Chilean gerilla. How the communists fought against Pinochet

27
September 11 A military coup took place in Chile in 1973. The country's legitimate president, Salvador Allende, not wanting to surrender to the rebels, committed suicide. Thousands of Chileans were subjected to political repression, and the military regime of General Augusto Pinochet was established in the country for decades. His rule is still controversial.

Chilean gerilla. How the communists fought against Pinochet




When General Augusto Pinochet came to power, mass repressions began in Chile against leftist forces - the socialists and the communists. According to historians, only in the first month after the military coup, about 30 thousands of people were killed. Perhaps the most famous victim of Pinochettov was the world-famous singer Victor Hara, who was brutally murdered in a concentration camp set up at the stadium in Santiago. Chile was hit hard by the left. The repressive policies of Pinochet were approved and covered by the United States of America, which viewed the actions of the Chilean junta as opposition to the further expansion of Soviet political influence in the New World. Strengthening pro-Soviet sentiment in Latin America in Washington, as you know, was feared like fire.

The harsh actions of the military junta stunned the Chilean left and did not let them quickly mobilize their forces for resistance. Yes, and at first this resistance could not lead to anything - the forces were too unequal. On the side of Pinochet was a powerful army, financial support for the Chilean oligarchs and the United States, special services. In turn, the Chilean left-wing organizations suffered the most serious losses from the actions of Pinochettovo in the first months after the coup. Thus, in the course of the military coup practically all the activists of the Left Revolutionary Movement (MIR), the largest radical left organization of Chile, were killed or imprisoned (the Communist Party was in positions more moderate than MIR). A serious blow was struck to the Communist Party of Chile.

The only method of resistance that the left could oppose to the military regime was guerilla warfare. But, unlike many other countries in Latin America, in Chile the traditions of the “guerrilla” were absent. This in Colombia, Guatemala, Bolivia, Peru, Nicaragua, El Salvador had their own rich traditions of the guerrilla war of the communist organizations against pro-American governments. Chilean communists had no partisan war experience. Yes, and the geographical location of Chile significantly hampered the deployment of partisan resistance to Pinochet. It is enough to remember what this country looks like on the map - a narrow and long strip of land between the Andes and the Pacific Ocean. There were no such forests as in Colombia. In the open space of the highlands, the partisans could not act for a long time - they would have been overtaken by air force strikes, and then the units of the government army would have arrived.

However, almost immediately after the military coup among the surviving Chilean leftists, who managed to escape and hide in the underground or leave the country, a discussion began on the possible ways of deploying the anti-Pinochet struggle in the country. Great support for the Chilean Communists was provided by Cuba, which took a kind of patronage over the surviving remnants of the Chilean left-wing movement.

Back in the middle of the 1960s, the Left Revolutionary Movement (MIR) was created, quickly becoming the largest left-radical organization in the country. MIR was guided by the Cuban experience of the revolution, and the only possible form of political struggle was an armed uprising with the aim of seizing power and building socialism. At the first stage of its existence, however, MIR activists concentrated their efforts on leaflet campaigns and periodic clashes with police patrols. When a military coup occurred in 1973 in Chile, the members of the MIR, of course, became one of the main targets of political repression and reprisals. At the same time, some Peacekeepers and Communists managed to leave Chile. They took political refugees in Cuba. The "Island of Freedom" Chileans took almost with open arms. Chile immigrants received housing, they were employed by Cuban enterprises, but the Cuban authorities did not tire of reminding Chilean like-minded people that in fact they should wage an armed struggle against the Pinochet regime and not sit out in emigration. More serious accusations were brought against the leadership of the socialist and communist parties of Chile - that they could not properly organize the defense of the government of El Salvador Allende and lost the battle for the socialist future of Chile. However, in July 1974, the meeting between Cuban leader Fidel Castro and the leaders of the Communist Party of Chile, Volodya Teitelbomem (pictured) and Rodrigo Rojas, took place.

Castro offered the Chilean communist leaders something that was difficult to refuse - to organize a full-fledged military training of the Chilean communist youth in the Cuban military schools. And it was not about some short-term courses of the “young partisans”, but about a full-fledged military education, after which Chileans would receive officer ranks of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Cuba. Most of the young Chilean communists were enrolled in the Camilo Cienfuegos military school, which was considered elite. Here they had to undergo a one-year training and become junior officers of infantry and artillery units. They also taught Chileans in other specialties, including naval and military ones. In fact, under the auspices of Fidel Castro, a parallel Chilean “red army” was created in Cuba. By the way, the Chilean communist youth was trained in the GDR - in the political school named after Wilhelm Pick. Another group went to get a military education in Bulgaria. Subsequently, it is the graduates of the Bulgarian military schools that will become the basis of the most combat-ready partisan units.

However, throwing Chilean communists, even those who received military training, right in Chile — to fight a well-armed and trained Pinochet army would be a fatal mistake. Fidel Castro understood this perfectly. Therefore, the Cuban command decided to conduct a "battle run-in" of the Chilean communists. The best place for this was Nicaragua, where the war between the Sandinists and their opponents was already in full swing. Thus was formed the legendary "Chilean Battalion", which fought in Nicaragua on the side of the Sandinistas.

At the beginning of 1979, the first detachment of Chilean Communists entered Nicaragua. It should be noted here that the arrived Chileans, who by that time were able to get professional military education in Cuba, became an excellent support for the Sandinistas, especially considering that the Sandinistas felt a great need for military specialists — gunners, anti-aircraft gunners, while infantry commanders had many and their own. Chilean internationalists participated in most major Sandinistas battles, including directly in the capture of the Nicaraguan capital Managua. One of the fighters, the Sandinists, who broke into the Somoza bunker, was Galvarino Apablasa Hera (in the photo) - one of the future leaders of the partisan movement in Chile. He fought in Nicaragua and Raul Pelhegrin Friedman - the future commander of the Patriotic Front named after Manuel Rodriguez - the largest partisan organization in Chile. After the victory of the Sandinists, many Chilean communists remained in Nicaragua - to continue serving as part of the Nicaraguan revolutionary armed forces in command and instructor positions.

Meanwhile, in 1980, the Communist Party of Chile officially announced the transition to an armed struggle against the Pinochet regime. By this time, certain left-radical groups had long organized periodic raids on the territory of Chile. Already in 1975, the rebels managed to carry out 132 guerrilla operations. First of all, they attacked the warehouses and barracks of the army and carabinieros to capture weapons. Guerrilla bases were equipped in the mountains, in the territory of neighboring Argentina. Here the partisans trained and lived in the intervals between raids. But in 1976, after a military coup d'état occurred in Argentina, the Chilean partisan bases in the Argentine mountains were destroyed during a raid by the Argentine air forces. The bombardment of the bases was a major blow to the rebel movement. For some time in Chile, there was a relative lull. However, the 11 of May 1983 of the year in Santiago hosted the first major anti-Pinochet show. The demonstrators were cruelly dispersed by the carabineers, two of the protesters were killed, 29 people were injured, 652 people were arrested.



In June, the regular meeting of the Chilean left was held in Havana on 1983, at which it was proposed to perform all the military operations of the Communist Party of Chile on behalf of the “Team Manuel Rodriguez”. This is how the Patriotic Front of Manuel Rodriguez (PFMR) emerged, becoming the largest radical left-wing armed organization in Chile. The front got its name in honor of Manuel Rodriguez Erdois (1785-1818) - one of the fighters for the independence of Chile from the Spanish colonialists. The creation of the PFMR marked the beginning of a new phase in stories anti-pinochet military resistance. Already at the end of the summer of 1983, five commanders penetrated into Chile, who were to lead the partisan detachments and begin to launch an armed struggle against the regime.

The direct support of the PFMR with weapons and money was carried out by Cuban special services. The backbone of the front commanders was made up of the very Chileans who were trained in military schools of Cuba and Bulgaria, and also fought in Nicaragua on the side of the Sandinistas. That is, these were experienced people who possessed military professions and who differed in their professional qualities from the Chilean partisans of the late 1970 model. The PFMR has become the center for the unification of all Chilean left forces, ready to fight against the Pinochet dictatorship with arms. Communists, socialists, left radicals joined the front lines, and disputes on ideological topics were postponed “for later” - in this the front repeated the path of 1950's Cuban partisans. The number of PFMR rapidly increased. Already in 1985, it was about 1500 armed fighters, united in 500 combat groups.

Already in 1984, the PFMR began combat operations against Chile's government forces and carabinieri. In addition, the fighters of the front began to make regular attacks on the branches of the Chilean ultra-right parties and movements, which formed the basis of support for the Pinochet course in Chilean society. Militants of the PFMR attacked the printing houses of right-wing newspapers, party offices, and warehouses of campaign literature. In 1987, attacks on police patrols and Carabinieri patrols began. Soon the partisans switched to attacks on the armories of police and army units. Another important activity of the Chilean partisans were expropriations. In the first half of 1988 alone, did the partisans conduct 193 expropriations. North American companies that, under Pinochet, further strengthened their positions in the country, became the object of partisan attacks. The situation in Chile is rapidly heating up. By 1989, entire regions existed in a number of Chilean provinces where government forces did not actually control the situation. The police and the army could patrol these territories during the day, but at night they preferred not to appear there, not wanting to be attacked by the partisans.

It should be noted that, despite the formal status of the armed wing of the Communist Party of Chile, in fact, the Patriotic Front of Manuel Rodriguez quickly became an absolutely autonomous organization. This was also explained by the fact that the views of the PFMR high command were much more radical than the positions of the pro-Soviet communist leaders. The main information body of the PFMR was El Rodriguista, a journal edited by Alex Voitovich.

Financial and logistical support to the PFMR was still provided by Cuban special services, but GDR special services also actively participated in helping Chilean partisans. The PFMR Commander Raul Pellegrin (pictured) repeatedly visited the GDR, where he met with East German representatives. But the money that Cuba donated was still not enough for the needs of the partisans. Therefore, the PFMR dealt with expropriations, and then turned to the practice of wrapping up entrepreneurs with a “revolutionary tax” and abducting wealthy people and their relatives, who were released in exchange for ransom. Sometimes high-ranking soldiers became victims of abductions. For example, in 1986, guerrillas kidnapped Colonel Mario Aberle Rivadeneiro, the protocol chief of the military garrison of Santiago. However, after three days he was released, and without any ransom — apparently, by kidnapping the colonel, the partisans demonstrated that they didn’t have any problems “to take” even major military officials. 7 September 1986 Propulsion Patriotic Front them. Manuel Rodriguez made an attempt on Pinochet himself. Five of the general’s bodyguards were killed, but he himself survived.

By the end of 1980's The economic situation in Chile has deteriorated significantly, leading to massive popular demonstrations. At the same time, the Americans also began to put pressure on Pinochet - the world situation changed and they no longer had the reason to support the odious military dictator. The general agreed to the 5 plebiscite of October 1988 of the year. Contrary to his expectations, more than 55% of Chileans voted against the preservation of military dictatorship. Given that the United States was watching, Pinochet was forced to begin the procedure of transferring power to a civilian government. 11 March 1990, Augusto Pinochet, resigned as head of state. However, the departure of Pinochet did not mean the cessation of military operations by the PFMR, which now spoke out with anti-American slogans and attacked the facilities of American companies in Chile. Only in 1999, the front stopped its military operations.
27 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +8
    11 September 2016 06: 44
    Ilya, thank you very much for the story about Chile, about those tragic events that turned 43 years old. The first thought when I learned about what happened in Chile is the thought that the date 11.09 now has a different meaning.
    I very much sympathize with the Chilean left parties. It is clear that in addition to Cuba, East Germany, Bulgaria, the USSR supported the Chilean left as well, although this is not very ...... Secretly? ...... But still, there was support, as well for Nicaragua.
    I regret that the front stopped its operations 17 years ago.
    I am pleased to recall your other articles on Latin America.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. +3
    11 September 2016 08: 51
    Traded a bully
    On louis corvolana
    Where can I find one ..... b
    To replace Brezhnev.
  4. +5
    11 September 2016 09: 06
    Quote from the article:
    "The country's legitimate president, Salvador Allende, not wanting to surrender into the hands of the rebels, committed suicide."


    A legitimate president does not need to commit suicide, but for the junta it is very desirable for Allende to commit suicide.
    The junta cannot judge the legitimate president. It will not be a court but a farce. From a living Allende junta, one headache.
    It turns out that the country's legitimate president Salvador Allende entered the junta position, decided to play along with the junta and shot himself.
    1. +7
      11 September 2016 11: 09
      it should be noted that the opinion about the suicide of President Allende was spread precisely by the Pinochet junta and is falsification ... there are recollections of several surviving defenders of the palace who were next to him at that moment (published, incidentally, in the 70s, including and in the USSR I read it myself). who spoke. that Allende was killed in battle (he shot like everyone else - at the rebels, by the way, from the AK that Fidel gave him) ... then. as I recall, his bodyguards did not know what to do with the body (there was a fierce battle everywhere, the body was seated in the presidential chair, and the president’s tape was put on his chest to hide the bullet hole and blood - the bullets hit Allende’s chest) - in such a way and the rebels burst into the hall and shot him again, if I may say so ... So he couldn’t enter the junta position, he was killed in the middle of the battle ... the defenders continued to fight back ... most did not know . that he died ... Allende could not leave his own, although he was offered evacuation under Pinochet's guarantee, and could not watch. how they are killed ... So draw your own conclusions, who played to whom ...
      1. +1
        11 September 2016 18: 16
        Quote from ZuuT:
        “... bodyguards not knowing what to do with the body (there was a fierce battle everywhere, the body was seated in the presidential chair, and the president’s tape was put on his chest to hide the bullet hole and blood - the bullets hit Allende’s chest).”


        If it was the way you write, then the behavior of Allende's bodyguards is more than strange. Put the murdered in the presidential chair, put on the murdered presidential ribbon. And what did they want to show through these actions?
        Most likely, Allende was in his office with all the regalia of the presidency, so that none of the juntas could say that they shot the president by accident, because they did not know that they were facing the president of Chile, Salvador Allende.
        Therefore, they came up with the idea that Allende shot himself.
    2. +3
      11 September 2016 11: 19
      Quote: Ivan Tartugay
      The junta cannot judge the legitimate president. It will not be a court but a farce.

      Will it stop them? Do you know how Slobodan Milosevic was "tried"?
      Chilean President S. Allende is known as a hero. "Danko".
      1. 0
        11 September 2016 18: 25
        Quote Was Mammoth:
        Do you know how Slobodan Milosevic was "tried"?


        Yes, we know, but we also know that in 1973 the states and their hului were not as arrogant as in the nineties.
        Then they tried, too, of course they didn’t particularly try, but still they tried, pretended to preserve the appearance of legality. And in the nineties they didn’t even give a look to them. Brazenly went to their goal, as now.
  5. +6
    11 September 2016 09: 12
    very nice article! Thank you - I did not know much.
  6. +2
    11 September 2016 09: 57
    In addition to the PFMR, another left-wing partisan organization of the Maoist trend operated in Chile .. and quite successfully .. That's the name I forgot ... Soleros ...
  7. +6
    11 September 2016 10: 38
    This is interesting information. In Soviet times, organizational, military
    and financial assistance to the USSR and Cuba to the Latin American Communist governments and
    the partisans fiercely denied. It was believed that local forces were rebelling against
    imperialism themselves and win.
  8. +3
    11 September 2016 10: 43
    Pinochet did the right thing by fighting the left. After all, Salvador Allende actually destroyed the Chilean economy. Monstrous inflation, falling real incomes of the population, shortage of goods are all the result of Allende's "reforms". Pinochet got the country in distress, and managed to fix it.
    1. +6
      11 September 2016 16: 13
      Well, yes, yes: it’s clear where the wind is blowing - Hitler and Bandera also fought with the left. laughing wassat

      In principle, it would be nice to first collect and analyze information, well, at least the one that is on the site. And then to make such categorical statements. Look at least here:

      https://topwar.ru/19800-kto-ubil-prezidenta-alend
      e.html
      https://topwar.ru/33164-voennyy-perevorot-1973-go
      da-v-chili-neoliberalnyy-mif-o-pinochete.html

      Now allow a few words without a protocol:
      Allende carried out agrarian and social reforms that led to the growth of the country's economy. Allende was the first to implement a large-scale cybernetic approach to governing the country, inviting Stafford Beer as a consultant (even today, "civilized" countries only dream of introducing such a governing system).

      But the economic pit into which Pinochet plunged his country turned out to be quite deep. It took Chileans another 8 years after the collapse of the Pinochet regime in order to stabilize the situation.

      Ps: Returning to the beginning of the comment: all fascist regimes at the initial stage show economic growth (and there are many reasons for this: external support, mobilization through repression, ...), but all these regimes are short-lived and ultimately catastrophic.
      1. +1
        11 September 2016 17: 10
        Quote: BMP-2
        Allende carried out agrarian and social reforms that led to the growth of the country's economy.

        If he carried out economic reforms, then why was Chile the highest inflation in the world?
        Allende introduced fixed prices, which led to the emergence of the largest black market in South America. In 1973, the budget deficit was 25% of GDP. Is this your economic growth?
        1. +4
          11 September 2016 23: 16
          Yes Yes. No. Only this you have not yet told the whole truth. feel When he came to power in 1971, inflation was 23%. And in 1973 it already reached 190%. Naturally, our "overseas partners" had a hand in such "economic growth": the United States was already well able to use the sanctions regime even then. They simply blocked the supply of Chilean copper, which provided the bulk of foreign exchange earnings. And the Americans were also very good at using disgruntled latifundists to sabotage Allende's policies. So, a positive undertaking, which could become one of the most successful economic projects, was hacked to the ground.

          And Pinochet, of course, is a fine fellow: from 3 billion dollars of public debt in 1973 he brought the debt to 17 billion in 1982; reduced all social spending, throwing a third of the country's population below the poverty line; reduced all development spending and made the country virtually a raw material appendage for the United States; well, naturally, in between times he destroyed several tens of thousands of the population. As the saying goes, "Glory to Pinochet! And to his admirers - too! good

          But only then it is not clear: why did the Spaniards (!) Bring such an economic genius to the age of senility, and when they didn’t suffer a heart attack, he went to another world in 2006 - why there was no mourning on the day of the burial , and half the country in Chile had fun and rejoiced at his funeral? wink
          1. +2
            12 September 2016 15: 21
            They simply blocked the supply of Chilean copper, which gave the bulk of foreign exchange earnings.

            In fact, the crisis occurred due to the fall in copper prices and Allende's "reforms".
            But Pinochet, of course, did a fine job: with 3 billion dollars of public debt in 1973 brought debt to 17 billion in 1982; reduced all social spending, dropping a third of the population below the poverty line;

            All this is the result of Allende's "reforms". At the beginning of his reign, Allende increased social spending, but it grew much faster than the economy. As a result, the world's largest inflation, lower wages, general popular discontent. Allende drove the economy of his country into such a hole that Pinochet restored it until the mid-80s.
            By the way, before the coup Allende traveled to all socialist countries (including the USSR), and asked for money in debt. Even our Brezhnev did not.
            in between destroyed several tens of thousands of people

            In 1990, a commission was set up in Chile to count the victims of Pinochet. We counted all 3192 people.
            1. +4
              12 September 2016 18: 25
              Well, Lord, I don’t even know what else can open your eyes to the obvious. request
              Maybe a change in the training manual? wink
              So many years have passed, and, for example, in our Ukraine the current junta is also trying to explain its economic incompetence with the consequences of the "evil lord of the past." And you know, it's not even funny anymore. Moreover, it is not funny even for those who especially believed in a bright European future and the effectiveness of the Western economic model ... crying

              And at the expense of Brezhnev - dig further. You will be surprised to find out why he did not. Yes

              As for the victims of Pinochet: 3195 people are actually the number of "missing" from the Valech Commission report, that is, the number of those who were kidnapped or killed by the Pinochet political police, but refused to admit their involvement in their disappearance.

              The number of victims in the first month after the coup amounted to 30 people. But then there were those who were executed and died in prisons (during the reign of prisons 000% of the country's population visited prisons), and hundreds simply froze in slums in southern Chile, where 27 million people were forced to move.
              1. +2
                13 September 2016 13: 59
                yes to such liberals as Lord Blacwood "piss in the eyes and they are God's dew" laughing
  9. +7
    11 September 2016 10: 45
    The essence of Pinochet's "economic miracle" was well shown by V. Katasonov in his book "Capitalism". Here are excerpts from the book: "Equally interesting is the experience of" reforming "the economy in another Latin American country - Chile, which many consider a" testing ground "for monetarists. In September 1973, the Allende regime was overthrown with the help of the CIA General Pinochet returned the property to private owners. A group of Chilean economists (about 30 people) gathered around the general, who at one time studied economics at the University of Chicago and became ardent admirers of Milton Friedman, a preacher of the theory of “free and self-regulating market.” In the first two years (the first stage) of reforms (which began a year after Pinochet came to power), the money supply and government spending were reduced.
    The consequence of the first stage was the following: unemployment doubled - from 9,1 to 18,7%; production fell 12,9%. It was the most severe depression in the country since the 30s.
    At the second stage of reforms (since 1976), active attraction of foreign capital to the country began. Only loans between 1977-1981 increased three times. In the period 1976-1981. what was called the “economic miracle” was happening: the average annual growth rate of the social product was 6,6%. However, this is a hoax: in fact, there was no “miracle”. In this case, there was what is called a universal rule: "the deeper the depression, the greater the subsequent growth." The mechanism of this "growth" is very simple. At the time of depression, millions of workers lose their jobs, factories are idle. During the rise, the workers return to their places and there is the appearance of growth. Such growth is achievable quickly and without much labor and sacrifice. Real growth involves not only reaching the pre-crisis point, but also further increasing production through investment and the creation of new jobs. With the implementation of neoliberal recipes, you can achieve the appearance of growth, but real growth is impossible. So, after the recession of 1980-1982. in the American economy under Reagan, which gave impetus to the development of neoliberalism both domestically and in the world, an upswing has begun, but it can rightfully be called "false" growth. It should be borne in mind that, within the framework of neoliberal development models, there is mainly “puffed” growth associated with the development of the unproductive sector.
    So, the economic miracle in Chile was "exaggerated", "fictitious."
    The third phase of reform began in 1982, when the world started an economic depression (caused in part by the debt crisis). Depression painfully hit the Chilean economy, it lay in ruins.
    The maximum unemployment rate was 34,6%; industrial production in 1982-1983 decreased by 28%.
    The reason for this fall is a sharp reduction in the inflow of foreign capital, which coincided with the moment when it was necessary to pay space interest on previously obtained loans. The largest financial groups in the country went bankrupt, and only massive assistance from the state did not allow them to collapse completely.
    The fourth stage began in 1984, when the country received bonded loans from the Fund and the economy began to recover. This period was relatively long and lasted until 1989. However, growth was largely fictitious.
    In 1989, per capita GDP was still 6,1% lower than in 1981.
    In 1988, at the peak of economic stability, the government decided to hold a referendum confirming the authority of President Pinochet for the next eight years. He did not receive support. In 1989, Patricio Aylvin, a moderate candidate from the Christian Democratic Party, became president. The era of Pinochet is over.
    1. +6
      11 September 2016 13: 30
      I think that it was not Salvador Alliance that destroyed the economy, but was there simply opposition from the oligarchs? Or some secret preparatory actions by the military, the creation of a shortage of products?
      1. +1
        11 September 2016 13: 54
        I think that it was not Salvador Alliance that destroyed the economy, but was there simply opposition from the oligarchs? Or some secret preparatory actions by the military, the creation of a shortage of products?

        Read about the "reforms" of El Salvador Alliance. He began to nationalize businesses and mines. Moreover, they paid taxes that went to the budget. And after nationalization by the state, these enterprises ceased to generate income. When Pinochet came to power, the factories and mines were in a terrible state, since the left could not use them wisely.
      2. +2
        11 September 2016 15: 06
        Quote: Reptiloid
        I think that it was not Salvador Alliance that destroyed the economy ....

        Allende.
        A blue-blooded representative involuntarily answered you: "Read about the" reforms "of El Salvador Alliance. He began to nationalize enterprises and mines."
        Just look at the structure of Chile's economy. Why does the United States need a rebellious state "in its backyard"?
        Quote: Lord Blacwood
        ... since the left could not use them wisely.

        Who is where, and naked in the bath. wink
      3. +4
        11 September 2016 15: 12
        Of course, Allende, in principle, did not destroy anything. Chile was already in crisis, but Allende simply did not manage to do anything. The reforms that he started did not have time to end so that he could be given a positive or negative characterization. But as a person, Allende is worthy of respect.
        1. +1
          11 September 2016 15: 52
          Quote: Rastas
          Of course, Allende, in principle, did not destroy anything. Chile was already in crisis, but Allende simply did not manage to do anything. The reforms that he started did not have time to end so that he could be given a positive or negative characterization. But as a person, Allende is worthy of respect.

          As it did not have time. Thanks to his "successful" economic transformations, inflation in 1972 was 225%, and in 1973 600% (the highest inflation in the history of Chile)! The budget deficit in 1973 was 25% of GDP (or 1/4 of the total GDP), and because of the huge external debt, the country was denied loans. In 1973, salaries fell 40%. Workers' strikes against the Allende regime broke out throughout the country.
          And this is all thanks to his "reforms" and nationalization.
          1. +6
            11 September 2016 17: 29
            You think, as a typical monetarist from the Friedman school, who believes that the concern of the state is only to fight inflation. Then, credit flows stopped flowing just with the USA, with which the Chilean economy was strongly tied. Allende was about to get rid of this addiction. And the strikes were initiated by the owners of the mines, sabotaging the production process and consciously pushing the workers to protests. And do not write about the crisis. with the advent of Pinochet’s power, a crisis began that Chile hadn’t known since the 30s. Read my first comment with quotes by V. Katasonov.
            1. +2
              11 September 2016 19: 50
              Quote: Rastas
              You think, as a typical monetarist from the Friedman school, who believes that the concern of the state is only to fight inflation.

              I wrote not only about inflation, but also about the budget deficit and salaries.
              Quote: Rastas
              And the strikes were initiated by the owners of the mines, sabotaging the production process and consciously pushing the workers to protests.

              How could mine owners initiate strikes if the mines were nationalized and did not belong to them?
              Quote: Rastas
              Then, credit flows stopped going just from the USA

              And not only. In 1972, Allende announced a partial ban on the payment of debts (technical default). In this situation, no one gave a loan. In December 72, Allende went to Brezhnev, but even Brezhnev did not give money.
              Quote: Rastas
              And do not write about the crisis. With the advent of Pinochet’s power, a crisis began that Chile hadn’t known since the 30’s.

              This was the result of Allende's economic policies. But under Pinochet, the country's economy began to grow, not fall (as was the case under Allende). Yes, there was a crisis at the beginning of the 80's, but the situation has stabilized since the middle of the 80's.
              1. +1
                13 September 2016 14: 08
                But Pinochet, of course, did a fine job: from 3 billion dollars of public debt in 1973 brought debt to 17 billion in 1982; reduced all social spending, dropping a third of the population below the poverty line; reduced all development costs and made the country a virtually raw materials appendage of the United States
  10. +4
    11 September 2016 18: 14
    Last picture