Chile Constitutional Referendum, October 25th 2020

[Velasco]

Christian Democrats indeed look like the very definition of uselessness, a walking corpse in an empty shell. The Good Old Days are gone and will never come back. It s a shame the division of the progressive camp, I have to say. Structural reforms demand unity of action.

[Velasco]

One has to understand, the core principles of the right, its whole raison d'être, is protecting Pinochet legacy and above all the economic model

I assume the economic model is the most lasting of the Pinochet legacies and it must be the only cement that unites all the different factions of the right, if only because I'd like to think the human rights legacy is more... controversial.

Regarding right-wing populism and pinochetismo, I don't know Antonio Kast very well and I'd like to ask you about similarities and differences with someone more familiar to me like the Vox leader Santiago Abascal. For instance: I'd say the latter is something like a neo-Francoist, but not an overt Francoist in the way I assume Kast is an overt Pinochetista

[Velasco]

If Abascal is neo-franquist, ALL the Chilean right could be regarded as neo-pinochetist. Of course, you have some idiots that say unironically that Pinochet did nothing wrong.

Jose Antonio Kast (who gets along very well with Abascal BTW) is simply more overt about all of that. He still says that human rights abuses were bad, but say that the coup saved Chile (Well, UDI has that in their principles declaration), that Chile that day "choose freedom", that Pinochet was the best government in history and is the first in the line defending human rights abuses. Honestly, the main difference with the rest of the right is that he is more provocative in his style and even more economically orthodox (...

I get the Chilean right has a lot in common with the Spanish right. With regard to the dictatorships, I suspect the difference between Antonio Kast and Santiago Abascal is on the nuances (the fact that Abascal avoids explicit mentions to Franco does not imply he's not a Francoist). Also, Vox is economically "orthodox" and not "populist". Sorry of the question is off-topic, but I'd like to know something about the links between Kast, the other factions of the Chilean right and Donald Trump (Vox is acting right now as the Trump's branch in Spain)

[Velasco]

Kast usually praises Trump on twitter because of course he does. But AFAIK he doesn't have any real links with him. He does have very close ties with Bolsonaro, and he has visited him several times. Maybe there's something shady going on.

The links between Vox and Trump are established through donors or people associated to the alt-right, via Iván Espinosa de los Monteros. Bolsonaro is a clear model and he is absolutely explicit in what concerns the human rights abuses of the Brazilian dictatorship (supports torture). Thank you

[Velasco]

I was unaware of that popular devotion for Bachelet. Eventually she will be elevated to the altars. I'm not following Chilean politics on a regular basis, but it makes more sense for me that she stays in the UN. On the other hand, there are many examples in history of comebacks by popular acclamation that didn't end well. Bachelet had a comeback already and the results were mixed at best. She better endorses that Jadue, imo

[Velasco]

Someone must have been reading this thread because Joaquín Lavin declared himself a Socialdemocrat

The funny thing is that I googled "Joaquín Lavín" and it's true!

https://www.eldesconcierto.cl/2020/08/25/presidente-fundacion-social-democrata-joaquin-lavin/

The UDI hardliner says that "Chile needs a centrist government that incorporates many concepts of the European socialdemocracy". I guess the next thing is that Lavín promises a comprehensive reform of  reform of pensions and social security, embracing the European Welfare State instead of the Chilean model dating back from Pinochet. It's the least that one can expect from a newborn socialdemocrat. Amazing

[Velasco]

Not the first time Lavin chooses an odd term to reinvent himself (he did it in 2007 by expressing support for Bachelet, infamously self-describing as "Bacheletista-Alliancista"), and I suspect it won't be the last.

I support the right to reinvention, but there's a limit for such things defined by logic, consistency and common sense. The conversion of someone like Lavin to socialdemocracy would be credible as the result of a long, gradual process. But this is seemingly a blunder or a funny occurrence, like that odd "bacheletista-aliancista" label. I'm trying to imagine Lavin worshipping Bachelet in a little indoor shrine, but it's not easy

[Velasco]

Congratulations, Chile 🇨🇱

Can someone walk me through the specific ways in which the Pinochet-penned constitution was deficient? I 100% believe people that it was, but I don't know the details. Is it less democratic than it appears on the surface? Does it somehow encode Chicago Boys neoliberalism or adopt a "negative rights only" approach? Both?

I'm not a lawyer nor expert at all but from what I know most of the issues are related to Article 19 (which encompasses part of constitutional duties and rights). At first sight it seems a normal article that assure rights to the people, but when you start to go deeper, then you understand that the article is pretty ideological. The article is pretty strict in terms of the right to choose. The most important thing in education, healthcare, etc, is the right to choose (and right to supply) and not the right to have. So this has been translated in parts of our daily lives (like education) to be in hands of the market with a weak state because is mandated to. In conclusion, this article is strongly influenced by the "neoliberal' way of thinking of having a subsidiary state.

The Article 19 is quite long and I need to read it carefully, but you notice immediately that the Chilean constitution is pro-life and anti-abortion

https://www.senado.cl/capitulo-iii-de-los-derechos-y-deberes-constitucionales/senado/2012-01-16/093413.html

Artículo 19

La Constitución asegura a todas las personas:
1º.- El derecho a la vida y a la integridad física y psíquica de la persona.
La ley protege la vida del que está por nacer.
La pena de muerte sólo podrá establecerse por delito contemplado en ley aprobada con quórum calificado.
Se prohíbe la aplicación de todo apremio ilegítimo;  

I get that abortion must be criminalized in Chile. Death penalty for a given offence can be implemented by a qualified majority. I ignore the meaning of "apremio ilegitimo"

[Velasco]

Here are the paragraphs concerning to healthcare and education

Healthcare: the state protects the free and egalitarian access to the "actions" of promotion, protection and recovery of health. It's a strange wording, but in any case the philosophy is clear. The main role of the state is not providing healthcare to all citizens, but guaranteeing "the implementation of the actions of healthcare" through public or private institutions. Freedom of choice is consecrated over the universal right to healthcare

 
9º.- El derecho a la protección de la salud.
El Estado protege el libre e igualitario acceso a las acciones de promoción, protección y recuperación de la salud y de rehabilitación del individuo.
Le corresponderá, asimismo, la coordinación y control de las acciones relacionadas con la salud.
Es deber preferente del Estado garantizar la ejecución de las acciones de salud, sea que se presten a través de instituciones públicas o privadas, en la forma y condiciones que determine la ley, la que podrá establecer cotizaciones obligatorias.
Cada persona tendrá el derecho a elegir el sistema de salud al que desee acogerse, sea éste estatal o privado;  

Education: the text says that parents have the preferential right and the duty to educate their offspring. The state will promote nursery education. Primary and secondary education are mandatory and the state will finance free education at these levels, but there's not a single world about the access to university (either free or through a scolarship scheme)

10º.- El derecho a la educación.
La educación tiene por objeto el pleno desarrollo de la persona en las distintas etapas de su vida.
Los padres tienen el derecho preferente y el deber de educar a sus hijos. Corresponderá al Estado otorgar especial protección al ejercicio de este derecho.
Para el Estado es obligatorio promover la educación parvularia, para lo que financiará un sistema gratuito a partir del nivel medio menor, destinado a asegurar el acceso a éste y sus niveles superiores. El segundo nivel de transición es obligatorio, siendo requisito para el ingreso a la educación básica.
La educación básica y la educación media son obligatorias, debiendo el Estado financiar un sistema gratuito con tal objeto, destinado a asegurar el acceso a ellas de toda la población. En el caso de la educación media este sistema, en conformidad a la ley, se extenderá hasta cumplir los 21 años de edad.
Corresponderá al Estado, asimismo, fomentar el desarrollo de la educación en todos sus niveles; estimular la investigación científica y tecnológica, la creación artística y la protección e incremento del patrimonio cultural de la Nación.
Es deber de la comunidad contribuir al desarrollo y perfeccionamiento de la educación;