Who is Pinochet? Red pill me please

A man who did nothing wrong.

He was good.
Liberated the economy, privatized useless national companies, got rid of left-wing terrorists, and recovered the country from the crisis of the previous government.

Que paja

>(((Kissinger)))'s puppet
>fascist

What that hair means? I've seen it in some famous people here in edited images.
So he was in war against Argentina?

Was he a puppet of (((them))) or against (((them)))?

Threw commies out of a helicopter, a real american hero

He gave communists FREE SHIT

>aka Helicopter rides

>doesnt know about the Brendan Fraser cut

Doesn't matter.
Chile was about to get into war with Argentina, but at the end it never happened.

Wow, I see now, that's the origin of that meme isn't it?!
Free helicopter rides for commies, they should be very happy for that hahahaha

Not directly involved in the war but gave covert help in the form of early warning of air raids and stationing troops near a disputed border area to tie down Argentine soldiers.

Augusto Pinochet became the de facto president of Chile after consolidating power in a 4-way military junta.

>Military dictator
>Passed many market reforms aimed at liberalization that were aided by students of the Chicago school of economics.
>Hated communists and ruthlessly persecuted them
>Threw cucks out of helicopters

He overthrew a democratically elected goverment and trampled over the human rights of an entire country.

But he was on the right side of the cold war, so it's OK.

If I were him I would to send the commies to the worst commie place ever, but was very cool too.

Handed control of the economy over to American conservatives, which caused it to crash in 1982, needing an IMF/World Bank bailout.

>He overthrew a "democratically" "elected" "goverment"
>trampled over the human rights of a a small fraction of left-wing terrorists
Fixed!

The crash was caused by the latin american debt crisis. It had nothing to do with Chile or Pinochet.

>He overthrew a democratically elected goverment
LMAO Allende was a cuck shitty president that was just months away from a civil war. Pinochet was a real hero.

>trampled over the human rights of an entire country.

just the terrorist commie scum. dont generalize.

Pinochet is a men who kicked commie's ass.
If not he Chilly would be shit hall like Cuba, but now Chily is one of the best economie of South America.

>people in this thread implying that commies deserve to live

I want neopol to leave

A meme. Videla was the real redpill

Hey! Do you have any idea on who to vote for the elections next year?

Videla was shit-tier.
The only other good latin american dictator was Fujimori.

Thanks to him Chile is the richest country in the Americas other then Canada and the USA. He was a bad person and like all dictators he murdered people but his kill count wasn't any higher then one would expect from a south american head of state. The amount of lives saved by the prosperity he brought to Chile far out weighs the people he killed. He's still burning in hell but of all hell's demons that have affected the countries south of the US/Mexico border he is far from the worst.

He mostly killed people who deserved to die though.

He prevented massive breach of people's right that was imminent due to alternative commie Moscow-ruled government

Also the very important fact is that he was not a true dictator. He dismissed himself after the election of 80th. He freely resigned from power after overcoming politician and economic crisis. It is a mark of Roman counsul, not dictator.

He was preferable to the commie fuck Allende, but he wasn't perfect. He really wasn't that good for the economy, he just let ultracapitalists run it which led to a lot of fluctuation.

>elections

P I Ñ I
I
Ñ
I

>Not knowing 75% of that shit was the USA squeezing the neck of a red state to generate mass unrest.

For a place that loves to shout DA JOOOOS at the drop of a hat, you guys are really blind to conspiracies that don't fit your world view.

>I'm confused, what option should I chose?!

That bastard Allende thought he could win the war against the USA with cuban guerrilla and land grabbing from the landlords. The yanks just put him in place. He put the country in that position, he was the cause of the coup too.

CIA operative, criminal, and thief.

He blew it. He could have been great but became a shitty puppet

the average dictator who brings economic development by killing thousands of innocents

He's most likely to win, but is he really the best we have?

All of those things are literal facts.
The USA did almost nothing to the economy. They only financed some newspapers, political parties, and the coup (which the people wanted anyways). It was a seriously awful government.
Also, don't put me in with the meme from the jews, I'm not into that shit.

How exactly did he blew it? Almost everything that happened under his government worked out to be great.

Consorted with German Pedophiles.

Of course most do nowadays so think of that as you will.

Hindsight is 20/20,

>Thanks to him Chile is the richest country in the Americas other then Canada and the USA
That's wrong. Uruguay and Argentina are both ahead of Chile.

I agree he did save them from being Venezuela-tier poor though.

fuck off, coffee monkey.

>is he really the best we have?

remember the period before he got elected? people were saying the country woudl implode, exactly as how liberals freak out with trump. now that term was a fucking breeze compared with the shit we are having right now. he fixes stuff, hell fix the country again.

killing people is ok if you kill for a good cause

But if you kill your enemies, they win!

>left-wing terrorists
Funny because his government was a terrorist entity in and of itself, and Allende only fell from power because of right-wing terrorism.
>privatized useless national companies
You mean the copper industry? The same copper industry which failed as a private business so he had to re-nationalize it?
>recovered the country from the crisis of the previous government
A significant part of the crisis in Allende's term was from economic sabotage, though Allende did make mistakes. That being said, Pinochet created more crises, including multiple serious economic crashes, a gutted education system, and serious issues with poverty and unemployment. The differences between these crises and Allende's crises were that you would "disappear" and your mutilated remains would be discovered in the Atacama Desert if you protested Pinochet's policies, and that historical revisionists like you whitewash his glaring flaws while claiming he was some sort of savior.

Not an argument.

>Consorted with German Pedophiles.

oh that movie "Colonia" with the feminist whore from harry potter, how much did it make, literally like $100 lmao.

>killing people = terrorism
jailing people should be terrorism too, oy vey iz mir, criminals shall not be punished

commies are disgusting

>n-n-not real democracy(TM) if it isn't rabidly anti-leftist!
>mass killings and political repression are okay when we do it!
Human rights are the rights of the dissenters. If we don't have rights for dissenters, we don't have rights at all.

He set the people of Chile free from the slavery of a centralized economy.

He was far from perfect, but he was a damn bit better than the totalitarian communist government that came before him.

I'm far from well read on the matter but from what I gathered Allende seemed like a madman, is this accurate?

come on man, he was definitely a better choice than commie allende but still no need to praise him

>Human rights are the rights of the dissenters.

dissenters trained military and ideologically by cuban communism. traitors. traitors are treated the same all across the world.

humans """rights"""" are an illusion of the strong for the weak, i do rather being killed than being brainwashed and stupid, even if my brain tell me to stay alive my humanity tell me to die for a superior good, commie are barely better than animals, soon to be extinct

>hahaha le cuck meme le XDDD
Not an argument.
>months away from a civil war
You mean the civil war that would have been started by right-wing terrorists funded by foreign powers?
>just terrorist commie scum
>implying holding certain views is terrorism
>implying protest is terrorism unless it involves the threat or use of violence
>implying it's okay to take any such judicial action without trial

>by killing thousands of left-wing terrorists
Be careful, you almost made a mistake!

>That's wrong. Uruguay and Argentina are both ahead of Chile.
Objectively wrong though
GDP PPP per capita:
Chile: #54
Argentina: #55
Uruguay: #58
Source: International Monetary Fund (2015)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

I'm not saying he was bad, just wondering if he's the best we have. Big difference. Also, I have to wonder how much did the price of copper affected his government. He kept his promises though, that's nice.

Those terrorists were terrorists before Pinochet took power.
Allende fell from power for being an inept.
Yes, he privatized most of the copper industry, and guess what, now it's CODELCO which is having loses now. Should have been sold.
There was no economic sabotage, he brough it all to himself.
Pinochet didn't create any crises (arguably one). The first one was caused by the previous government, oil crisis, and the "shock therapy", the second one was international and had nothing to do with Chile.
No issues with poverty, as we are now the south american country with the least poverty after Uruguay. Unemployment was always falling until the crisis of 1982 came.
You could indeed protest against his government without getting killed.
He did indeed save the country, no need to be a "historical revisionist".

>n-n-not real democracy(TM) if it isn't rabidly anti-leftist!
Getting "elected" with 36% of the vote, while the other candidate has 35% of it, and the next one the rest votes is not democracy.
>mass killings and political repression are okay when we do it!
No. They literally killed terrorists who deserved to die.

Commies started a war, then lose, and blamed the right, how surprising

wat

>Every single person that was killed during Pinochet's reign was a filthy commie terrorist who had it comming.

You aren't this fucking gullible, are you?

>but still no need to praise him

DUDE

during this whole year we have had some real heavy shit come to light. tl;dr post pinochet """"left"""" has been robbing EVERYTHING they got their hands on, most of them are FUNDED by Pinochets son in law. can you believe it, the same fuckers crying "muh deceased ones, muh ded comrades" receive monthly high amounts of money from Pinochets family. we have seen some of the highest caliber corruption these days, we need a leftie purge ASAP... and guess who comes to mind when you think of leftie purge?

Basically
>chille is shit
>everyone is poor, everything is corrupt and shitty, everything sucks, democracy is sketchy, foreign spies rigging votes everywhere

Now Pinochet steps in:
>was a general, coup'd the government by force, military junta rules
>implemented economic reforms, privatized everything
>everyone is rich now, corruption went down, middle class ultra hyper strong
>threw a bunch of leftist terrorists out of helicopters
>pol finds this hilarious even 100 years later but the guy really threw a bunch of commie terrorists in the ocean

Today leftists call him a fascist but in all reality he made Chile a much better place to live.

>muh innocent victims
no such thing as an innocent commie

Basically the right wing version of Fidel Castro. The Latin American left has their heroes , the right has their own.

>holding certain views is terrorism

they tried to kill him several times. they were terrorists with military training from cuba. it wasnt just some hippie lads dissenting. it was war on the law.

>Fujimori
You mean the nutjob who tried to resign in exile, only for the Congress to reject his resignation because they wanted to extradite and impeach him specifically because he was such an ass?

>I'm not saying he was bad, just wondering if he's the best we have. Big difference.

the right of this country is full of loonies. he is the most stable and respectable, mind you.

milton friedman for fucks sake, to the south americans here shitting this alternative history of how their right-wing dictators were heros and not puppets, you're funny

collateral damage.

want no one harmed or offended? see current europe, thats what you get.

He was an idiot.

No, he really was that good.

Cuba was sending weapons to Chile to aid left-wing terrorists and start a civil war. A civil war was imminent.

>implying holding certain views is terrorism
When your manifesto literally says you want to install communism through violent revolution, you are indeed a terrorist.

>implying protest is terrorism unless it involves the threat or use of violence
Protest? Those were killing before Pinochet took power.

>implying it's okay to take any such judicial action without trial
>implying it was possible

This guy gets it.

Accurate. Except he still has a worse image than him.

I don't care about what he personally did, but his government turned out to be great.

I'm not very convinced by that... Who would you nominate if it wasn't him?

He was indeed a hero.

Western puppet cuck
applied policies,
fucked over his own people
so Wall Street could make a buck.

(rhyme somewhat intended)

youtube.com/watch?v=dRRUpO5kPhw&feature=share

Merely a pawn of the juden agenda for southamerica.

>Today leftists call him a fascist

millennials call their own parents fascists because they eat meat. everything that doesnt pander to them is fascism.

>fucked over his own people
[citation needed]
Also, commies don't count as "your own people"

>Communists
>people

The only thing Pinochet did wrong was not living forever

The IMF puts us ahead.
Latest figures.

imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2016/01/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=32&pr.y=8&sy=2015&ey=2015&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=512,668,914,672,612,946,614,137,311,962,213,674,911,676,193,548,122,556,912,678,313,181,419,867,513,682,316,684,913,273,124,868,339,921,638,948,514,943,218,686,963,688,616,518,223,728,516,558,918,138,748,196,618,278,624,692,522,694,622,142,156,449,626,564,628,565,228,283,924,853,233,288,632,293,636,566,634,964,238,182,662,453,960,968,423,922,935,714,128,862,611,135,321,716,243,456,248,722,469,942,253,718,642,724,643,576,939,936,644,961,819,813,172,199,132,733,646,184,648,524,915,361,134,362,652,364,174,732,328,366,258,734,656,144,654,146,336,463,263,528,268,923,532,738,944,578,176,537,534,742,536,866,429,369,433,744,178,186,436,925,136,869,343,746,158,926,439,466,916,112,664,111,826,298,542,927,967,846,443,299,917,582,544,474,941,754,446,698,666&s=NGDPDPC&grp=0&a=
>Argentina $13,588
>Chile $13,340

yes, a lot of them were terrorists but not all of them bro

(And yes the actual link looks like that, fuck the IMF)

It's in the video you dumb fuck, his policies made people poor as shit aside from a small elite.

Friedman was just a hustler, same as the US government and Pinochet was just a little bitch doing their bidding.

wow holy nigger link

Because Argentina is white, if Argentina killed all their commies it would be Europe tier

something to do with Texas

>Soviet support
Support that was given cautiously and eventually withdrawn*
>tons of food, factories, ships, and tractors
Source?
>expropriate farms and factories from workers
Allende worked towards workers' self-management of such assets. The expropriations were from private business owners.
>leading to starvation
That's complete and total bullshit, and you know it.
>get workers to strike against you
(((Funded))) and generously aided by the USA
>get your own people asking for a coup
A small fraction of the population supported by foreign powers*
>own supporters asking you to resign while warning the people of an imminent civil war
You mean a fraction of the loose coalition of which he was a part?
>implying the CIA wasn't extensively involved in Chile
>implying the only people who care are commies

>Who would you nominate if it wasn't him?
A DC cuck. this country needs stability, we were doing cool until bachelet ii.

Argentina could not evolve because it would imply cucking major European powers and they would not allow that for obvious reasons.
Unless we had cleaned our Country up back then and allied with Argentina, Argentina would not prosper without military brotherization.

Basically he killed a shit ton of people and waged a brutal war against those he considered leftists. Thing was the guy before him was pretty much a commie and wanted to fuck Chile's Constitution up so he was probably correct in launching a coup. However he was also a very brutal dictator but if you look at Chile today it is one of the much better off south american countries so did the ends justify the means?

Praise the Kek

Yes, he was a devout Catholic Christian and did absolutely nothing wrong by choosing the least problematic alternative, a fucking hero basically.

Of course, I'm not denying that. Most of them were, just not all.

>his policies made people poor as shit aside from a small elite.
[citation needed]
Also, don't give me the video, and use some actual sources instead.
You want some actual sources? Check out this graph from Macroeconomic Populism in Latin America by Edwards.
Real wages went down by 66% during Allende's government (between the two vertical lines), then they went back up with Pinochet to the point of increasing real wages by 200% until 1981. That's not making the people poorer. Also, we still have the same economic system and we are the south american country with the least poverty after Uruguay.

>Muh poor people
poor people are scum

>tfw Chile is even lower given the big inequality.

I want more pinochet memes I'ma fan now.

Milton Friedman was a big part of all this
>Friedman
You guessed it

Also, funny they never talk inflation went to 375% under Chile and families spent 60-70% of their income on bread while the rich got richer.

"Hurr durr so edgy, Pinochet did nothing wrong rawr xDD"

>very brutal dictator

nice meme.

he gets lumped in charts with mao, stalin, pol pot. looooool. the numbers are like 60million, 20 million, 8 million, aaand .....3.000 under pinochet. omgz genocide amirite.

>Chile is the richest country in the Americas other then Canada and the USA.
The Bahamas is actually #3

A N G L O
N
G
L
O

He did nothing wrong.

Allende didn't have a majority of votes, he was given power by the center-left coalition. He fucked-up Chile's farms by taking land away from the tradiitonal farming families and trying to nationalize it, which led to food shortages. He also caused the copper mines to have a net loss after he staffed them with commie retards. Allende hired Cuban and Soviet mercenaries to basically be his steet enforcers; and they were being trained and funded by the Soviets (this was a violation of the Chilean Constitution, btw.) Allende also refused to hold plebiscites as much as possible, so he could force his policies through Parliament. General Prats, the previous leader of the military, was a commie who shilled for Allende hard, and he was also a huge asshole. He got fired for threatening to kill a civilian woman for insulting him, he then got fired and replaced by Pinochet.

Lefties are butthurt because Pinochet was one example of their commie take-overs during the Cold War getting prevented. 2/3rds of the material on Pinochet comes from butthurt commies, Meanwhile, they try to keep Mao and Pol Pot in the closet.

Looks like the death squads missed one

go take a fucking helicopter to Venezuela or Cuba if you like it that way, fucking parasite

Nice strawman.
>anyone who the almighty leader didn't like was certainly a foreign-sponsored terrorist
Sounds literally like something from Animal Farm.
edgy/10
>implying the current state of the copper industry cancels out that he had to nationalize it because it was failing as a private business
>economic sabotage didn't exist
You're literally denying facts that are in documents released by the USA itself as well as the UN.
>Pinochet didn't create any crises
>conveniently blaming all the various issues that occurred under his watch on "other causes" of which the effects were unmanageable
>you could indeed protest without getting killed
Yeah, instead you'd end up getting raped by animals or run over with cars in a torture chamber somewhere.
>Allende wasn't democratic
He was indeed elected by a mere plurality, but even that is better than a military dictatorship.
>they literally killed terrorists who deserved to die
Literally "it's okay when we do it"
>holding views is a crime
You're full of shit.
>they MUST have been Cuban-trained terrorists
You're literally denying the fact that tons of people hated the regime and protested it without funding from Cuba. Funnily enough, when the USA added Cuba to its list of state sponsors of terrorism, funding Chilean rebels was nowhere to be seen on the list IIRC.

someone autists with a free market fetish like to idolize on the internet

>DC
Ugh...

>Support that was given cautiously and eventually withdrawn*
Wrong
>Source?
Here.
>Leonov stated in an interview at the Chilean Center of Public Studies (CEP) that the Soviet economic support included over $100 million in credit, three fishing ships (that distributed 17,000 tons of frozen fish to the population), factories (as help after the 1971 earthquake), 3,100 tractors, 74,000 tons of wheat and more than a million tins of condensed milk.
cepchile.cl/dms/lang_2/doc_1140.html
Use the internet archive

>Allende worked towards workers' self-management of such assets. The expropriations were from private business owners.
Yes, and with that previous workers were expropriated as well.

>That's complete and total bullshit, and you know it.
There were literally shortages of food and many public manifestations because of this. That's where the term "cacerolazo" was born. Because people hitted their pans as a sign of there being no food.

>(((Funded))) and generously aided by the USA
Yeah, luckily. They wouldn't have been able to get into a strike if it wasn't for them.

>A small fraction of the population supported by foreign powers*
People were still asking for it.

>You mean a fraction of the loose coalition of which he was a part?
No. A deputee from the UP (Allende's party) literally told the people to get ready for a civil war.

>implying the CIA wasn't extensively involved in Chile
It was, but not in the economy, and more into funding the coups and newspapers.

Argentina is more unequal if we go by quintiles though.

> inflation went to 375%
Correction: Inflation lowered from 606% to 375% on his first year of government. Then it went even lower.
>families spent 60-70% of their income on bread while the rich got richer.
[citation needed]

>most of the population
>only the elite get richer

You know for a poorfag country you seem to have quite the hatred for poor people like yourself.

This

And Allende was the same for commies. 40 years and they STILL Praise both faggots.

Literally
>killing and political repression is okay if it's right-wing!
>when your manifesto says you want to install communism through violent revolution, you're a terrorist
Funny. Reading a book or being associated with some of the ideas in the book doesn't mean you're a mass murderer last time I checked. On the other hand, actually carrying out mass murder DOES indeed make you a mass murderer.

>Th-th-they're not humans!
Exactly what Stalin said when he ordered the killings of "enemies of the people."

A man with a plan.

>not adjusted by PPP
Also, the source I'm using is from the same year.
We are still richer.

That image is wrong.

>economic sabotage didn't exist
Just because Nixon said it doesn't mean it happened. And it didn't.
>You're literally denying facts that are in documents released by the USA itself as well as the UN.
No proofs? No facts.

>Pinochet didn't create any crises
I already told you why he didn't
>conveniently blaming all the various issues that occurred under his watch on "other causes" of which the effects were unmanageable
Literal facts. Latin american debt crisis and oil crisis had nothing to do with him.
>you could indeed protest without getting killed
Cacerolazos from after 1982? No? Ignorant fuck

>Literally "it's okay when we do it"
Literally killing before they kill us

wow that is some autism. do you even realize how inefficient it is to dispatch people by throwing them out of a helicopter over the pacific ocean repeatedly.

>when your manifesto
>YOUR
>MANIFESTO
It wasn't just a manifesto they read and discarded; it's a manifesto they were choosing to live by. Them choosing to live by it made it likely they would kill people and violently install a communist government. Therefore the correct action, morally and pragmatically, is to strike first before they consolidate power. How much would a communist regime care about the rights of people? Probably not very much if you use actual communist regimes from the era as warning signs.

>Allende, who was PM for 3 years totally would have been better, trust me! Just look at how successful Venezuela is under a socialist state!

Everybody ITT needs to listen to this whole vid:
youtube.com/watch?v=8Gicl9GJqpc

>He wasn't a fascist, you commie
You say that like fascist is something negative

Not an argument.
>60 million billion trajillion
Mao and Stalin's death tolls were in the order of millions, but they weren't that high. As for Pol Pot, Cambodia didn't even have 8 million people when he took power. He still killed one or two million, which was a whopping 25-30% of the population at the time. Pinochet's death toll was much lower, but that doesn't come close to discounting his crimes.

Ever heard of the MIR and VOP? They literally said they wanted a violent revolution. It was to either kill them or let them kill you.
Also, they had already killed plenty of people before Pinochet, during Pinochet, and after Pinochet.
It's not about killing people with different political ideologies, but people who openly stated they would kill you to achieve their ideology. It's not about "us, the right wing XD", but about real people who were real murderers before Pinochet took power.

If you're doing military training exercises at the same time it's just killing two birds with one stone.

Where are you people, anyway?

I'm perpetually surrounded by salty liberal tears about Pinochet.

I have respect for the older generation that remembers that time and says that those were a rough few years, and I believe them when they talk about people getting disappeared. I don't deny that it was difficult, I just think we have to see the bigger picture.

We needed a drastic change and we paid the blood price.

I have no sympathy for people too young to have lived through the 70's who cry about it anyway. Where can I find redpilled Chileans? Is there a spanish language Cred Forums somewhere?

Also, FPMR

>Grandpa Pinocchio chilling
>FPMR goes in
>Launches a fucking rocket at his car
>Gramps survives
>Now i have a police station near home

Pinochet made some mistakes in terms of price fixing and such, but there's plenty of examples of states run by communist parties that are very successful in a global capitalist political economy. Vietnam, China, hell even the USSR. Not to mention, while Venezuela also made many mistakes with price fixing, its over dependence on oil is not unique to its economic system and Angola is experiencing many of the same problems, except the extreme inequality there means its less pronounced.

>He overthrew a democratically elected goverment and trampled over the human rights

Fuck human rights. They seem to only apply to niggers and communists.

Maybe Nido? Those guys were trying to make a Cred Forums

We were Northern Europe-tier, the Peronists destroyed us.

They took one of the three richest nations (per capita) in the world and literally crashed it into the ground. Having Peronists is worse than having Hiroshima and Nagasaki on your soil.

Wait a minute, I thought communism never existed.

Here in burgerland even the KKK get their human rights protected.

>he trampled over Cuban and Soviet mercenaries' right to enforce the rule of a coalition government where even the centrists began to question Allende's Soviet brown-nosing

The horror. Also, show me the communist track record on human rights, lmao.

It hasn't, but communist political parties have been in power and in control of large economies. Communism itself is only achievable when a certain material situation of abundance is reached. Socialism, its lower form where workers control the means of production, is also rare, but has occurred several times in history.

PPP is a big meme, but whatever.
Seems to me nominal GDP is more transparent, and I'm not just saying that because we are ahead.

There's a very tiny difference either way.

>hired Cuban and Soviet mercenaries to be his street enforcers
Source? He had aid from the Soviets and was close to Fidel Castro but I haven't heard of this happening.
>refusing to hold plebiscites
At least he was something resembling a democratic leader. Even that's better than a general.
>Lefties are butthurt because Pinochet was one example of their commie take-overs being thwarted
>le communist conspeeruhsee (which conveniently includes anyone who I call communist)
>2/3 of the material on him comes from butthurt commies
Which in turn cite U.N. documents and documents released by the FIA, in addition to things that are known by virtually all historians of the era.
>Meanwhile, they try to keep Mao and Pol Pot in the closet
Most Western "socialists" (read: social democrats and liberals) hate Mao and Pol Pot. So do most democratic socialists and basically all libertarian socialists. Basically everyone hates Pol Pot because he was a fucking lunatic (even Ho and Mao got sick and tired of him, and the Vietnamese finally deposed him by invading), though it's interesting to note that he almost certainly would never have taken power had it not been for the massive US-led bombings in the region that devastated the country's economy and laid the foundations for such radical parties to come to power.

This cuck lost me at:

>holding views is a crime

Some views, like Communism or Sharia, are proven enemies to western civilization.

Explain to me why you think that freedom of speech is a thing. Because some assholes wrote it down, long before media corporations, internet and social media completely changed the role of expression in society?

Please tell us now about why democracy is important or good, and why I should judge a government based on how it came into power, and not on what it did with that power.

Post a pic of your hand while you're at it, I'm pretty sure we've found some burrito.

You need to go back.

But think of the aesthetics and national pride!

o/

I'm saying it like the way a commie calls anything he doesn't like fascist, you stupid fascist

Santiago, because only Santiago is Chile.
I feel you. Most people at my Uni are commies. Or, actually, most people open about politics are. Fucking 7 out of 8 political parties at my uni are some kind of communist marxism with only one center right party which never wins. Fuck that shit.

Nido has a national politics board, /cl/, but it's still mostly left-wing. You can help us turn it to the other side though, some effort really is needed and I have been trying to convert some people there.

Yes, but FPMR formed during Pinochet, that's why I didn't mention them.
Also, weren't they the ones who killed Guzman? IF yes, fuck them. He could have done great things to this country, and was supposed to be the mastermind behind Pinochet's government.

It really isn't. You guys are higher because of inflation, while we have low inflation and that's why we appear "poorer". Also, we have less poverty than Argentina.

The only thing I wish Pinochet did was wage a war with Argentina.

...

>At least he was something resembling a democratic leader. Even that's better than a general.
Pinochet also got democratic representation during 1980. 66% of the people voted for him, and then 45% in 1989. He was pretty democratic desu, more than 36% Allende.

Also, stop using so many >implyings and strawmans, it's annoying.

Considering they are three times more numerous, we would have been dead, and you don't want a shithole like them to stay alive.

>Where can I find redpilled Chileans?

not in social media. you have to be well aware that every single ""news"" outlet that millenials eat -like it was big black cock- is heavily bluepilled, like gamba and noesnalaferia. they are cancer as fuck.

one online place to find right wing being open right wing is the comments section of emol. gets pretty Cred Forums sometimes lol.

>You guys are higher because of inflation, while we have low inflation and that's why we appear "poorer"
????
Inflation is good for an economy? Since when?
What a bunch of nonsense, our currency also fell because of said inflation so it balances itself out.

>Also, we have less poverty than Argentina.
Nope, you have a smaller GDP per capita and twice the social inequality with more than 200 thousand Chilean immigrants living here.

You are also lower on the UN Human Development Index which actually measures poverty.

See: youtube.com/watch?v=8Gicl9GJqpc

They mention the books they got the info from, one of them being from an old archive.

i dont live in a commie country, i get richer, they poorer.

Sorry, here it is.

Out of the Ashes, by James Whelan

archive.org/details/OutOfAshes

>not in social media
Zorron Socialista in FB is kind of redpilled and fun at the same time.
Gamba and Noesnalaferia are so shit. Like, I don't have a problem with left-wing news, but those are so fucking awful. Were I a left-winger I wouldn't recommend them.
Yeah, emol gets heavy on right-wing issues, wasn't really expecting that. I think La Tercera Online too, but both of them are pretty "basic" to be honest.

It's not good, that's why you guys are worse, but artificially better if you don't consider PPP.

>Nope, you have a smaller GDP per capita
Only nominal. We have higher PPP.
>and twice the social inequality
>twice
How exactly are you measuring this? GINI? Also, you guys have higher inequality by quintiles.
>with more than 200 thousand Chilean immigrants living here.
Good. It only means you guys are cucks. We are only there for free education. Literally paying taxes for us.
Also, lower poverty here than in Argentina is a fact.

HDI means shit. We do better in every parameter from it except education because you give it away for free.
And thinking it's a good measure of poverty is a big misconception of what the HDI is.

We really need to organize on a physical level in universities and push propaganda into public spaces. There have to be more than the three of us.

I am so fucking tired that every international story in Chile is about a natural disaster, or about communist scum clashing with police in the streets for no fucking reason.

Now that we are returning to democracy, we are going to die as a country if we do not find a real national identity. I feel like everyone is just trying to copy Europe, but since they're fucking English illiterate they fail to understand that democracy and the European socialist model are failing before our eyes.

As world economic growth is turning towards the Singapore/China model of a mixed economy under a nationalist one-party system, we're on one of the lower parts of the sinking ship of the West, but we're so far away from the tip we don't realize it's going down.

/soapbox

>FB

yeah there are a lot of ironic leftie shitposters in fb. didnt count them because its not straightforward righ wing. its satire.

now emol and latercera, while "basic" and all that you want, they are still places where people can voice their not concertacion-aligned opinion without being crucified. that such spaces exist is very, very important.

>the guy really threw a bunch of commie terrorists in the ocean
its so green and efficient, ahead of the times

There are. I'm from Universidad de Chile, and made a strawpoll on the Confessions site from FCFM about what was their preferred political party and if they preferred Allende or Pinochet.
40% supported either RN or UDI
50% supported Pinochet

The problem is they are nowhere to be heard. The left has a lot of voice, while the right barely speaks.

Now, national identity reals means nothing to me. We never had much to begin with. We do need to enforce patriotism though, or at least get rid of the "Chile is awful" mentality most young people have.

Our only hope is to get a right wing president for the next elections, and we will most likely have one, but if not we are doomed.

Also, get in here. It's not right-wing, but could really use some help.
nido.org/cl/

Did you even check the site I mentioned? It's right wing satire towards left wing attitudes. Not good for discussion, but they do get some from time to time.
Emol, etc are not enough. We need a way to influence the students, to voice their opinions, so that people realize not every uni student is a commie.

Also, get in here. It's not right-wing, but could really use some help.
nido.org/cl/

I was willing to concede Chile is roughly on par with us but since you insist in calling us a shithole or whatever...

1. Argentina is ahead of Chile in GDP per capita (nominal)

2. Chile is ahead of Argentina in PPP per capita according to your source by less than a 1% difference

3. Argentina is ahead on GNI per capita PPP.
hdr.undp.org/en/indicators/141706

4. Argentina is ahead on the Human Development Index

5. Argentina has a full literacy rate unlike Chile

6. Chile has more social inequality

Whatever bullshit you make up is irrelevant, we win out most of these rankings. Poverty is measured differently in either country, your poverty line is much lower than ours.

Also,
>being proud of sending immigrants
Who's the cuck again?

hey portugal, this is better than your daily holocaust thread

Like I said before, nominal doesn't mean shit if it's not converted to PPP

1. We are about the same. Doesn't matter.
2. We are about the same. Doesn't matter.
3. We are about the same. Doesn't matter.
4. We are about the same. Doesn't matter.
5. We are about the same. Doesn't matter.
6. Depends. GINI? Yes. Bottom 20% vs Top 20%? No. Also, inequality means nothing really.

>Poverty is measured differently in either country, your poverty line is much lower than ours.
Wrong. We have twice as low poverty than you, and poverty is measured by the international line of poverty of 1,90$ USD/day. We still have less poverty, because we are using the same poverty line.

>Who's the cuck again?
You. You are paying for our education, like a man who pays for condoms so that his wife can use it with her boyfriend.

Also, sorry about calling you a shithole, it's nothing personal, but for most of modern Argentinian history the politics of your country have sucked. If it wasn't for all that Peron BS you would be the best regarding economy.

>pinochet
>According to the Chilean government, the official number of deaths and forced disappearances stands at 3,095

>3095
>chilean population in 1973: 10.1 million

0.03% of the population

OY VEY THOSE POOR COMMUNISTS

That's like 1/6-gorillianth the commie dictator average!

I see some of the points have evidence, but there's still no evidence that people were literally starving during Allende's presidency. There were food shortages due to a variety of factors, but I've never heard anything about famine.
>they wouldn't have been able to strike if not for the USA
Source?
>the CIA wasn't involved in the economy
There's literally documents released from the Freedom of Information Act that prove the CIA and other entities from the USA were taking economic action.
>funding the coups
Which is a flagrant violation of international law.

>We have twice as low poverty than you, and poverty is measured by the international line of poverty of 1,90$ USD/day. We still have less poverty, because we are using the same poverty line.
data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY?year_high_desc=true

According to the World Bank going by that measure we have 1.6% poor while Chile has "no data", doesn't seem very significant. There are also plenty of social welfare plans for that kind of income.

>one of the people who would have been connected to any sabotage literally was recorded as giving orders to make the economy scream
>but magically economic sabotage still didn't happen
Sure, buddy.
>proofs?
nacla.org/article/declassifying-us-intervention-chile
history.state.gov/milestones/1969-1976/allende
nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB470/
This stuff is very easily available.
>protests happened without people getting killed
The military literally doused two students in gasoline and lit them on fire. One of them died and the other is still alive, working as an activist.
>killing before they kill us
Oh yeah because everyone is out to kill you...

Economy didn't start working until he got rid of libertarianism during the depression in the early '80s

>manifesto they were choosing to live by
>implying they were all Marxists
>implying that they were Stalinists/authoritarian Marxists at that
Holding views on things like worker ownership of factories doesn't mean that someone is a mass murderer in the making. Openly advocating the immediate killing, imprisonment, or gruesome torture of those with differing political views does, however.
>How much would a communist regime care about the rights of people
Allende's government didn't have death squads, torture chambers, and concentration camps. Of course you'll probably ignore that and claim that he was magically going to build them and become the next Pol Pot because Milton Friedman said so.
>actual communist regimes
You mean the ones Allende often criticized for being too violent, and the ones that in turn criticized Allende for being too moderate?

>one terrorist group exists
>therefore everyone I don't like is literally that terrorist group
>it's just killing people who said they would kill you to achieve their ideology
Oh yeah because Allende and his supporters were building killing fields and GULAG camps...

We have weed here, and it's soon going to be on pharmacies.
I think we can all agree which one is the superior south american country

Checked

>muh Soviet/Cuban conspeeruhsee
>hurrr if they kill we can kill too even if they're not actually killing and it's just a tinfoil hat conspiracy

thread theme song
youtube.com/watch?v=zhrYY3ocQ5o

>freedom of speech shouldn't exist
Then you're an enemy of Western Civilization. I'm sure you'd love somewhere like Uzbekistan or Eritrea.

>Allende's government didn't have death squads

Allende had Ariel Fontana, a Cuban-trained military officer who had a group of communist brownshirts that basically did the dirty work for Allende.

It's also a valid point that Allende would have kept grasping for more power as time went on; since he kept refusing to hold plebiscites. There was also a strike against Allende, and union membership only rose by 3% while he was PM.
>muh 36%

You are right about me no having sources about starvation, but food shortages were indeed a thing. A famine would have been way too extreme.

>Source?
Going into a strike is costly. Had it not been for the funding, they wouldn't be able to get into a strike because they needed the money, which was very much needed at the time because of the growing inflation and the like.

>There's literally documents released from the Freedom of Information Act that prove the CIA and other entities from the USA were taking economic action.
Yes, I have seen them, and they never mention the measures the USA took to intervene in the chilean economy. Just because Nixon said he wanted it to happen won't make it magically occur.

>Which is a flagrant violation of international law.
I really hate the USA getting into other countries and promoting freedom and stuff, and I'm not denying that's against the law or whatever, but what they did was for the best.

That's because it's using data from the World Bank from 2013.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_percentage_of_population_living_in_poverty
Argentina: 1.75%
Chile: 0.92%

In conclusion, Chile in 2013 has still less poverty than Argentina in either 2013 or 2015.

Except he didn't.

Again, it's hard since 80% of the material on Pinochet is from butthurt leftists, and they constantly echo-chamber the negatives about Pinochet while ignoring Allende's faults.

Also, explain Ariel Fontana pls.

Yes, I have seen those studies. There was still no intervention in the economy. If there is, go tell me where exactly in those studies does it say that and how.

>The military literally doused two students in gasoline and lit them on fire. One of them died and the other is still alive, working as an activist.
That might very well be true, but lots of protests happened, especially after 1982 where nobody got killed.

>Oh yeah because everyone is out to kill you...
They literally were, and they had literally killed people before Pinochet took power. Those are facts.

Judging from a quick look, it looks like mostly revisionist history pushed by conservative bodies (the author wrote for the Washington Times) and part of a broader narrative trying to justify USA policy in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Not an argument.

>That's because it's using data from the World Bank from 2013.
I literally clicked on the source for that Wiki page and it says "Chile no data", it's the World Bank link I gave you.

>trusting Wikipedia
>ever

Also, even if those numbers were true and not some unsourced Wikipedia edit, you are arguing over a 0.83% difference after claiming the 0.8% difference between Chile's literacy rate and Argentina's "was about the same, doesn't matter".

Your material is written by leftists, isn't it the same difference?

Your leftists sources hardly ever mention things like the transit strike against the Allende government; even though that was a leftist issue. There's ideological bias on both sides; it's just that leftists give more of a shit about Chile because it was one of their losses - thus, they write about it more.

Also, Whelan mentions many of the shady things the CIA did in that same paper.

At the end of the day, it's just a battle of favorites. Allende and Pinochet both had revolutions that were unpopular with the right and the left, and the centrists wavered on both. Allende refused to hold plebiscites and got Soviet/Cuban support. Pinochet had the support of the military, the Chilean Constitution, and the US.

No, I'm not talking about the Communist manifesto, but their own declaration of principles by this left-wing terrorist group.
es.wikisource.org/wiki/Declaración_de_Principios_del_MIR
>La destrucción del capitalismo implica un enfrentamiento revolucionario de las clases antagónicas.

Also
>implying they were all Marxists
>implying that they were Stalinists/authoritarian Marxists at that
Literally the first line of their manifesto
>El MIR se organiza para ser la vanguardia marxista-leninista
So, yes, they were that kind of marxists

>Allende's government didn't have death squads
Yet he allowed those left wing terrorists to kill people without setting them to trial. It's kind of the same.

They were actually two, and then a third and fourth joined. They had over 10'000 members, Pinochet only killed 3'000. He couldn't even kill all of them, and they even almost managed to kill Pinochet. Literally, kill them or they kill you.

Weed is seriously overrated, and making it legal is pretty irrelevant save for medical uses.

omg you're some next level retard fascist aren't you? you're twisting and exaggerating facts like a madman.

It literally doesn't say that. It has a dot on it. You have to click on Chile and go up, you will see poverty at 0.95%
Please tell me you are not that stupid to do this or I will send a screenshot.

>trusting Wikipedia
I checked the information for myself. What it says is true.

>Also, even if those numbers were true and not some unsourced Wikipedia edit, you are arguing over a 0.83% difference after claiming the 0.8% difference between Chile's literacy rate and Argentina's "was about the same, doesn't matter".
Fair enough. We have the double of illiteracy, but you have the double of poverty. What's better? Having less poor, imo.

>butthurt

Explain Ariel Fontana, pls.

I'm not a fascist, if anything, I would describe myself as an utilitarian classical liberal. Are you a commie? Because commies like calling everything they don't like fascism.

>you're twisting and exaggerating facts like a madman
[citation needed]
Literally, I refuse to accept facts that don't agree with my own bubble-like world view.
So, tell me, what exactly is wrong from my post?

Ariel Fontana was in fact part of Allende's guard, but the MIR (a commonly mentioned militant group he associated with) was a military group but explicitly rejected the use of terrorism. They acted mostly after the threat of a (((foreign-funded))) coup became apparent.

>He didn't

You must be a product of one of the private schools outside the good part of Santiago.

rrojasdatabank.info/econom~1.htm

Nope, illiteracy is worse.
The poor can get welfare.

You get $60 USD per month here just by joining a free university course, not to mention the myriad of social welfare programs for unemployment, single mothers, etc.

A 0.83% difference in income is truly irrelevant, unlike illiteracy.

What are you fucking gay?

>MIR (a commonly mentioned militant group he associated with) was a military group but explicitly rejected the use of terrorism
Wrong. They had already killed plenty of people, together with bombing and robbing.

Nice assumption
Don't link me the study, cite me how exactly did the USA intervene. I literally ctrl+f'd "interv" and got zero results.
Can't do it? That's because they never did.

Oh well, yeah, he's a good boy because Allende and the Soviets said so. Militant Marxist groups in South America never did nuffin.

What difference does it make to you to legalize weed? Nothing, UruGAY

You must be lost too. Click on my ID.

Well, when you are in a continent surrounded by half breeds, small things like being high/drunk all day actually make you enjoy life more.

relevant

Oh, alright, my bad.

What I'm saying is that legalizing it doesn't do much to the recreative consumer. Now, about this
>things like being high/drunk all day actually make you enjoy life more
That's pretty gay.
Get some actual hobbies instead.

Only 3% of Chile lives in poverty though.

everyone with basic knowledge of history and economics knows he is a puppet of the CIA and a very ignorant person that passed laws under the influence of the Chicago School of Economics.

Well, it turned out this policies were dumb and he broke the economy in 1980 (well into his dictatorship). Thanks to that, now Chile has one of the more strict regulations over how banks can lend money in the world. In fact, he had to pull back from most of what he implemented because it was basically stupid since deregulation works in smaller countries where you can check that all the companies and corporations aren't doing unethical practices and trying to break the system, just like in Singapore. And also we can't compete in terms of labour to the East Asian Countries, so most companies didn't choose Chile, but those few that did only took the easy markets that the State (ironically) opened, like Electricity, Highways and Water.

Basically, if you think he was great, from an economical viewpoint, you are just ignorant. Privatization is not bad per se, but doing it YOLO style because a bunch of guys from expensive universities told you so is questionable to say the least.

Most of what he did was just because others told him to do so. We could have been a South American Singapore with him being Lee Kuan Yew, but he just became a puppet of smarter and richer people. Also, he stole millions of dollars from the State, far from being a hero I would say.

I've got hobbies, I also enjoy them while high/drunk

Except that's wrong.
The economy didn't collapse because of him. The first crisis had to with the previous government, the oil crisis, and the "shock therapy". The second crisis had to do with the latin american debt crisis. None were fault of his government.
You are the economically illiterate one.
>Privatization is not bad per se, but doing it YOLO style because a bunch of guys from expensive universities told you so is questionable to say the least.
Yes, becaue they were experts in the field of economy, being taught by a nobel laureate. Why would Pinochet not listen to them?

We are the great country we are today (in south american standards) because of him. I too like the Singapore model, but our own model is good as well.

Him stealing money is pretty shitty though, I agree.

Correction. The first crisis did have some of his fault, but not all, and it's arguable if that was actually a bad thing.

He saved his country from becoming a piss poor country. He literally made their economy explode. He also threw commies out of helicopters.

Just goes to show that privatization and helicopter rides are all you need to save your country.

Well if Stalin had fucking made his country one of the most prosperous in the region it wouldn't have been for no fucking reason would it?

Sorry but if you're an idealistic fuck head socialist who wants to drag your country through the garbage bin because you want to make it into the perfect poster boy for the socialist cause you deserve to be thrown from a rotor propelled vehicle.

Please flip the right-left orientation of the coup and give your opinion again.

He was only the Greatest South American to ever live!!

Maybe you should stop shitposting from your cuckshed and do something about it.

>You say that like fascist is something negative
You are assuming Pinochet was something positive.

>You are assuming Pinochet was something positive.
He was.

>He was only the Greatest South American to ever live!!

banks were lending more money that they had and they made the inflation grow because of that, the central bank had to print money just so that they didn't go bankrupt.
you can factor thousands of variables into the equation, but looking at the bigger picture, if he had (and the people around his administration) had taken a lot more responsibility about the effects that their policies would have, none of the crisis would have happened, at least not the second one and not in the level they did.

You have to admit that in times of crises it is the State that has to step in and save the country because individuals act unethically and do not think of the end result of their own practices.

Also, nobel prizes outside 'hard' sciences are very, VERY questionable. They are sometimes just a popularity contest and they are even contradicting since they give prices to people that believe in opposite theories, I can't trust that.
Also, you should never, ever trust something that hasn't been applied elsewhere in a macroscopic level, and we were the experiment for the Chicago School. Did it turn out well? Well, to answer that we would need to look at all the successful countries that applied their idead, which are none as far as I know. Reagan policies weren't exactly the most successful ones and neither were Tatcher's. So, I guess you can say that for all their pedigree, economists aren't always a authority or the correct policy makers.

Also, are we a great country?
Pension system is all fucked up, Education is all fucked up and we have no future outside selling copper. We are living a good moment that will end (actually, you could say that it is starting to end), and when that happens we have to thank Pinochet and the subsequent gov'ts from the Concertación for not spending the tax money more smartly.
Nationalized strategic industries always work, even Singapore has nationalized some of their strategic industries.

put your trip back on AMG

Maybe those things did bad to the economy, but the crisis was going to be a thing without a doubt. Peru and Uruguay went through the same situation during 1981-1983.

I agree what you say about the state in times of crisis.

Say what you want about economics not being a hard science or whatever, I was only addressing your point that for some reason it wasn't reasonable to listen to a bunch of experts and a nobel laureate. It definitely was reasonable, and imo, it was good as well.

Many countries applied a similar model to the Chilean one, particularly Reagan and Thatcher. What happened? Reagan got elected two times, and Thatcher three. Now, this is an argument for popularity, sure, but you can study their politics if you want. From what I have read about them, their politics were great, they even continued through their respective Democrat and Labour government, just like it happened with Chile and the concertacion (Lagos and his privatizations, for example).
Of course, economics are a very controversial subject, but from what I have studied, the Chicago experimented turned out for the best.

>Also, are we a great country?
Yes. We have to compare ourselves with our neighbors for that. Are we doing better than them? Without a doubt, if you ask me.
>Pension system is all fucked up
It really isn't. The pension system itself is great, although it needs some modifications. Considering we only give 10% of our salaries to them instead of the 20% of the reparto alternative (yes, there are more alternatives, whatever), and get a more than 70% return? That's seriously awesome. Of course, assuming constant employment and higher wages, but that's where we should fix the issue, and not just say the system is bad because everybody is marching about it.

cont.

We've become a cattle state, being drained of our resources by foreign interests. As soon as those resources dry up, we will be tossed aside like an empty husk and left to rot.

But lets be happy we're being fed and taken care of in the mean time

He's the hottest meme on the net mostly being posted by edgy millennials and ancaps

cont.

>Education is all fucked up
I have to be honest here and tell you I haven't studied much of the subject. Would you mind enlightening me about it?
>we have no future outside selling copper.
That really isn't true. Most estimates say we have around one hundred more years of copper, and in that time we can diversify our economy.
>We are living a good moment that will end (actually, you could say that it is starting to end), and when that happens we have to thank Pinochet and the subsequent gov'ts from the Concertación for not spending the tax money more smartly.
I will need you to elaborate more on this.

>Nationalized strategic industries always work, even Singapore has nationalized some of their strategic industries.
I agree. Copper is a good thing to nationalize, and if not, we should probably increase copper royalties. At the same time, I have my doubts about it. Codelco isn't doing well, last time I heard they had loses while the private ones didn't, so I'm very suspicious to both stances of nationalization and privatization of copper.

No idea who she is, but I bet she's pretty cool :P

someone that failed miserably since his country is full commie again

He was the hero a bunch of stupid Mexicans didn't deserve.

commie removers are always welcome but that doesn't mean he was fascist, in fact he wasn't redpilled at all

D-don't remind me...

Yeah, what do you propose then, faggot?
Once our resources are gone, if we are fucked, they are fucked too anyways.

Well dumb ideas do easy root in stupid people, so its no wonder why the country turned into a shithole again.

this

...

The pension system isn't a dignifying one and it is run by privates that try to get as much benefit from their position as they can (I know it's an exaggeration to put it that way). Logically speaking, you have individuals 'playing' with money that isn't their own, and that is particularly something that even Friedman would argue aganst.
youtube.com/watch?v=5RDMdc5r5z8

I do not know which one is the better pension system (and I guess no one knows), but saying that this one is good doesn't really seem like it's correlated with reality. Even José Piñera expected higher % returns when he made the system, and these just don't happen.

And note that I'm not arguing against the morality of the system, but the logical part of it is not right.

Educationally speaking we have made changes that are superficial but don't really alter the core problems. Why do we have an educational system that has nothing to do to our project as a country (do we even have one)? the Colegios Tecnico Profesionales are marginalized time and time again while they are an opportunity for the poorest people in the country to gain a way to compete in the labour market. The Ministerio de Educación just tries to dodge the bigger issues with teachers and doesn't change the system to the point where we are raising our standards in the areas that we as a society define as important. For example, if we are to sell copper we may put our educational focus in Engineering, Geography/Topology and Geology, Heavy Machinery Drivers, Biology/Medicine investigations about the effects of people in mines, etc...

We drift in an educational system that has no focus point. Of course I advocate for liberty if you want to be an artist, but if we had a plan we would raise the poorest sectors of society giving them opportunities for their future.

1/2

cont.

Yes, we can change our industry in the future, but no government wants to do so and that's also an issue. We don't see money flowing to investigations about Lithium for example. It's the same I don't see any State politics regarding this topic and touching the Royalties is a big no-no for the pussy-ass politicians.

When the 'Chilean Miracle' is over we will have nothing to rely upon. We aren't spending the money smartly on our industries and we are just living the Laizess-Faire ideal because that's what our stupid right-wing politicians think will bring prosperity, thinking that industries and investigations grow out of thin air and private investment (actually, all through the world the biggest investor in technology and investigations is the State). While the left-wing governments try to reap the benefits of a good economical moment and fixing the social inequality but neither having a future objective nor being effective about their policies.
When no one is stepping in for giving Chile a future, I would say that it is logic to say that we have no future whatsoever. But feel free to argue against, after all it's more about Politics than anything.

I hate how you people refuse to question your own views.

When you talk about the pension system you aren't really talking on pragmatic terms. I don't care if those privates get rich by this system as long as the citizens are getting a good return, which they do get like I said before. Again, a 70% return by giving only the 10%, while in Europe you get a 70% return giving the 20%. That's an amazing thing to celebrate from our model.

Jose Piñera expected a 70% return, then it turned out to be 77%. No idea where you got that idea from. I think they are mostly good, but they can be improved, but what's more important to improve are real wages and unemployment (the two most important reasons on why pensions are "so low").

You really are arguing about the moral part of the system, I don't see much logic in that post, in all honesty.

Regarding the education, what exactly do you want to change? I agree we should promote and give more aid to IPs and CFTs, they are a wonderful tool to improve the conditions of the people with less resources. But then you have the people asking for free education (and mostly Uni education at that) and that's pretty much useless. That only helps the middle-upper class people to end their debts once they get out to work, but doesn't help the poor in a significant way. Why? Because the poor can't even start to study at Uni!
Yes, giving a stronger focus to specific areas is a good idea, but I would try to direct it towards technology instead of only mines.

>we can change our industry in the future, but no government wants to do so and that's also an issue
Do they really? The government has a limited amount of money, and you have people out in the streets asking for free education, higher pensions, free healthcare, etc. Can you really pay for those when the people are complaining about this?
I also have to wonder why is it that they don't want to increase the royalties. I'm very suspicious regarding that issue.

You are such a special snowflake :3
It never occurred to me to question my own beliefs! Turns out I LOVE Allende now!
Truth is, I had no beliefs until I started studying those subjects, and now that I have, I can be more certain of them. I still have my doubts on a lot of issues, but when it comes to Pinochet being better than Allende, I'm 99.9% certain that's true.

>When the 'Chilean Miracle' is over we will have nothing to rely upon
Are you talking about when we dry up from copper or something else?

>We aren't spending the money smartly on our industries and we are just living the Laizess-Faire ideal because that's what our stupid right-wing politicians think will bring prosperity
Except it's actually working.
>thinking that industries and investigations grow out of thin air and private investment
Which is still true to some extent
>(actually, all through the world the biggest investor in technology and investigations is the State)
That might as well be true, and I really like the idea of the state investing heavily into technology, but I'm skeptical towards how much we can actually make because we are restricted by our amount of money we have and the amount we want to spend on new things (education).

>When no one is stepping in for giving Chile a future, I would say that it is logic to say that we have no future whatsoever.
When our future is over, it will most likely be the end of the future of other countries. If we run out of copper, then so does everybody else. If you actually want to think about the future, be worried about all the natural products that might go scarce. See: Peak Phosphorous, for example. It really is a terrifying possibility.
>But feel free to argue against, after all it's more about Politics than anything.
Sure, that's alright.

Do you have a Skype or something? You seem pretty cool.

bump

youtube.com/watch?v=5rsb7dT6sEM

Copper is going to be replaced eventually, and my guess is that it will be faster than oil, wood or other natural resources.
Even if a substitute (which I'm pretty sure there are or some scientist out there is designing) starts supplying 10% of the demand we are on a dire situation. All the machinery and logistics we have around Copper could be transfered to Lithium just in case we get to the point were it's needed, but right now there seems to be no plan B or backup or anything. That is scary for everyone living here.

It's not the possibility that copper runs out that scares me, but the possibility that China doesn't need as much copper because they produce a synthetic version of it and we are sitting on our hands trying to sell copper cheaper than ever before. We lived through the same when Germans found a synthetic substitute for Saltpeter and everything went to shit ending with the crisis of 1929 and Ibañez assuming the control of the Government.
It's like we haven't learned anything.

unfortunately I don't use Skype, but you can add me on steam if you use it
id/fbx/

Copper is not going to be replaced until it's too expensive to extract, I can assure you that. Considering it's even a literal element in the periodic table, it's a very essential product.
I seriously wouldn't worry about someone finding a replacement or synthetic version.
It won't happen the same as saltpeter, because that is indeed possible to synthesize since it's not a literal element of matter.

I don't have Steam (well, I do, but never ever use it). Do you have a kik then?

>>Not using wikipedia to find legitimate peer-reviewed scholarly sources to find a better understanding of any subject outside of advanced theorems.

>>Comes here to learn things instead

Wikipedia is very biased towards the left though, even it's founder admits this.

I went to chile once, you guys are alright (fuck all the non-chileans plaguing the busy parts of santiago though (peruvians and bolivians))

Question: what do you guys understand "Socialism" to be?

I made a kik account:
fpj04

Depends on the context.
What's your point?

Adding you!

No. is a hero

youtube.com/watch?v=z9IHUhwNOKM

>We do need to enforce patriotism

And this shity propaganda supporter supposed to be redpilled

???

Bulgaria was a little socialist heaven for 45 years.Too bad after 1989 the democracy we received fucked us up to become 3rd world country tier.

>death squads, torture chambers, and concentration camps.

He made that stuff for commies, so it is pretty cool