Allende's chile - Was it doomed to turn to shit or would have allende done a decent job

  • 🔧 Site instability resolved. You can report double-posts and broken attachments. For bigger issues, use the Technical Grievances thread.
    🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Wicky Wicky WoW

dont lose your grip on the tigers dream
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Registrado
27 de Sep, 2021
Everyone knows about that time the CIA overthrew the government of Chile and installed a dictator (a tale as old as time itself) but for years I've been unable to determine if allende was able to run the country without outside interference or if Chile under his rule was damned to being run into the ground.

The second point for a long time seemed far fetched but watching the real time decay of Venezuela who was practically playing the game on easy mode since they are a Petro state and still managed to devolve into a barely functional shit ass mess so it gives credence to the idea latin American leftism being inherently doomed to fail
 
Likely it was doomed to turn to shit. It could take a while, however. Remember that at the time the USSR was still around and had an interest in helping socialist regimes in strategic areas remain stable. There's no USSR anymore, that's why Venezuela failed so miserably so fast.
 
Likely it was doomed to turn to shit. It could take a while, however. Remember that at the time the USSR was still around and had an interest in helping socialist regimes in strategic areas remain stable. There's no USSR anymore, that's why Venezuela failed so miserably so fast.
Did the Americans ever mess with the Venezuelans that severely before things had clearly gone off the rails? I assumed the extreme response to Chile in the first place was fear of the Soviet Union
 
Did the Americans ever mess with the Venezuelans that severely before things had clearly gone off the rails? I assumed the extreme response to Chile in the first place was fear of the Soviet Union
The US tried to intervene in Venezuela in order to protect the Punto Fijo pact by creating a sort of moral panic around Chavez, but he was such a popular figure at the time that the American operation failed. Then they tried the old-school coup d'etat method, which resulted in the Caracazo (killing of Chavez supporters during a mass protest in Caracas). The Caracazo led to the strengthening of already popular Hugo Chavez, who was reconducted to Venezuela's presidency. He then proceeded to use the Caracazo massacre as justification for gradually increasing his own powers and basically become dictator for life. However, he chose a very incompetent successor (Nicolás Maduro) and that's how Venezuela became what it is today.
 
The US tried to intervene in Venezuela in order to protect the Punto Fijo pact by creating a sort of moral panic around Chavez, but he was such a popular figure at the time that the American operation failed. Then they tried the old-school coup d'etat method, which resulted in the Caracazo (killing of Chavez supporters during a mass protest in Caracas). The Caracazo led to the strengthening of already popular Hugo Chavez, who was reconducted to Venezuela's presidency. He then proceeded to use the Caracazo massacre as justification for gradually increasing his own powers and basically become dictator for life. However, he chose a very incompetent successor (Nicolás Maduro) and that's how Venezuela became what it is today.
Would Chavez be able to seize power without CIA fuckery or would it have still happened just slower?
 
Would Chavez be able to seize power without CIA fuckery or would it have still happened just slower?
Chavez's seizure of power was already rather slow and gradual, even more so by South American standards, where coups usually occur rapidly and violently, so I doubt that he would have managed to become a dictator without such an antagonistic attitude by the US. Venezuela actually was, until the Perez Jimenez dictatorship, the longest lasting democracy in South America. Being the country of Bolívar, Venezuela's spirit is very liberal and democratic, and they had solid institutions. However, the instability generated by the Perez-Jimenismo and the aforementioned antagonistic attitude on the US' part produced a populist, anti-American sentiment that was easily exploitable by demagogues like Chavez and could be used to justify authoritarianism.

One must not overlook how much anti-Americanism is a core element of Latin American leftism. Socialist regimes in the continent often fail precisely because they have no clear, coherent, pragmatical economic framework. It's primarily an ideology of resentment, fear, aversion or even hatred of the US, specifically of the country's foreign policy, which is seen as too interventionistic. Therefore, leftist governments in Latin America establish their policy around doing the opposite of what the US does, regardless of the results so achieved, because the ideology is sustained by propaganda, not reality. Whenever the US actively tries to destabilize those regimes in such a blunt way, it actually strengthens their propaganda, keeping the ideology alive even when the operation is successful. US Politicians and their voters need to understand that what they call "Latin American socialism" isn't an economic system like that of the Russians, it isn't even an unified model within itself (many would argue that Chavez and Maduro don't belong in the same category as Allende, making your original question nonsensical), it's an aesthetics. The unfortunate truth is that aesthetics usually triumph over reason.
 
Allende was a retard who was destroying Chile. His term saw inflation skyrocket, fuckery with the economy as many companies got nationalized or meddled with, wages collapse, food rationing and supply line issues, and of course commie fuckery.

Like every commie ever, the first few steps went well because he was stealing people's money and spending it. The 1st year saw a great improvement in Chilean's lives and prosperity. This is what communists and retards use to try and run apologia for the fucker and spread the CIA boogeyman of evil yankees sabotaging communism. Starting on 1972 everything started falling apart and collapsing.

I also wanna point out that there were MASSIVE strikes as people were mad he was fucking up. Like any good commie, he proceeded to call these people saboteurs and bourgeoisie and shit and only made things worse.

The funny thing is that Chile's Coup by Pinochet wasn't actually that much of a Glownigger Op. Most of it was done in house by Chile themselves but when they launched it the CIA was around and hey, the more the merrier and having them around helped things go along faster.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo