for this. E.g., what was “illegal” about the expropriations in question? And who were these “armed gangs” and which side were they on?
9 June 1967
A carabinero (policeman) is kidnapped by the MIR in Concepción. He is released, but his weapons and uniform are stolen.
6 June 1969
The MIR kidnaps Hernán Osses, director of the Talcahuano newspaper “Las Ultimas Noticias de la tarde”. He is humiliated and left naked in the streets.
16 July 1971
Around 100 armed MIR activists try to break into a jail in Los Angeles.
11 August 1971
The MIR attacks the “Santa Blanca” vineyard in Rancagua, shooting and killing the son of the owner.
28 October 1971
A police raid against one of the MIR headquarters in Loncoche finds 24 cartidges of dynamite, 16 bombs, and large amounts of guns.
1 November 1971
(not a crime, but still significant)
Miguel Enríquez, the Secretary General of the MIR, calls for the dissolution of Parliament and tells young communsts to “seize the industries”.
14 December 1971
Led by MIR leader Alejandro Villalobos, members of leftist terrorists organizations such as the MIR and the Frente de Trabajadores Revolucionarios (FTR) take over the Municipality of La Florida.
2 February 1972
70 MIR members illegaly storm and take over numerous estates in Lautaro.
19 February 1972
MIR militiants threaten to kill a judge investigating the MIR’s crimes.
25 March 1972
A gun fight starts between the carabineros and Nelson Ugarte, MIR chairman, who is accused of various acts of violence and robberies. Ugarte is killed.
27 May 1972
Police find large amounts of weaponry in the car of a MIR leader.
24 July 1972
1,000 MIR gunmen take over a supermarket and a service station. One of the leaders of the attack was one of Allende’s former bodyguards, surnamed Melo.
27 February 1973
Ten carabineros are killed when MIR gunmen attack a police station in Llanquihue. The gunmen wanted to rescue Sergio Gómez, an imprisoned MIR officer.
17 July 1973
Member of the MIR put posters all over Santiago encouraging people to attack the armed forces.
12 September 73
A day after the coup, MIR gunmen are responsible for the injuries and deaths of the following soldiers:
Gerardo Carlos Araya, injured.
José Castro Nieto, killed.
Julio Antilef Gáez, injured.
Pedro Hernández Aburto, injured.
Patricio Flores Tamayo, injured.
Other soldiers are killed by the MIR in the years following the overthrow of Allende.
24 March 1980
The MIR bombs a police station in Conchalí. Among the dead and injured are José Sáez Pérez, an 11-year-old boy; Karina Ferrada Carrasco, 9 years old; and Erika Sáez Pérez, age 8.
5 November 1980
The MIR attacks the Banco de Crédito e Inversiones in Americo Vespucio Street. They shoot gardener Alberto Cifuentes Cifuentes, leaving him seriously injured.
16 Dicember 1980
The MIR attacks a Banco de Chile in the Cerrillos Street, killing Manuel Espinoza Bravo, a caretaker of cars.
28 Dicember 1980
The MIR attacks the home of law student Roberto Rojas Alvarez, injuring him.
6 November 1981
The MIR tries to assassinate Israel Bórquez, President of the Supreme Court. The attempt fails, but Bórquez is seriously injured.
30 August 1983
The MIR kills the indendent of Santiago, Carol Urzúa, and bodyguards Carlos Riveros and Jorge Aguayo.
3 October 1985
The MIR bombs a supermarket in Viña del Mar, causing a fire which kills five.
18 October 1985
The MIR storms a jail in Santiago, kidnapping and killing a guard, Gendarme Arnoldo Parra.
14 August 1986
The MIR plants bombs around Santiago, killing innocent bystander Luis Alberto Pérez.
28 August 1986
Member of the FTR kill Francisco Guzmán when he refuses to allow them to set his bus on fire.
4 September 1986
The MIR attacks an underground station, killing two passengers.
Etc, etc, etc.
Yeah, I like making stuff up. Sometimes. Sometimes I just read the entire article though because it is easier than making stuff up. Look towards the middle of the article.
The Chamber of Deputies calls on the military
Although this document was invoked to justify the September 11 coup, it is clear that the agenda of the coup was something other than restoration of the constitutional order.
The document [11] accused the Allende government of seeking “…to conquer absolute power with the obvious purpose of subjecting all citizens to the strictest political and economic control by the state… [with] the goal of establishing a totalitarian system,” and claimed that it had made “violations of the Constitution” into “a permanent system of conduct.” Many of the charges came down to disregarding the separation of powers and arrogating the prerogatives of both the legislature and judiciary within the executive.
Among other particulars, the regime was accused of:
List I provided.
Just to clarify to you and Rini: the MIR was the extreme left that was willing to take arms, as it turned out, Allende was at odds with them (after all going the election way was not seen by the MIR as an effective way to get to socialism)
http://countrystudies.us/chile/30.htm
The fact that the predicted violent revolution failed to materialize was proof that while MIR was as nasty as descrived, it was not the power the right in Chile made it to be, nor it was part of the Allende government.
That Country Studies site BTW is interesting because:
Allende may have been at odds with the MIR in the sense that he wanted a democratic way (rigging elections) and the MIR wanted a more violent way to communism. However, Allende frequently gave amnesty to groups like the MIR, calling them “young idealists”. In this interview, MIR member Andrés Pascal recalls that his organization had a very good relationship with Allende.