Pinochet - A Chilean Hero

http://www.policyofliberty.net/HPdA/CobinAraujo.html

I notice quite a bit of anti-Pinochet sentiments on this board, but nobody seems to acknowledge the real truth about the Marxist terrorists versus President Pinochet's early years. Left-wing liberals want to impale him, accusing him of human rights violations. Read the article -- proof that these accusations are garbage.

Chile erupted into civil war, but wasn't acknowledged by the socialists in Europe that saw and wrongly accused Pinochet of being a terrorist, when it turns out he was actually defending the will of the people.

This article, is the TRUTH about President Pinochet, the economic miracle, modernization, and de-Stalinization of Chile.

Rmsharpe, did you notice that the "article" was written by a guy selling LIFE INSURANCE? If you're going to spew right wing propaganda, try to make sure it's from a fairly repuatable source.

http://www.libertysoft.com/liberty/issues/70issue.html

It was in a Libertarian magazine. I got a copy of it from the guy's business page.

Also, only a third of Chileans opposed Pinochet's presidency -- not a poll taken during the so-called "dictatorship"

Originally posted by rmsharpe
http://www.libertysoft.com/liberty/issues/70issue.html

It was in a Libertarian magazine. I got a copy of it from the guy's business page.

Click to expand...

So it's not from an actualnews orginization? This guy is just talking out of his ass. So are you.

Yep, General Pinochet was a great leader who saved Chile, and was a great friend of the West in their existential war against evil communism.

Left-wing media like CNN, the New York Times, and the Washington Post won't accept opposing viewpoints on issues. They publish their Marxist doctrine, and you're left with little choice but to read it.

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Left-wing media like CNN, the New York Times, and the Washington Post won't accept opposing viewpoints on issues. They publish their Marxist doctrine, and you're left with little choice but to read it.

Click to expand...

Boo hoo. Like I've never heard that before. Left-wing media are only as liberal as the conservatice corporations that own them.

"The people who cast the votes don't decide an election, the people who count the votes do."

The newspapers count the votes, and every time, the liberal wins.

Originally posted by rmsharpe
"The people who cast the votes don't decide an election, the people who count the votes do."

The newspapers count the votes, and every time, the liberal wins.

Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? Are you talking about the Florida election? Cause I'm pretty sure that every time a newspaper does some official recount of that election, not that anyone really cares about it anymore, Bush usually comes out on top. But that has nothing to do with Pinochet, who i'm sure ran perfectly legal elections.

It had nothing to do with the 2000 election.

It was a parallel between vote counters and how newspapers try to influence people's politics.

It was a parallel between vote counters and how newspapers try to influence people's politics

Click to expand...

Like you do here...

Originally posted by rmsharpe
It had nothing to do with the 2000 election.

It was a parallel between vote counters and how newspapers try to influence people's politics.

Click to expand...

Whatever. Newspapers don't count votes. You're not making any sense. The New York Times no more tries to influence people than the Washington Times, that bastion of objective reporting.

Anyone who said anything (other than rmsharpe) is arguing for the sake of arguing and has no real point. Rather than opposing his point of view, you're taking a poop on his sources. He got the opinion from himself, he's not the kind of guy whose made by a newspaper article. He felt the need to share the article because it bears a vast similarity to his opinion on the subject.

That 's my take of it.

Pinochet is no hero

and CNN is not left wing

I find it hard to believe I can read the words communist, liberal New York Times and Washington Post being used interchangeably. but then I'm from across the pond.

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Chile the country that had its president assassinated (and some peole, probably paranoid, thought that the CIA just might have been involved) not long after he was elected by popular vote? And was it not the case that prior to his assassination, the rich (and perhaps - dare I say it? - right wing) Chileans had been siphoning off their wealth to foreign parts with the intended and largely successful goals of keeping themselves rich and destabilizing the economy.

Back to my main point, if we can intercgange the words liberal and communist, perhaps we can reduce the whole English language to a few hundred words and get rid of all its complexity. Ironically the perfect satire on this is a book which is generally regarded as more of an attack on Stalin than Hitler. Perhaps we can lose the word totalitarian at the same time?

By the way sniping-people, opinions without reference to facts are so much hot air and checking the validity of sources used to back up opinions is an essential activity in a "free" society (please think some more about my reference to Orwell). since you have got me onto that theme, can I point out that Allnde's government only lasted a very short time and even though he was a "communist" he had neither had the time nor the will nor the mandate to stalinize Chile. If mrsharpe actually knew anything about history he would understand that a process like stalinization (which has little to do with communism in my opinion) takes even a very determined thug like Stalin many years of effort. And to reach its peak it probably needs a major outside threat (like Hitler) to cement the job.

Whenever I think of the sad affair of Chile I think of the song "Ellas Danzan Solas (Cueca Sola)". In fact writing this has made me put on the right now. I can't remember Sting's English title precisely and I suspect that to rmsharpe Joan Baez is another synonym for the words above whicih he wants to merge into oblivion, and so I won't discuss it anymore, I'll just listen to the "propaganda" (which affects me even though I don't speak Spanish).

the democracy loving pinochet, although he ruled the country with ironfist for seventeen years, fought a war on terrorism where "some innocent people were undoubtedly killed" and some disappered should stand above the international law and human rights.

rmsharpe, you and this article are pissing me off. i can´t help it. i know a guy whose familly escaped from pinochet´s liberal army. this article is disgusting, it didn´t even mentioned the word torture once. "Pinochet was no tyrant." then what was he? a politican that just had great use of the army and threatening speechs? "Afterward he voluntarily stepped down from power." he lost the election in 1990. the reason to why he is liked in chile is not because any freedome or so, it´s because the low wages were enough for them.

Since many family members of mine were killed/tortured during his regime, this thread is about as tasteless as claiming that the 911 was an heroic act.

No wonder libertarians extal him. Through ruinous free market reforms, he took a stable economy and created the worst income inequality in Latin America within less than two decades. When democracy was finally restored in 1989, voters quickly voted him out of power. National hero, you say?

His takeover, in response to the nationalization of American-owned interests (namely copper mines) was not a proud moment for the CIA (which was soon subject to congressional oversight after Allende's assassination.) The man murdered thousands of dissidents and labor figures - all of whom his own countrymen. That is a fact...

A true compassionate conservative.

Originally posted by ZultanofZex
Since many family members of mine were killed/tortured during his regime, this thread is about as tasteless as claiming that the 911 was an heroic act.

Click to expand...

Well put; I was about to make the same point, but you did it better than I could.

Quibbling about Allende's intentions or Pinochet's policies are one thing; I have no doubt that economically, Chile is better off now than it would have been if Allende had stayed in power.

And, so what? As a fiscal conservative and a free marketeer, I have to tell you, I would give all that up in a single breath if the only way to keep it was to wage a "war" that consisted of a one-sided military golpe and a regime that solved its political problems with torture. Justifying Pinochet's violent coup and dispicable governance because of where it fits on some macho left-right paradigm is no different from the crap the stalinists pulled in the Forties to justify their own behavior (and ditto Adolf, btw; he was just fighting a war against bolshevism, what was all the fuss about?)

Pinochet-lovers, when your moms disappear to a gruesome fate in some electrode-equipped office because they happened to be on the wrong union local's bargaining committee, then I will accept your judgement as to whether it was all worth it or not. Until then, lets just call an arrogant, murdering thug what he is and move on....

R.III

EDIT: BVD, I don't think it's fair to say "libertarians" extol him. People who might claim to be libertarians might, but to suggest that anyone who actually values "liberty" would be a flag-waver for a fascist dictatorship is a bit unfair to those who actually DO value liberty.

Indeed Pinochet was the man needed at the right time. Chile was turning further and further to the extreme left and something had to be done.

The US did the right thing, they supported a coup d'etat and succeeded in removing the Communist dictatorship that had already developed. Let's not think that he destroyed democracy, he merely changed the form of dictatorship and in fact Pinochet had been ordered to clamp down on protesters in Santiago when he took charge.

The USA fought the Cold War and had to protect its vital interests and stop further communist expansion, particularly in the Americas and indeed the coup was a better solution than a direct military strike would have been. That's how I think the US should react to their present enemies too, they should overturn the government and impose Western-friendly dictatorships.

A right-wing pro-Western dictatorship is better than a left-wing anti-Western dictatorship or indeed an anti-Western dictatorship of another kind.

And, as you all know, Pinochet ended up reinstating democracy, do you think Allende would have done that? I don't.

Of course there are always exceptions, but Pinochet isn't one of them.

BUT, finally I'd like to say that I'm sorry you lost family and yes, he was a cruel dictator, and oppressive too, but he was the lesser evil.