|
wateroverfire posted:It wasn't great. It was loving scary. The article above is total poo poo, though, and the view that everything was happily chugging along and then the dictatorship happened and the Chicago Boys wrecked everything is wrong. There's nothing but assertions in this post.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2014 05:06 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 09:35 |
|
Allende's system was objectively working better than the Pinochet regime ever did.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2014 05:43 |
|
StandardVC10 posted:Turns out that a lot of people are just waiting for the chance to morally justify taking everything that they can. It's the "philosophical" equivalent of: "Kids can be so cruel." "We can? Thanks, mom!"
|
# ? Jul 23, 2014 16:10 |
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Allende's system was objectively working better than the Pinochet regime ever did. No, it wasn't. Allende came to power with a slim plurality of about 36% in a country with a tenuous economic and social situation characterized by high inflation, rampant poverty, and civil unrest. He proceeded to pull a Chavez (or perhaps Chavez pulled an Allende) and using the full force of his non-existent mandate made those problems worse, culminating in telling the judiciary to gently caress off when it pointed out that much of what he was doing was illegal. Read the wikipedia article on Allende, which is actually pretty balanced despite not capturing the pure "oh poo poo things are about to go off the rails" zeitgeist of the time. In no sense was the Allende regime "working" and a violent confrontation of some kind was the inevitable result of Chile's (failed) revolutionary politics. The coup was loving terrible and the Pinochet regime committed crimes that can be explained by circumstances (ongoing political violence by the left) but never justified by them. However, it did restore a certain amount of economic stability and today Chile is one of the most developed countries in Latin America instead of a socialist failed state like Venezuela. edit: Excerpt from the article that talks some about the prevailing conditions at the time: quote:Chilean presidents were allowed a maximum term of six years, which may explain Allende's haste to restructure the economy. Not only was a major restructuring program organized (the Vuskovic plan), he had to make it a success if a Socialist successor to Allende was going to be elected. In the first year of Allende's term, the short-term economic results of Minister of the Economy Pedro Vuskovic's expansive monetary policy were highly favorable: 12% industrial growth and an 8.6% increase in GDP, accompanied by major declines in inflation (down from 34.9% to 22.1%) and unemployment (down to 3.8%). However by 1972, the Chilean escudo had an inflation rate of 140%. The average Real GDP contracted between 1971 and 1973 at an annual rate of 5.6% ("negative growth"); and the government's fiscal deficit soared while foreign reserves declined.[45] The combination of inflation and government-mandated price-fixing, together with the "disappearance" of basic commodities from supermarket shelves, led to the rise of black markets in rice, beans, sugar, and flour.[46] The Chilean economy also suffered as a result of a US campaign against the Allende government.[47] The Allende government announced it would default on debts owed to international creditors and foreign governments. Allende also froze all prices while raising salaries. His implementation of these policies was strongly opposed by landowners, employers, businessmen and transporters associations, and some civil servants and professional unions. The rightist opposition was led by the National Party, the Roman Catholic Church (which in 1973 was displeased with the direction of educational policy),[48] and eventually the Christian Democrats. There were growing tensions with foreign multinational corporations and the government of the United States. If I find some more english language sources I'll post them. wateroverfire fucked around with this message at 17:01 on Jul 23, 2014 |
# ? Jul 23, 2014 16:56 |
|
wateroverfire posted:No, it wasn't. Yes it was, becuase it didn't involve murdering tons of people and the average Chilean was no better off under the murder regime.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2014 16:59 |
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Yes it was, becuase it didn't involve murdering tons of people and the average Chilean was no better off under the murder regime. D&D.txt. "Let me tell you about how your history has no nuance and no I don't know anything about it why would that be important?"
|
# ? Jul 23, 2014 17:06 |
|
"I really don't think you're appreciating the nuance of this situation" *rolls you out of helicopter into ocean*
|
# ? Jul 23, 2014 17:09 |
|
Salon had an interesting article on Libertarians, Silicon Valley, and the GOP. http://www.salon.com/2014/07/23/the_extreme_right_wing_is_using_the_tech_industry_to_rebrand_the_gop_partner/ "" posted:Silicon Valley vanities demand a focus on the future. But the entrepreneurs and code writers attending San Francisco’s Reboot 2014 this week would be wise to note the past of the conference’s Libertarian sponsors as they and other right-wing Republicans are seeking to rebrand the GOP—in California and nationally. So what they are trying to do: "Start with the “two libertarianisms, the hick fascism version owned by the Koch brothers, essentially rebranding Joe McCarthy with a pot leaf and a ponytail; and Silicon Valley’s emerging brand of optimistic, half-understood libertarianism, part hippie cybernetics, part hot-tub-Hayek,” to end up with one Libertarianism. So one side one has fully developed systematics, backed up in the real world with an extensive educational network in universities developed over decades. The other side likes to talk techno-optimism, seasteading utopias, and Hayek in the hot-tub. One of these things is going to be made consistent with the other, and that doesn't look like a fair fight to me. Bar Ran Dun fucked around with this message at 17:54 on Jul 23, 2014 |
# ? Jul 23, 2014 17:52 |
|
You see Allende was screwing up the economy so Pinochet had no choice but to come along and impose his scary reforms.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2014 17:56 |
|
So the fact that Nixon and the CIA did everything in their power to undermine the Chilean economy means nothing, so therefore Allende is another example of Socialism failing?
|
# ? Jul 23, 2014 20:07 |
|
FADEtoBLACK posted:I don't understand why people promote Ayn Rand, she clearly didn't know what she was talking about and even said women shouldn't lead countries right? "The Career of Nikodemus Dyzma", a Polish book from the 30s, describes a similar phenomenon. Its titular hero, a member of lumpenproletariat from a small town comes to the capital and accidentally finds an invitation to a party in the most posh restaurant in the city. He meets a member of the Parliament, who by mistake believes Nikodemus is someone important. The protagonist is then introduced to a successful, but shady businessman, which kickstarts his career. The important thing is that the hero is not particularly clever of charismatic - but because of the initial introduction, everyone tends to look at his actions and words in the most favorable light. He is crude and vulgar, which his political allies interpret as a sign of strength and willpower. Even his most trite and banal utterances are treated like pearls of wisdom. At the end of the book, Dyzma is approached by prominent politicians and offered the position of the Prime Minister. He refuses, knowing no foreign language and fearing his masquerade will come to an end. The politicians are baffled with this decision at first, but then conclude the protagonist knows his worth and is going to run in presidential elections. I suppose a somewhat similar thing happened with Rand - a mediocre philosopher and atrocious writer got some praise from influential people because they liked her message, which started a chain reaction of praises. It helped that people likely to become libertarians tend to adhere to the Great Man Theory. They wanted to see a genius philosopher and helped to create one by becoming members of her army of sycophants.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2014 23:08 |
|
Gantolandon posted:I suppose a somewhat similar thing happened with Rand - a mediocre philosopher and atrocious writer got some praise from influential people because they liked her message, which started a chain reaction of praises. It helped that people likely to become libertarians tend to adhere to the Great Man Theory. They wanted to see a genius philosopher and helped to create one by becoming members of her army of sycophants. I'll be honest, I've heard people in my department talking about Rand but I am convinced that none of them have read anything by her, or know of her by anything other than the libertarian myth that has been built up around her. Here is the sum total of the conversations on the topic (this is an economics department for what its worth): Rand was a woman who suffered in Russia under the Soviets and came back with a new perspective on the role of government in ruling over its people. Seriously I thought Atlas Shrugged was a book about her experiences and perspectives in Russia documenting the dangers of an overgrowth of government, and so did the professors I was talking to. I thought Atlas Shrugged was a riff on Leviathan until this very thread. In summary Rand may have sycophants, but much like Smith and Friedman the majority of people who call on them have read nothing by the people in question nor do they care to.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2014 23:16 |
|
wateroverfire posted:D&D.txt. "Let me tell you about how your history has no nuance and no I don't know anything about it why would that be important?" Look I get it , you were one of the few Chileans who wasn't hosed over too hard by the murderers. That doesn't erase the fact that living standards for Chileans at large were fine during Allende's tenure and Pinochet's random acts of murder didn't even make the trains run on time as it were.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2014 23:58 |
|
wateroverfire posted:D&D.txt. "Let me tell you about how your history has no nuance and no I don't know anything about it why would that be important?" I really love how libertarians can only propagate the great leap forwards caused by the free-market in the world by ignoring the fact that the vast majority end up getting hosed in the rear end. They talk about how during Thatcher's reign the GDP went up by x% while ignoring that the livelihoods of the working-class faced a dramatic decline. They talk about New Zealand while ignoring the decline of wages for most workers. They talk about Hong Kong while ignoring the life of the average person living there. If it was good for the rich, then its automatically considered to be good for everybody. Then they can argue that libertarian policies just magically work despite common sense dictating otherwise. Pinochet can only have been good for Chile if Chile, as a nation, can be represented by its rich. As for the average Chilean, Pinochet's regime hosed him in the rear end with no vaseline.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 01:11 |
|
Filippo Corridoni posted:so I can easily assume you aren't amongst the legion of ordinary Chilean people who got dicked so hard that even today Chile is one of the most unequal nations in south america. Your regdate indicates you probably weren't around at the time, but one of the classic libertarian posters we used to have way back when was a charming oaf by the name of Qualnor. Among many other ridiculously stupid things he argued was that Gilded Age America really was something to aspire to as most people back then were middle class. When challenged, he claimed he'd only meant most urbanized Americans were middle class, if you can believe that.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 01:29 |
|
wateroverfire posted:D&D.txt. "Let me tell you about how your history has no nuance and no I don't know anything about it why would that be important?" so you're gonna keep posting until you're shown to be a massive dipshit in every thread right?
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 04:13 |
|
I'm conditionally willing to suffer Venezuelans who deprecate Bolivarianism. People in other nations who cite it as a catastrophe receive extreme skepticism from me. Chileans who retroactively apply it to Allende receive laughter and derision.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 05:15 |
|
I must say, I'm quite fascinated that libertarians and conservatives proudly bring up a brutal dictator like Pinochet as an example to bolster right-wing economic theory.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 11:39 |
|
Mr Interweb posted:I must say, I'm quite fascinated that libertarians and conservatives proudly bring up a brutal dictator like Pinochet as an example to bolster right-wing economic theory. The only real liberty is the liberty of the politically-connected wealthy.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 11:40 |
|
Mr Interweb posted:I must say, I'm quite fascinated that libertarians and conservatives proudly bring up a brutal dictator like Pinochet as an example to bolster right-wing economic theory. Well it's pretty much identical, and as fascinating as leftists that will do the same for Stalin etc.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 12:07 |
|
Changing the subject somewhat; how do Libertarians who are absolutely opposed to any form of Government assistance propose to feed/house severely disabled people who are unable to work, and do not have families to care for them? I ask this because the leader of my country's Libertarian party has proposed an utterly ludicrous policy that would require any government department to disclose what the personal income tax brackets would be if their department was not funded. This of course focuses heavily on showing that the 19% income tax band would become 13% if the Ministry for Social Development (welfare) ceased to exist.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 12:35 |
|
El Pollo Blanco posted:Changing the subject somewhat; how do Libertarians who are absolutely opposed to any form of Government assistance propose to feed/house severely disabled people who are unable to work, and do not have families to care for them? I ask this because the leader of my country's Libertarian party has proposed an utterly ludicrous policy that would require any government department to disclose what the personal income tax brackets would be if their department was not funded. This of course focuses heavily on showing that the 19% income tax band would become 13% if the Ministry for Social Development (welfare) ceased to exist. Charity and family will take care of that, bro. Here's a great, empirical deconstruction of that idea.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 13:44 |
|
El Pollo Blanco posted:Changing the subject somewhat; how do Libertarians who are absolutely opposed to any form of Government assistance propose to feed/house severely disabled people who are unable to work, and do not have families to care for them? I ask this because the leader of my country's Libertarian party has proposed an utterly ludicrous policy that would require any government department to disclose what the personal income tax brackets would be if their department was not funded. This of course focuses heavily on showing that the 19% income tax band would become 13% if the Ministry for Social Development (welfare) ceased to exist. They tend to believe that private charity would go up as government assistance goes down, along with the old canard that removing the "incentive to be lazy" would solve half the welfare cases in one swoop. I once went to a talk by a CATO institute researcher who suggested that new welfare recipients stop being added to the roles nine months from next weekend. "So they get one more weekend to screw around, and that's that."
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 14:17 |
|
Filippo Corridoni posted:Some really dumb What would you know about conditions in Chile at the time? Or now, for that matter? Chile was desperately poor and unequal when Allende was elected. Inflation and shortages due to mismanagement pretty well ensured that the poor were going to stay hosed. You guys are the most absurd caricatures of clueless privileged leftists. You know nothing about the actual history of Chile or the conditions in Chile but gently caress it who cares because Communists Are Never Wrong and gently caress Capitalism Anyway and I Took a Lat Am Marxist Studies Internet Course Once. asdf32 posted:Well it's pretty much identical, and as fascinating as leftists that will do the same for Stalin etc. It's not identical because saying "Allende was a failure and his policies were driving Chile into collapse" is not the same as saying "I approve of Pinochet".
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 14:18 |
|
Mr Interweb posted:I must say, I'm quite fascinated that libertarians and conservatives proudly bring up a brutal dictator like Pinochet as an example to bolster right-wing economic theory. One would think it would go against their professed opposition to "state coercion", but then you remember in whose sake that opposition is.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 14:20 |
|
Some people just love the crisp sense of purpose that comes from having a president with smart epaulets, I guess.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 14:22 |
|
wateroverfire posted:What would you know about conditions in Chile at the time? Or now, for that matter? I'm actually interested in that period of time in Chile, through reading way too much about Project Cybersyn/Synco. If you wanted to create a relevant thread in... I guess SAL? I would gladly participate. Otherwise, would you say Sergio Bitar's book, "Chile: Experiment in Democracy" is good for getting a better idea of the economic background to Allende's rise and fall?
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 15:23 |
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I'm actually interested in that period of time in Chile, through reading way too much about Project Cybersyn/Synco. If you wanted to create a relevant thread in... I guess SAL? I would gladly participate. Otherwise, would you say Sergio Bitar's book, "Chile: Experiment in Democracy" is good for getting a better idea of the economic background to Allende's rise and fall? Bitar is a good source. For a purely economic reading of Chilean history Economic Reforms in Chile: From Dictatorship to Democracy by Ricardo Ffrench-Davis is decent.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 17:35 |
|
wateroverfire posted:
I confess I'm not overly familiar with the internal situation in Chile but it is well documented that the US government immediately terminated most of its foreign aid and Kissinger famously gave the order to "make the Chilean economy scream". This was on top of the extensive internal opposition to Allende such as those highly disruptive transportation strikes. You're accusing other posters of being ignorant or simplistic but it seems like you're doing the same thing declaring Allende's policies outright failures. He was only in power for three years, inherited a polarized and unstable country, and faced extensive economic sabatoge from both the world's most powerful country and some of Chile's internal actors. Also correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding is that one Allende era reform that Pinochet never reversed was the nationalization of the copper industry - and copper exports were a huge source of national income and government revenue throughout the Pinochet era.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 18:30 |
|
President Obama is also a complete economic failure whose policies will destroy his nation. Just ask his political enemies.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 18:47 |
|
Not going far enough for the right. Would probably be: traitor who is actively undermining the state and who should be prosecuted by the state (impeached). Or uh, that he should be drawn and quartered with his head on a spike. http://thinkprogress.org/immigratio...xchange_article edit: Steinlight posted:“And we all know, if there ever was a president that deserved to be impeached, it’s this guy. Alright? And I wouldn’t stop. I would think being hung, drawn, and quartered is probably too good for him. But you know, this man who wants to rule by the use of a pen, a telephone, let us not forget his teleprompter … the fact is that it would backfire very badly and we’ve got to be grownups and accept that we can’t have everything we want, you know, [like] his head on a skewer.”
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 18:54 |
|
Did anyone get raped by dogs under Allende's regime? No? Okay, he wins. It is that simple.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 19:23 |
|
wateroverfire posted:What would you know about conditions in Chile at the time? Or now, for that matter? clueless privileged leftist posted:Pinochet was the figure-head of a military coup in 1973 against the democratically elected left-wing government, a coup which the CIA helped organise. Thousands of people were murdered by the forces of "law and order" during the coup and Pinochet's forces "are conservatively estimated to have killed over 11 000 people in his first year in power." [P. Gunson, A. Thompson, G. Chamberlain, The Dictionary of Contemporary Politics of South America, Routledge, 1989, p. 228] Halloween Jack posted:Did anyone get raped by dogs under Allende's regime? No? Okay, he wins. It is that simple.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 19:36 |
|
Eh. Brutal regimes often have some redeeming features, and economic policy can generally be held as at least somewhat loose from social policy. Of course, Pinochet's economic policy also didn't work except for the already very rich, so he doesn't even have that going for him.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 19:49 |
|
What's your source? I just know it's got to be amazing scholarship.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 20:55 |
|
V. Illych L. posted:Eh. Brutal regimes often have some redeeming features, and economic policy can generally be held as at least somewhat loose from social policy. Of course, Pinochet's economic policy also didn't work except for the already very rich, so he doesn't even have that going for him. Precisely. Hell it didn't even work for a lot of the Chilean rich.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 21:02 |
|
wateroverfire posted:Bitar is a good source. Ooh, and in PDF, to boot! Thanks a bunch! In return, if you're ever interested in the history of the European Southern Observatory in the Atacama desert, there's a recent 50-year retrospective available online here. Has a little bit about the Pinochet coup, although it doesn't really go into Chilean politics very much.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 21:28 |
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Ooh, and in PDF, to boot! Thanks a bunch! In return, if you're ever interested in the history of the European Southern Observatory in the Atacama desert, there's a recent 50-year retrospective available online here. Has a little bit about the Pinochet coup, although it doesn't really go into Chilean politics very much. That's pretty neat. I've traveled in the north of Chile a bit but I've never seen the observatory. I started a Chile thread in D&D (possible mistake. More data needed). If you want to chat about Chile I'll answer whatever I can and maybe we'll discover some other Chile goons.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2014 21:37 |
|
That's the thing. Welfare is just "irresponsible charity" to them. They're also openly admitting that social inequality exists within their system the second they say it needs charity, which undermines one of their key arguments. Hardcore libertarians, as the studies showed, are far less humane and want to replace government with something as such.
|
# ? Jul 25, 2014 04:16 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 09:35 |
|
wateroverfire posted:What's your source? I just know it's got to be amazing scholarship. All those inline citations are lies planted by Communist Satan aka Obama.
|
# ? Jul 25, 2014 13:39 |