Chile's Pinochet dead at 91 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 02, 2024, 10:51:10 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Chile's Pinochet dead at 91 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Chile's Pinochet dead at 91  (Read 7629 times)
Storebought
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
« on: December 10, 2006, 10:42:45 PM »

Poor dazzleman. He must be crying a waterfall now that his hero's gone.

I'm going to have a shot now in celebration.

I went to church today and lit a candle for the soul of Mr. Pinochet.  May he rest in peace.

I think you need to address the matter of your own soul, BRTD.  Please come toward the light of salvation, and away from the wicked and sinful ways that you have been indulging yourself in.

Your Fordham education is showing Tongue

And about Pinochet: I find it curious that Latin America's whitest countries, namely Argentina, Chile, and to a lesser extent, Uruguay, have produced the two continents' most odious dictators (outside of Columbia -- that country is a mess).

Pinochet seems like a Latin American version of Portugal's Salazar -- he used unadulturated authoritarianism to introduce modern economics to a backward basket case of a country. He left Chile more stable than when he found it.

Now compare that to Argentina's Peron. Peron took a wealthy, thoroughly Europeanized nation, with a higher standard of living than Canada, and did this:

1.Taking advantage of government leniency if not outright support, trade unions were formed in every industry. 2. Social security was made universal. 3. Education was made free to all who qualified. 4. Vast low-income housing projects were created. 5. Paid vacations became standard. 6. A working student was given one paid week before every major examination. 7. All workers (including white-collar employees like bank tellers, etc.) were guaranteed free medical care and half of their vacation-trip expenses. 8. A mother-to-be received 3 paid months off prior to and after giving birth. 9. Workers recreation centers were constructed all over Argentina, including a vast resort in the lower Sierras that included 8 hotels, scores of cabins, movies, swimming pools and riding stables. This resort was available to workers for 15 days a year, at the cost of 15 cents per day, all services included.

In order to strengthen Argentina's economy, Perón created the Argentina Institute for Promotion of Exchange (AIPE), a monopoly that handled all commodity exports. Cattle, wheat, etc. were sold at a high price overseas. While not socialism, this measure was consistent with the traditional Marxist demand for a monopoly on foreign trade. Perón also bought out the local IT&T operation and the railroad and trolley system from Great Britain. He paid off Argentina's foreign debt and launched a 5-year plan in 1946 that covered everything from the woman's right to vote to shipbuilding.

By 1954 Perón had initiated more than 45 major hydroelectric projects designed to produce 2 billion kilowatt-hours of energy, 20 times the amount that was available in 1936. While in hindsight we can say that these projects had ecological drawbacks, they still represented an audacious step in the direction of making every citizen's life more fulfilling. By 1947, Argentina had launched its own iron and steel industry. It was also moving forward in coal extraction and other raw materials using the most advanced technology available at the time. It began to make farm machinery, planes and cars in modest numbers. Ship-building had expanded by 500 percent under Perón's regime.

But Perón failed to sustain these progressive changes over the long haul. All of the gains of the Perón era have disappeared as workers' lives and fortunes have gone downhill.


Source: Some Columbia  University Marxist, but the raw data I cite specifically comes from Time Magazine.

Peron socialized every industry that Argentina had, with the result that, when he was deposed in 1955, it had a lower standard of living and a more destabilized social climate than it had in 1930.
Logged
Storebought
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
« Reply #1 on: December 11, 2006, 08:09:03 PM »

Poor dazzleman. He must be crying a waterfall now that his hero's gone.

I'm going to have a shot now in celebration.

I went to church today and lit a candle for the soul of Mr. Pinochet.  May he rest in peace.

I think you need to address the matter of your own soul, BRTD.  Please come toward the light of salvation, and away from the wicked and sinful ways that you have been indulging yourself in.

Your Fordham education is showing Tongue

And about Pinochet: I find it curious that Latin America's whitest countries, namely Argentina, Chile, and to a lesser extent, Uruguay, have produced the two continents' most odious dictators (outside of Columbia -- that country is a mess).

Pinochet seems like a Latin American version of Portugal's Salazar -- he used unadulturated authoritarianism to introduce modern economics to a backward basket case of a country. He left Chile more stable than when he found it.

Now compare that to Argentina's Peron. Peron took a wealthy, thoroughly Europeanized nation, with a higher standard of living than Canada, and did this ...

Portugal's economics were far from modern, and Salazar's economic polity was way different from Pinochet's. Salazar was a corporativist, Pinochet actually did free market stuff.

Salazar's corporatism was "modern" (as of 1928) in the sense that it attempted to use late 19th century Catholic theology to create a communitarian but non-socialist economy.

I had misgivings about Salazar when I remembered the idiotic lengths he went through to maintain the African colonies, such as spending 40% of GDP and sending upwards of 100,000 troops for swamps like Mozambique, in addition to Angola, which you could argue was worth keeping.

Salazar did attempt to open up Portugal's economy by the early 60s, but by then it was way too late. But even then, the Socialist governments that came after him only increased the poverty rate.

On the whole, he was just a hardhearted version of Peron.

Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.03 seconds with 11 queries.