OK, explain to me the case for Pinochet...

[YoMartin]

I had never thought there was a case to be made for Pinochet. However, I've seen a few people singing his praises on this forum. So, what'd the guy do that was good?

Pinochet is a completely marginal figure nowadays in Chile. Even right wing candidate Sebastián Piñera is (and was back then) against Pinochet. But those who praise Pinochet usually claim that:

- he "saved" the country from communism. That may be true, yet Salvador Allende´s government was democratically elected, and (my personal opinion) was ruling within the Constitution (there was a controversy with Congress about that, controversy that provided part of the rationale for the coup).
- his economic legacy was far better than those left by other military dictatorships in the continent.
- he stepped down after losing a referendum, showing he was a "democratic" guy.

Maybe those people in this forum that have his picture as a banner think that these accomplishments allow someone to be a dictator for 17 years (long after the communist threat had ceased to exist) and to torture and kill 3.000 people.

[YoMartin]

Parliament, before the coup, passed a resolution calling for his removal by the military. 

Well, no, the opposition (a majority in Congress) claimed he was acting outside the Constitution, but they didn´t openly call for a coup. The Supreme Court also claimed he was breaking the law, for accepting the intrusion of homeless people in private properties. Still, if that was the case for the coup, I would say every Latin American president should be removed. In countries with housing problems, most presidents know it´s impossible to send the police everywhere to throw this people out. Of course, you could say that the difference is that Allende (or some in his party, actually) was actively promoting this intrusions...

[quoteJ Second, most, but not all, of the killing occurred within the first months of the coup, which was violent. 
 [/quote]

After a couple of years of such regime, with the dead, the exiled and those too afraid to do anything, there´s almost no one else to kill actually.

[quoteJ  Arguably the human rights situation improved from 1973 post coup period under Pinochet.
 [/quote]

The situation of those missing hasn´t improved one bit since 1973. Except for those already found dead, the others have technically been kidnapped, so the crime against them is still being commited.

[quoteJ Third, the economy did improve under Pinochet's reforms.  His free market policies survived him and have not been altered by Socialist governnments.
 [/quote]

Mostly true. Yet in 1982, after a decade of his policies, unemployment was above 30%. When he left office, poverty was around 40% (more than in 1973). The administrations of Concertación (christian democrats + socialists) have taken that number below 20%.

[quoteJ Fourth, while thought at the time thought rigged, a referendum kept him in power in the 1980's.
 [/quote]

It was rigged, no doubt about that. The opposition barely had access to the media. And they weren´t allowed to control the vote counting. Anyway, I admit his 43% of 1989 was very impressive.

[quoteJ It's not a particularly good defence,  bit arguably Chileans were probably better under Pinochet than under allendi
[/quote]

Some were, some weren´t. The dead were chileans too.

[YoMartin]

I am noting that the situation under Allende was heading the direction of extra-constitutional power

Present continuous is a difficult tense. "Was heading" implies the idea of a clear and predictable direction. I´m not so sure about that, as I´m not sure of the benefits of "preventive action".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We can´t know that actually. That´s the problem with dictators: they might be popular, but we can´t know that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, actually most of the killings of the Argentine Junta were commited in 1976-77. The 1980-83 period was much more "peaceful" in that regard. And Pinochet also tried foreing expansion; it´s now known that he planned to cross the Andes after Argentina was defeated in the Falkland´s, but was warned no to do it by his northern allies.

About the Castro-Pinochet comparison, I would say: Pinochet´s regime was authoritarian, while Castro´s is totalitarian. Certain organizations outside the government did exist in Chile, while they don´t in Cuba. Of course, when you´re tortured or killed by either regime that´s not much of a difference...

[YoMartin]

Well, we won´t agree on the other issues, but about Pinochet vs the Argentine Junta: Argentina had some 4 times the Chilean population, while it had 3 times its number of missing (desaparecidos). The CONADEP has listed 9.000 missing in Argentina (the 30.000 number has no base); in Chile there were 3.000. Actually, the odds of being tortured and killed by the government were higher in Chile than in Argentina. There are no official numbers of exiled (that I´m aware of), but I think it´s also higher in proportion in Chile (most of the current Concertación leaders left the country in the 70´s, including Presidents Bachelet and Lagos).