pretty sure they surrounded and entered the palace dude... As the story goes, they surrounded, Allende suicided, miltary came in and found him dead....
@Mugan 11 I have lived in Chile for the past 9 years and my wife and kids are Chilean. Being a curious person, I have been quite interested in understanding how this excessively traumatic period of time has affected the Chilean People. It is the same curiosity which drove me to learn ask my grandfathers about (and read about) all the wars they fought in (WW1, WW2, & Korea). As Chile is excessively polarized (high and low class) I have had to pull from a great many sources. Basically I have tried to consume material (books, documentaries, people) from both political sides to try and get a full view of the situation, which isn't easy considering the polarization that contaminates both peoples viewpoints and the media's biases.
@@Herp234 Yeah, ok, they probably bombed it... I never said they didn't bomb it. I just said that they did surround it (as the op said that they didn't). I do obviously remember the iconic video of jets flying over the palace.... But anyway, even if they did bomb it, they didn't do a very good job of it... I have seen pictures of it after the event and it sure doesn't look bombed.... It isn't a pile of rubble.... I don't know how much you know about the presidential palace (La Moneda), but it isn't thaaat big... Must have been a pretty small bomb if Allende was inside and the cause of death was a gunshot and you can't see collapsed walls and such.... besides, if they bombed it, it almost even supports my point. If they bombed the palace while Allende was in it, why didn't he leave the palace? Probably because there where tanks and soldiers in every direction I imagine...
@@jonm3024 You are right they did surround the palace. And I'm not sure what it looked like afterwards, however Dorfman described what used to be the balcony as a "black hole".
It’s definitely way past time that you redo this topic! I hate the numerous the non-committal points that you discussed when we have US government declassified documents that clearly state involvement in so many of the points that you acted like were up to personal taste/opinion instead of stating the actual historical fact. When retelling history the only important thing is giving an accurate account and paying no mind to how those events are seen in the current time.
It’s not easy to obtain people like Rene Schneider nowadays, a true patriotic and remarkable soldier who couldn’t be corrupted , he was never tempted to hijack the power for himself when the opportunity presented itself, respected constitution and let the democracy prevail, he had a class of his own, if he had survived maybe he could’ve become a next president of chile. Much love from a fan of history from Tanzania 🇹🇿 East africa.
ALLENDE was more than a "cold war socialist" he was a tremendous visionary: 1.- In 1972, he was already denouncing the Globalist corporatism that today runs our lives worldwide (at ONU); 2.- He personally did not want a "Socialist Revolution" by means of weapons (unfortunately many of his coalition did want it) but through popular elections (1st country in the world where Socialism did not come to power by means of weapons); 3.- His own government created long before digital interconnection existed (Internet, etc.) a proto-digital system called SYNCO (cyber socialism). PS. I am not a socialist but I am not blind to reality. Greetings from Santiago of Chile 🇨🇱, South America.
Completely warrants a redo by this point with the admissions the US government has made about the situation and for numerous factual errors people in chat have noted
Salvador Allende was elected with under 36% of the vote, and proceeded to turn Chile into a robber state on the way to full blown Fascism. The Allende government ignored the constitution and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists. This is the part that was omitted.
@@kasimirfreeman Dude do you know how voting works? A party can win with 36% of the votes. Also, robber state? Fascism? Yeah that's totally what happened. The former officer in charge of the army is killed by some radical right wings paid by the CIA? Allende's fault, for sure. Pinochet makes a coup d'état? Totally justified and actually it was the people who asked for it, not just a richer minority. Of course, the facts only support it. And after Allende's fascist state ended, Pinochet made Chile great again, no doubt. Great story, so who are you selling this to? Hollywood? Nah, this looks more a Bollywood kind-of movie. Marxist terrorist... You're the same kind of people that told a lot of parents that playing a boardgame made kids become cultists and killers. Scaremongering is pathetic. "The Marxists are coming". The authoritarians are coming, and your kind is paving the way.
Um.... You forgot the March 1973 parliamentary elections where Allende's party won by around 40% of the vote, INCREASING his popularity. Also the famous phrase said by Nixon when undermining Allende, saying "make Chile's economy scream!".
@The Law But genocide was literally commited and the economy completely tanked. Homelessness and unemployment soared to record highs, people were disappeared, imprisoned and murdered.
@The Law 1. 'Condor Time. Like Pinochet and his allies have planted terrorism on three continents' John Dinges 2. 'Storm Over Chile: The Junta Under Siege' Samuel Chavkin 3. 'Latin American fever' Artur Domosławski 4. '100 biggest murderers''. William L. Wolcott 5. 'The most dangerous dictators in history' Shelley Klein 6. 'La Vanguardia' Alfred Rexach 7. 'Formas de solver a casa' Alejandro Zambra 8. 'Mano de obra' Diamela Eltit
@The Law 'I am an officer and I have my honor. I will never try to put responsibility for the orders I gave on my subordinates. However, I expected the same from my supervisor, with whom I consulted all my decisions. Unfortunately I was disappointed. In my eyes he is nothing'. and 'Pinochet is a coward and a man without honor, he deserving no respect'. Manuel Contresas - the former head of DINA.
In September 2014, the CIA admitted what we all knew for a long time, that they did this. Claims that "we don't know how much involvement" no longer have that particular veneer of respect.
@@TheLocalLt It is not a pro-Allende narrative it is a factual narrative. YOU PEOPLE have been disgraced because your Pinochet dictatorship wasnt wonderful
@@Atmost11 if it’s “factual”, what part did the CIA play in the coup? You won’t be able to tell me because they had none. They did try to possibly instigate a coup or at least get Allende banned in 1970 but their local collaborators botched it and killed a gov’t official, this actually helped Allende get elected. After that Nixon told the CIA to bring Allende’s economy “to its knees”, which they helped to do over the next three years, paying for strikes and anti-socialist demonstrations. However when the coup actually happened in 1973, the CIA had nothing to do with it, except to give a thumbs up when it was in progress. It was 100% planned, organized and executed by Chilean staff officers in the army, navy, and air force, even Pinochet didn’t know it was happening until he was told about it that morning. He then took command and the rest is history, but the point is that the CIA had nothing to do with the actual coup.
@@TheLocalLt You might not have heard, but a few years back the CIA admitted to doing the Pinochet coup. For a long time they denied it, but they admitted it now. Look it up
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
@@Sebastian-zn3dx Well first of all he didn't use guerrilla terrorism to come into power "through armed and violent means." This is why he had to be stopped because it screwed with America's simplified rhetoric. Kissinger tried to break democracy before Allende was ever democratically elected. Once that failed, they overthrew a democratically elected president and installed a dictator through armed insurrection. The facts couldn't be more contradicting to your argument.
@@Sebastian-zn3dx literally everything you just said is wrong. Allende was democratically elected and appointed as president, notoriously didn’t use violent means, publicly and diplomatically lobbied against the chokehold American industry put on Chile, and the Allende government was actively gaining more support prior to the CIA orchestrated coup. Allende was not a dictator.
@@upnhere8513 please correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember that the CIA actually assassinated the Commander-in-chief of the Chilean Army in order to lead an military uprise, René Schneider（Who got assassinated) was an honourable general who believed exclusively in military-political mutuality
If you're doing South American history at the moment, don't forget the 1964 Brazilian coup d'état, Perón & Eva in Argentina between 1940s-1970s, Che Guevara in Cuba/Bolivia, and US involvement in the governments of Guatemala/Nicaragua/El Salvador.
Operation Condor was not masterminded by Kissinger. If anything it was founded by Chile and Argentina, with the U.S. simply providing support to an operation that would have already gone ahead with or without U.S. support
I think he wants to avoid upsetting people who don't like Allende because of his Marxism - unfortunate, as this lead to omissions of real facts about what happened and the wider context. A historian covering events such as this is going to alienate some people no matter what, and the truth should be more important than the viewer count
Operation condor was necessary to defeat Cuban Communist influence in South American. America actually had nothing to do with the Chilean or Argentine coups, or operation condor for that matter, but they did approve of them to enforce the American sphere of influence which already had been punctured in Cuba. As Nixon said communists in Chile and Argentina would create a “red sandwich”
You're missing a lot of context that led to the price controls in Chile... Like the US deliberately funding Trucker strikes, that led to the blocking off the trade and distribution of goods within Chile. Also he wasn't implementing "Marxist" policies without it being approved by the OPPOSITION controlled congress. Kind of disappointed with the lack of detail, Khan Academy
Why was a strike even necessary? Was it because truckers were fed up of dealing with very high inflation for which Allende's policies contributed? It is easy to blame USA and CIA for everything. Part of the blame is definitely Allende's absolutely disastrous economic policies. The statistics do not lie. Look up inflation rates in Chile in 1970,1971,1972,1973. No one would have been prone to striking if there wasn't hyperinflation.
@@ForTimtwopointzero Please do not try to reason with fanatics. Just insult them and ask them to go to your crowdfunding page for a fleet of helicopters.
PD: this video is missing the whole ussr involvement in allende's regime, this guy was heavily helped by the warsaw pact with money, weapons and information.
Good video as always. Though I have a minor criticism: it seems unnecessary to point out who is a good guy / bad guy. Just let the viewer decide from the facts your provide.
@@noanikqi1721 pretty obvious sir: not a single mention to the Russian activities to help Allende, not a single mention to the influence of Fidel Castro in the GAP an other paramilitary groups promoted by Allende, not a single mention to the continuous Allende’s contempt with the other democratic powers in Chile (congress, Supreme Court and comptroller) and many others.
@@lautarob But there was also not a single mention of right wing paramilitary groups like Patria y Libertad nor the German torture camps such as Villa Dignidad and Villa Baviera which unsurprisingly were run by Nazi refugees and there's evidence of Joseph Mengele's precense in those camps. The video doesn't explicitly endorse Allende either, he only called Shcneider a "good guy" for not wanting to have a coup and Pinochet a "bad guy" because political prosecution, murder and torture are crimes universally agreed to be bad things, or at least to everyone except Pinochetists
@@noanikqi1721 Democratically elected president is overthrown in coup staged by a foreign power and what follows is years of brutal, fascistic dictatorship. Geniuses: Hey don't try to tell me who the good or bad guy is here alright
Rabid Caboose lol what about the Chilean monetary crisis that Pinochet caused. I’m from a post socialist country and I can definitely tell you that socialism works.
@@theta3302 where are you from? Because if it's from a "post Soviet" communist nation. Then it's not a "true Marxist state", because a "true Marxist state" is like Venezuela or North Korea. And look where that's gotten them?
@@kalebthehistorian5928 As a historian you might find it interesting to learn that US economic sanctions imposed on Venezuela have contributed to tens of thousands of deaths in the country. Here's the analysis cepr.net/images/stories/reports/venezuela-sanctions-2019-04.pdf
I love how the Kaleb guy literally just made up "marxist state" even though Marx was anarchistic, and they're talking about socialism... the guy is mixing and mashing his terminology.
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
Actually you are correct. However just few weeks later after this operation by the end of September of the same year he was rewarded to Secretary of State. "coincidently"
So are you ever going to re-do this video? 10 years is more than enough time to revise your perspective on this event given the CIA’s admission of deep involvement, and the easily accessible understanding of American neo-liberal strong-arming of Chilean industry. Not to mention Allende was never a dictator, nor a violent threat to democratic values.
I think you may want to look further into this. I have read that Fidel Castro was providing armament to Allende, so he can eventually stay in power just like him.
@@Thomas-rj9kl what’s the source? Though I’ve never read any academic literature suggesting that to be true, the notion of a communist in Fidel Castro supporting another latin communist in Allende with a coup on the horizon is not ridiculous. Allende didn’t need arbitrary military force to stay in power, he was elected by a majority in a free and fair democratic process. The only reason he would need arms to maintain power, is as a safety-measure against a US-backed military coup to overthrow his perfectly legitimate government.
@@SweetieWithAHat You may very well say that, but look at other examples in Latin America where communist leaders have staid in power beyond what one would call democratic. It's a true fact that in Chile we found a lot of military weapons hidden by the MIR , I know because I was a kid in the 80s in Chile aware of those news. Well now that history is repeating itself down there with Allende 2.0 (Boric), we'll but this question to the test and come back here in a decade or so and see how things turns out! By the way, have you ever wonder why Latin America is so poor and behind compare to Asia?
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
René Schneider's death was a story on its own: he was kidnapped by a group within the military who wanted to use him to push the armed forces to take action against allende. But those kidnappers had been infiltrated by mir agents who shot him and fled the scene, they spoiled the kidnappers' plan and delayed the coup d'etat roughly 2 years. It was top notch spy drama.
Chilean here. MIR means Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria (Revolutionary Left Movement, basically, a guerrilla army). However, the intellectual authors of Gen. René Schneider attempted kidnapping and assassination were Gen. Roberto Viaux and Gen. Camilo Valenzuela, who were convicted for their crimes. Declassified CIA documents revealed they were financed by the CIA. There were so many MIR agents infiltrated there as there were Antifa and FBI agents storming the Capitol on January 6. Please, prove me wrong *with sources.*
So, the point is unlike what's been reported in many western stories Rene's Schneider's death did not come during the kidnapped. He was kidnapped, controlled, then assassinated.
My country was communist and took chilean communist refugees but the funny part is that when they actually saw how communism work they left the communist countries to be refugees in Sweden and West Germany.
I've got quite interested in this & US involvement in South America in general and would suggest that the US is all for democracy as long as it suits them, interesting stuff is the School of Americas & the IMF/World Bank operate/get their money. There seems a lot of blind 'flag waving' and conflation with 'Capitalism' in the comments. Also a artificial binary placed on Communism & Capitalism. One of the things I've noticed in all this (& modern stuff like Iraq/Afghanistan is, like the 'Domino Effect', how much of what is assigned as 'Communism' is in fact nationalism & the aim of self determination. The simple question to ask is how much would the US accept behaviour towards them of a similar nature?
It’s pretty simple: if you can’t build your own businesses and other countries companies have to get your resources out of the ground for you, it’s impossible (and rightfully so) to kick those companies out without doing some type of Marxist nationalization program, and yes the other country is usually going to resist pretty hard and try to hold their position, especially when the opposition is openly Marxist such as in Chile.
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
I think many ppl acctually dont know how horrible Pinochets Coup was, the world knew at the time. Many ppl say today that the journalist at the time didnt know about the concentration camps and torture that was happening within the country, this is false. The journalist knew about the horrors, one swedish journalist Leonardo Henrichsen was shot by a chilean officer in a jeep the day the coup started because he was recording the horrors of the coup on the street. Jan Sandquist his colleague tryid desperately to save him but almost lost his life aswell. Another swedish journalist Henrik Janbell barely escaped being sent to one of the many concentration camps for torture, after the horrible crimes against humanity he witnessed he commit his life to help refugees escape Chile, totaling around 25,000 to Sweden.
Just flat out not true that Chile's economy did well under Pinochet. *Average annual growth under him was 1.6%* (increased to 7% over the decade after), *unemployment and poverty skyrocketed to 18% and 45%,* respectively. Even inflation was still incredibly high, 80% during Pinochet's rule. 1986 GDP per capita was lower than that of 1973! Social democratic reforms in the years after Pinochet were what created significant growth and poverty reduction, not economic liberalization. Also, Allende was not a Marxist-Leninist (i.e., Soviet communist) as you seem to believe, but a relatively moderate socialist who was known for his commitment to democracy rather than violent revolution. Many other details are incorrect about here, too, but these are probably the most egregious in this video. It sounds like this video came out of an early 2000s textbook written by a poorly funded state board of education.
Neither the soviet nor American have the right to do that. If you want to use this argument to devalue Allende, remember that Allende didnt side with the Soviet. He was elected in a democratic way, and didnt implement authoritarian rule like most countries did. Instead he implemented peaceful and progressive reforms, in a democratic way, which costed his life. (Cuz the US empire didnt want to see him succeed)
@@puppet1-170 lol no - most people barely survive socialism. In Venezuela they mass exodus to the US and vote against Biden/Harris...they know the truth!
Pretty good video but missing a few things. For example, you bring up the "counter argument that the CIA would not have wanted to assassinate Schneider because that would have only made Alleinde more popular." But, like you said, it was meant to be a kidnapping attempt that went wrong when they shot Schneider. The plan before the shooting of Schneider was to claim Alleinde supporters kidnapped Schneider and would not release him until Congress voted to approve of Alleinde's steps into office. The idea was that the kidnapping of Schneider would have made the public look at Alleinde's supporters as a violent mob that would have been dangerous to run the country and thus support for Alleinde would plummet. But the plan failed because Schneider was shot. I'm not saying I'm an Alleinde supporter, but that counter argument fails to take into account why the plan was to kidnap Schneider in the first place. Also, there are a lot of comments on bias here. And while you're clearly opinionated on what the facts mean, that does not mean the facts are wrong. You might have missed a few things, but what you did say are indeed things that happened. As a historian, I must say that this is one of the most headache inducing aspects of what I do. I get it from my conservative friends and from my Marxist friends, "If the facts don't align with what I believe politically, then we can simply say you're biased shrug our shoulders and pretend this never happened." It seems most agree that we need to learn from the mistakes of the past to have a brighter future; however, the more I observe, the more depressed I am when I notice that we haven't even made it to the first hurtle first. We cannot begin to learn from the past because we are so tribal in our politics that bringing up a fact of the past that is potentially uncomfortable, it becomes commonplace to simply ignore that fact and tarnish the speaker. I'm not saying there aren't people who embellish the truth or lie to match an agenda, but that's why we have peer reviewed journals... Or at least, that's why we're suppose to. But in this day and age where everyone is an expert on everything, blog historians have overtaken peer reviewed research in the popular minds of citizens.
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
You omitted a key factor between 1970 and 1973, which was both Congress and Supreme Court condemning the President for constitutional violations and armed robbery. The military was responding to a popular demand to end these right violations.
The economy crashed again in 1982, 14% of the work force had to apply to govt. "make work" programs that paid less than minimum wage, while investors enjoyed a massive public bailout that ended up costing 10% of Chile's annual GDP. By 1990 average wages were 10% less than they were in 1970, before Pinochet.
deeponeperfectmorning exactly, and the 27.3% unemployment rate he caused, and the monetary crisis. I’m from a post socialist country and would definitely want the old days back. 1/5 Americans live in absolute poverty lol and they wanna tell us how to run our economy
Thank you for explaining in a simple way. I have tried to understand what happened in chile with several books and materials and none of it made sense.
By the way he wasn't a capitalist. He really didn't have any political views and for the first couple years he followed many of Allende economic policy's to failure.
At the time of the military coup. I was teaching school in Medellin Colombia. I was preparing to travel to Arica Chili. The border was closed. And sandbags were unplaced outside of the American Embassy in Medellin. The news there reported what was happening with live videos of the coup. It was obvious that the CIA was involved. 1973. I made it to Ecuador. And lived inOtovalo tutoring the Katchur Indians. What a long strange trip it’s been.
Highest number of votes, but he didn't win the majority votes. He won ike 36% of the votes, which meant 64% of the votes weren't for him. The 64% figure later came from the votes of the Democratic Christian Party too Also he tried to remove the influence of Chile's Congress and the courts back then. He wasn't really a dictator, but he did try to shift Chile to an authoritarian socialist state
@@rexchiliae Completely ignoring how Hitler orchestrated a Reichstag burning that gave him dictatorial powers. By the way CAPITALISTS from all around the world FINANCED Hitler. He was not a socialist at all.
@Alex Libman Allende was a socialist, supported by a coalition of political parties and movements, among which were the communists, socialists, the MIR, Christian Democrats and others.
@ haha, cool. I'm glad we can agree something. Personally, I'm not sure what would work best, but lean towards a mix of both. It's hard to balance reasonable wealth with reasonable equity, though, that's something I'm sure about. What are your opinions? I'd love to hear!
This was a great video for using but a single frame the whole time. I also see that it's old compared to now. 3 million subs? You probably did well to deserve it!
The economy did not do well under pinochet... real wages stagnated all the years of his rule... wealth became much more concentrated at the top... calories consumed by the poor dropped during his rule... real wages of the poor dropped too... the economy had a silver lining in that the rich were able to consume much more... luxury shops expanded... but the consumption of the poor did not expand... public education was placed into private hands... a huge cause of yearly strikes even to this day.
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
In this series of videos about 20th century I hear new names from important people all over the world who played effective role in the history of their country in particular and in the world history as a whole. So, here in Salvador Allende and Pinochet.
The "economic miracle" is nonsense. After Pinochet wages fell by 65% and unemployment exploded.Most of the profits came from extractive industries like copper, which Pinochet wisely renationalized after his first policies bombed. (Much of this growth came from capital investments the govt. made before him.) Besides mining Chile also specialized in export agriculture (apples, grapes, etc) that were done usually unsustainably and had little value added.
@AQGOAT24 true. But I believe it is the role of the khanacademy to actually do check what they publish. They are a great source of knowledge, IMHO, this kind of video plays against their quality levels and hence: reputation. What saddens me in the bottom line, is really that putting this in a US centric vision of the world the video/project looses reach.
you have a talent for teaching IDK much about politics but i learn alot from your vids because it's from a General Human Being point of view not a democrat, capitalist, communist, etc. thank you. :)
Actually, the main thing that hurt the economy was not price controls and increased wages, but American companies refusing to sell machinery parts. The first couple of years, things improved greatly. Inflation actually increased during the first two years of the dictatorship.
Yup, from what I’ve seen, working class wages and consumption was increasing, production was increasing, and this was despite the managerial and owner class going on “strike”, but as I understand it the workers completed their jobs as usual anyways.
Yay, Latin America. This is great stuff. I expect there to be a history of everything on your site & on here within a few years, Khan!!! You have my undying appreciation for bringing all of this knowledge to the masses.
i only subscribed yesterday (because of your hem vids) and i already respect you as an individual, you for free, spend your time trying to help others learn while at the same time trying to be impartial and even telling people to on some level and check information independently
Chilean economy did "well" just fore some, for look what happened on October 2019 that led to writing a new constitution (in the works) and made Gabriel Boric, a student leader, president this year, amongst many other social, cultural and political changes we`ve been going through.
Why wouldn't Salvadore Allende be considered an unambiguous good guy.? He followed his beliefs won the plurality and kept his promise to the people. And for being a person of integrity he paid for it with his life. To me that's an unambiguous good guy!
Im not Chilean but i agree with that.I know his decision in economy may not work out,but it definitely can be fixed over time with his party.Throwing a dictator in to rule the country instead of keeping a democratically elected leader is the worst thing we can ever think of
The chilean miracle of Pinochet's government is a myth. The economy remained stagnant throughout his entire tenure and it only started to grow with the governments of Concertación. Pinochet apologists like to take credit for all of it, as if everything was part of the same Pinochetist whole. As minimal as they were, the post-dictatorial governments implemented crucial reforms to deal with the country's stagnation and promote growth. You can google Chile's GDP if you don't believe me. In fact, if you wanna know when the chilean economy really skyrocketed, it was during the center-left governments of socialists Ricardo Lagos and Michelle Bachelet.
@@Diego-zz1df You're right about Pinochet. I do not apologize for him, nor for Milton Friedman who advised him on fiscal policy. However, I'm also not a socialist either. Democracy and capitalism are essential to each other, two sides of the same coin.
With respect, I know it is hard to get all the facts, but you left out some key points: 1) Congress, upon electing Allende president, did so on the condition that he sign a formal document declaring that he not bring the country into Socialism & Communism. I’m pretty sure it stated that such acts were grounds for removal from office too. 2) Allende was overstepping his authority to forcibly bringing Chile into a fully socialist and communist nation. 3) Left wing extremists were assassinating their political opposition throughout the time that Allende was in Power. 4) Congress and the courts declared that Allende was overstepping and requested that the military remove him from office. Meaning that in this case, the coup was legal and constitutional. (For example, would you say that it was illegal if Trump lost in his impeachment process, didn’t step down, and the military was forced to remove him? This is actually a pretty close parallel to what happened in Chile.) 5) When this decision was taken, there were arms being shipped from the Soviet Union and their puppet states in order to arm Allende’s army effectively initiating a civil war. 6) The Chilean economy was collapsing under Allende, there was a food shortage, and malnutrition was a real risk for many. (points to you for recognizing both sides of Pinochet’s free-market shock economic recovery program) 7) The justification for not having elections was that democracy had just failed to provide a government which adequately protected the population. This may not be enough to justify the removal of democracy, depending on where you stand. But, for many Chileans (maybe even a majority at the time), it was. 8) After like 18 years, and after a vote, Pinochet peacefully and willingly returned the country to democracy. This is something that I don’t think has ever happened under any other Latin American Dictatorship (even if it may have been overdue after 17ish years - this issue is still debated in Chile). 9) While it is undeniable that Pinochet was brutal in his treatment of his political opposition, so was his opposition. Many here in Chile believe that Pinochet saved Chile from a worser fate, that being communism. This position is seconded by many who live in other Latin American countries where dictatorships haven’t relinquished power and the consequences of those regimes were much more dire (Venezuela, Argentina, Colombia, Bolivia, Panama, etc…). I’d like to let you know that I am not really on either side of this, I interact with Chileans on a daily basis and it truly does seem that living under Pinochet was no cake walk. But this situation was quite a bit more complex than simply the CIA interfering with a foreign government. This was the Cold War, both sides were guilty of interference, and in many respects, we (the USA) were better stewards than our counterparts. Nobody can say what the world would look like if the US didn’t participate in the cold war, but a fair number of books & movies have imagined gloomy alternate futures in which Communism conquered. There are arguments to support our participation in these conflicts and it isn’t so Black and White. In the spirit that the author of the vid sets forth at the beginning of this vid, I invite you to read from various sources on both sides of the fence, verify or debunk my perspectives based on the various sources I have read over the years, and come to your own conclusions.
Jon M As a former Council Officer in an Indigenous Native American Tribe , I can say now that although a “negative official leaves” for whatever reason we certainly can’t assume that office will be served by a “positive” one. I held several terms as an elected position and when it got aggressively exhausting I acquired some Great Wisdom from a Tribal Elder...Always consider the opposition as a gift. 🙇🏻♀️🙏🏽❤️🕊🇺🇸
@@stephallan2543 Thanks for your reply! In regards to your 1st paragraph, I would certainly agree! In fact, any change should be carefully measured as to replace with something better (This in no way detracts from the value & need for change). In regards to your 2nd paragraph, I am a bit confused as to the message you wish to communicate. could you elaborate?
Allende *was* indeed a Marxist, and *did* admire Castro, but his domestic policies were *very* different from Castro's. Allende, unlike Castro, believed in freedom and human rights. Chile has a complex, globally unique political system (there are not one but two different kinds of coalitions there). Allende's electoral coalition won the 36% plurality, and then formed a congressional coalition that had 78% support. But that coalition was shaky and collapsed. That left the Allende administration with an opposition-controlled Congress. Allende's electoral coalition included both the Socialist and the Communist parties. The Socialist Party was ideologically diverse and contained a far-left segment that was to the left of the Communist Party (and the latter was actually moderate left, advocating basically social democratic policies, at the time). Allende's economic policies were initially successful: poverty went down, and the economy expanded. The problems came later. Some were almost certainly due to the policies themselves. Others were due to deliberate economic sabotage by the USA and Allende's opponents. Kissinger and Nixon deliberately created economic disruption in Chile. There was also foreign interference aimed at disrupting Allende's efforts to rebuild his shattered Congressional coalition. I am not aware of any lack of basic political freedoms under Allende. The mass media remained mostly under the control of Allende's wealthy opponents and freely excoriated Allende daily. There were regular anti-Allende political protests that were allowed to freely take place. The economy did not do well under Pinochet. There were some severe contractions and deregulation-induced crises under Pinochet. There was overall growth over the 17 years, yes, but it was not shared amongst all in society. The rich benefited greatly, the middle class to some degree, the poor not at all. Poverty rate was over 40% under Pinochet, and only started going down after Pinochet left and democracy was restored. Pinochet was not just another Latin American strongman, he was probably the worst dictator South America saw during the 20th century. His government was a state sponsor of international terrorism. Google the names "Orlando Letelier" and "Carlos Prats" for starters.
David Barts can you even comprehend how people in comments are defending Pinochet just because he deposed a “communist”. Like you said Pinochet was directly responsible for the disappearance of thousands of people.
3:50 I don't think you should say that a military general who blindly follows the president is a moral figure. I think we should all know from history that "simply following orders" isn't a justification for evil behavior. Sometimes defending your own nation means resisting the leadership.
For a 15 min summary it's very good. Some details: Allende wasn't Marxist, he was socialist. Allende never put in danger free press, the largest newspaper El Mercurio had all the freedom during his period to express opinion. USA supported strongly Pinochet until the killing of a former Allende Minster and his USA citizen secretary in Washington by the Chilean secrete services (they put a bomb in the car just couple of blocks from the White House. Finally, Pinochet finish his period in 1990, thereafter he used his military position only to protect himself and his circle, but he didn't rule the country.
In the 1970s, anyone socialist was automatically called a Marxist. Today it's anyone who is in favor of ANY policy unless it primarily helps those MOST wealthy get even more wealth. Even not being enthusiastic enough about helping the 43 top billionaires get more money.
NoSoyRapero Recuerde a los disaparacidos bajo Pinochet. I was there from 72-74 and am ashamed of my country for the damage done to Chile. Left alone, Allende would have been voted out the next election and the many murdered and tortured by the Pinochet regime would have lived. Que lastima
Subjectively，allende did not implement extreme communism, he just want under such a social system to protect vulnerable groups, more but based on this platform, in the practical action appeared a lot of deprivation and assaults on private property, and a batch of the vital interests of the vested interests. Chile was a country dominated by comprador capitalism, and Allende tried to change that, but unfortunately, his opponents were too powerful. Allende was the democratically elected president of Chile, and his last moment of martyrdom was a defense of the rights and duties entrusted to him by his people.
Pinochet and the legacy he left behind warrants its own 5-part video series. You can’t squeeze in a detailed summary of the Pinochet era in a 4 minute section of a video, but this more or less gives an accurate account of the events that took place. The truth, however, is that Pinochet did a lot of good as well as a lot of bad. Leftists refuse to acknowledge this fact because they cannot fathom that so many CHILEAN people wanted the beloved Saint Allende out of office, not just the American leadership. Pinochet implemented measures that saved Chile from a terrible famine and established both a strong private sector and a separate, public utility system for the poor. The healthcare and educational programs that so many praise today are directly built on the foundation that the Pinochet regime placed. Yes, Pinochet was a complicated man, but why don’t leftists ever comment on Videla from Argentina or Stroessner from Paraguay? You know, openly fascist dictators that stole, raped, and destroyed minority communities in their respective countries. There are far more radical dictators, especially in Latin America, that the Left could criticize the U.S. for supporting. Pinochet is rather irrelevant on that front.
That’s not even mentioning how Pinochet threw the Chilean oligarchy into jail. He was hated by the country’s richest classes because he destroyed the corruption and the growing black markets that were flourishing because of Allende’s failures. Also, Allende himself appointed Pinochet as head of the military when he was president. Even using Allende supporters’ logic, you’d have to either admit that Allende made a grave mistake in appointing Pinochet to that position or that Pinochet simply took matters into his own hand and did what he deemed necessary to save his country from ruin. At the end of the Pinochet era, he held a plebiscite that asked the citizenry if they wanted another 8 years of Pinochet or if they wanted to build “democracy,” which in turn would remove him from office. Ultimately, Pinochet lost, but he still won 46% of the vote. Nearly HALF of the country wanted Pinochet to remain in power, many of which were working class people that suffered under Allende, despite them being hopeful that a socialist government would bring them prosperity.
"because they cannot fathom that so many CHILEAN people wanted the beloved Saint Allende out of office." Yet it was Allende who was elected in, not Pinochet, fascist muppet
For people interested in hearing more of this story from an on-the-ground but personal, fictionalized/novelized perspective, The House of the Spirits was a really good book (and was why I looked up this video, the story stayed with me and I wanted to know more about the CIA involvement, which the book doesn't really mention I don't think)
I love how the commies and the fashies spew their radical views on here and claim ur biased. In reality you mentioned both viewpoints and affecting factors on the nation. Thx for this video its short good and not giving into the radicals with their one sided views
Dude, I'm from chile and this was a WAY better history lesson on the subject than the sum of all the history lessons I recieved DURING MY WHOLE SCHOOL LIFE Which is embarassing. I only know this stuff cause I'm from a politically active family
Allende was literally a Soviet/KGB backed Marxist. He wasn't a liberal in any way. Marxist militias were being armed by the Soviets, assassinating politicians left and right. People in his party were talking about murdering *1 million Chileans* to accomplish their socialist paradise. They discussed *openly in public* the need for a socialist dictatorship. In comparison, Pinochet only killed a mere couple of thousand, most of them terrorists or socialist militiamen. Pinochet's Friedman inspired reforms are the reason Chile is today the best economy in Latin America. Take a look at Venezuela if you want to see what Chile would look like had Allende succeeded. Also a commonly overlooked but important detail, the Chilean legislature ASKED for a military coup. They were desperate because they realized what the Communists were going to do. Pinochet was a hero. Not the hero they wanted, but the hero they needed.
According the the disciples of Erdoğan, he only arrests terrorists so there can't be anything wrong with this...The soviets ended the nazi regime so the repressive methods they used were totally justified. Only fascists were killed... You see how this is akin to your argument?
@@888nevik the soviets were part of the allied forces who combatted nazi germany. But they later installed the DDR and oppressed anyone who disagreed with stalinism, labeling them as fascists and class traitors
@@lineb98 the americans did the same so really yes from the point of view of the soviets it was perfectly justified yet theres also the difference that it was an occupation of a foreign country not chileans revolting against their goverment. Its more alike the spanish civil war.
There are already admissions by the cia about operation condor in Latin America. The USA was actively interfering in foreign governments all over Latin America at that time.
How can you be so neutral ? “I’ll let you decide who’s the bad guy who’s the wrong guy…” I don’t know if I’m the USA we teach this event like this but in France Allende is clearly an innocent radical social-democrat who was in the people’s side and Pinochet a cruel tyrant who repressed his people and is considered as a criminal. In France, they also teach us than the USA played the bad role by supporting the army in the putsch. Between 1970 and 73 the teach us Allende’s social realizations not only how was the right opposition and the expectations of USA I think this video is definitely too much politically oriented in right/pro-American side.. Dommage
@hedonism13 I'd refer you to the wikipedia article on the matter: Many here see Allende as a hero&martyr. many don't see Cuba as a failure but expl. to many, 'marixst' isn't a bad word, 'capitalist' is, and thousands of death & life-long dictatorship isn't seen as a good price for economical success. point: This video takes the negationist posture of ignoring the proved CIA strong involvement in all of LA especially at this period.
“Actively overthrowing dictators” the military actually supported Pinochet but why did you say that in Allende part like if the nationalization of industries and minimum wage increase was bad
Excellent. Could you do one on Iran and the CIA/MI6-backed overthrow of Mossaddegh, the reign of the Shah and how he was deposed by the Iranian revolution? I think it will help people understand the current situation down there better.
@Kelly Miles yeah that's because we are chilean and don't enounciate the letters at the end of words jajaja but you wouldn't argue "it's pronounced Lope" for a person named Lopez. it is not wrong to enounce the T at the end for us, we just fail to do it. people who get paid to talk properly in the news or in government videos do enounce the t.
Allende was a comunist and destroyed Chile with his comunist policies. Pinochet stoped comunism in Chile and transformed the countrywith free market policies. Although there were human rights violations in his regime I think with comunists would have been worse
pepetv1000 1982 monetary crisis? 27.3% unemployment rate, 70% fall in wages, human rights violations worse than in the USSR, literal cannibalism? I don’t think that’s “economic upheaval” that his great “laissez-faire” policies created
how do you get the name René Schneider? that guy there is Carlos Prats Gonzalez, former chief of the military. After he resigned Pinochet came into this position...
“Why is it that, in the U.S., there never has been a coup de Etat?”
“because there is no American Embassy in Washington”
Please check again and then make another comment. You'll be surprised.
Do you believe in the lone nut theory? Think again.
Democrats trying to overthrow 2016 election right now
there was in 1963 when jfk died
Brilliant. You made me laughing like a madman.
Killdisko Webzine Oh, you’re one of those empty-minded morons I see.
Just to be accurate, since this is a 'history' channel, the Chilean military didn't just surround the presidential palace, they BOMBED it.
Good. Allende was a Marxist
Shane M No, that is not good. Just because someone has different beliefs than you doesn’t mean they should be attacked.
Shane M Stupid
@@STM1066 what an enlightened response
Dante's Rants They should if their ideas cause mass starvation.
also, the military didn't surround the palace: they bombed it
pretty sure they surrounded and entered the palace dude... As the story goes, they surrounded, Allende suicided, miltary came in and found him dead....
It was bombed. Read Ariel Dorfman's book
@Mugan 11 I have lived in Chile for the past 9 years and my wife and kids are Chilean. Being a curious person, I have been quite interested in understanding how this excessively traumatic period of time has affected the Chilean People. It is the same curiosity which drove me to learn ask my grandfathers about (and read about) all the wars they fought in (WW1, WW2, & Korea). As Chile is excessively polarized (high and low class) I have had to pull from a great many sources. Basically I have tried to consume material (books, documentaries, people) from both political sides to try and get a full view of the situation, which isn't easy considering the polarization that contaminates both peoples viewpoints and the media's biases.
@@Herp234 Yeah, ok, they probably bombed it... I never said they didn't bomb it. I just said that they did surround it (as the op said that they didn't). I do obviously remember the iconic video of jets flying over the palace....
But anyway, even if they did bomb it, they didn't do a very good job of it... I have seen pictures of it after the event and it sure doesn't look bombed.... It isn't a pile of rubble.... I don't know how much you know about the presidential palace (La Moneda), but it isn't thaaat big... Must have been a pretty small bomb if Allende was inside and the cause of death was a gunshot and you can't see collapsed walls and such....
besides, if they bombed it, it almost even supports my point. If they bombed the palace while Allende was in it, why didn't he leave the palace? Probably because there where tanks and soldiers in every direction I imagine...
@@jonm3024 You are right they did surround the palace. And I'm not sure what it looked like afterwards, however Dorfman described what used to be the balcony as a "black hole".
It’s definitely way past time that you redo this topic! I hate the numerous the non-committal points that you discussed when we have US government declassified documents that clearly state involvement in so many of the points that you acted like were up to personal taste/opinion instead of stating the actual historical fact. When retelling history the only important thing is giving an accurate account and paying no mind to how those events are seen in the current time.
It’s not easy to obtain people like Rene Schneider nowadays, a true patriotic and remarkable soldier who couldn’t be corrupted , he was never tempted to hijack the power for himself when the opportunity presented itself, respected constitution and let the democracy prevail, he had a class of his own, if he had survived maybe he could’ve become a next president of chile. Much love from a fan of history from Tanzania 🇹🇿 East africa.
ALLENDE was more than a "cold war socialist" he was a tremendous visionary:
1.- In 1972, he was already denouncing the Globalist corporatism that today runs our lives worldwide (at ONU);
2.- He personally did not want a "Socialist Revolution" by means of weapons (unfortunately many of his coalition did want it) but through popular elections (1st country in the world where Socialism did not come to power by means of weapons);
3.- His own government created long before digital interconnection existed (Internet, etc.) a proto-digital system called SYNCO (cyber socialism).
PS. I am not a socialist but I am not blind to reality.
Greetings from Santiago of Chile 🇨🇱, South America.
Completely warrants a redo by this point with the admissions the US government has made about the situation and for numerous factual errors people in chat have noted
Oh wow, a techbro misrepresenting history? What a shocker!
They're not factual errors, they're deliberate omissions.
@@Diego-zz1df potato, potahto, don't get lost in the semantics; should they redo the video? Yes.
Salvador Allende was elected with under 36% of the vote, and proceeded to turn Chile into a robber state on the way to full blown Fascism. The Allende government ignored the constitution and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists. This is the part that was omitted.
@@kasimirfreeman Dude do you know how voting works? A party can win with 36% of the votes. Also, robber state? Fascism? Yeah that's totally what happened.
The former officer in charge of the army is killed by some radical right wings paid by the CIA? Allende's fault, for sure.
Pinochet makes a coup d'état? Totally justified and actually it was the people who asked for it, not just a richer minority. Of course, the facts only support it. And after Allende's fascist state ended, Pinochet made Chile great again, no doubt.
Great story, so who are you selling this to? Hollywood? Nah, this looks more a Bollywood kind-of movie. Marxist terrorist... You're the same kind of people that told a lot of parents that playing a boardgame made kids become cultists and killers. Scaremongering is pathetic. "The Marxists are coming". The authoritarians are coming, and your kind is paving the way.
Um.... You forgot the March 1973 parliamentary elections where Allende's party won by around 40% of the vote, INCREASING his popularity. Also the famous phrase said by Nixon when undermining Allende, saying "make Chile's economy scream!".
Why might people vote for their own starvation?
@@conveyor2 they didn´t vote for Pinochet! It was a morderous fascist coup that threw them in starvation....
@The Law But genocide was literally commited and the economy completely tanked. Homelessness and unemployment soared to record highs, people were disappeared, imprisoned and murdered.
@The Law 1. 'Condor Time. Like Pinochet and his allies have planted terrorism on three continents' John Dinges
2. 'Storm Over Chile: The Junta Under Siege' Samuel Chavkin
3. 'Latin American fever' Artur Domosławski
4. '100 biggest murderers''. William L. Wolcott
5. 'The most dangerous dictators in history' Shelley Klein
6. 'La Vanguardia' Alfred Rexach
7. 'Formas de solver a casa' Alejandro Zambra
8. 'Mano de obra' Diamela Eltit
@The Law 'I am an officer and I have my honor. I will never try to put responsibility for the orders I gave on my subordinates. However, I expected the same from my supervisor, with whom I consulted all my decisions. Unfortunately I was disappointed. In my eyes he is nothing'.
and
'Pinochet is a coward and a man without honor, he deserving no respect'.
Manuel Contresas - the former head of DINA.
In September 2014, the CIA admitted what we all knew for a long time, that they did this. Claims that "we don't know how much involvement" no longer have that particular veneer of respect.
we should be holding these accounts with pride
They didn’t have much involvement at all except to approve of it, but whatever fits your pro-Allende narrative
@@TheLocalLt It is not a pro-Allende narrative it is a factual narrative. YOU PEOPLE have been disgraced because your Pinochet dictatorship wasnt wonderful
@@Atmost11 if it’s “factual”, what part did the CIA play in the coup? You won’t be able to tell me because they had none. They did try to possibly instigate a coup or at least get Allende banned in 1970 but their local collaborators botched it and killed a gov’t official, this actually helped Allende get elected. After that Nixon told the CIA to bring Allende’s economy “to its knees”, which they helped to do over the next three years, paying for strikes and anti-socialist demonstrations. However when the coup actually happened in 1973, the CIA had nothing to do with it, except to give a thumbs up when it was in progress. It was 100% planned, organized and executed by Chilean staff officers in the army, navy, and air force, even Pinochet didn’t know it was happening until he was told about it that morning. He then took command and the rest is history, but the point is that the CIA had nothing to do with the actual coup.
@@TheLocalLt You might not have heard, but a few years back the CIA admitted to doing the Pinochet coup. For a long time they denied it, but they admitted it now. Look it up
The problem with "Roberto Viaux belives the military should be actively overthrowing dictators" is that Allende was not a dictator.
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
@@Sebastian-zn3dx Well first of all he didn't use guerrilla terrorism to come into power "through armed and violent means." This is why he had to be stopped because it screwed with America's simplified rhetoric. Kissinger tried to break democracy before Allende was ever democratically elected. Once that failed, they overthrew a democratically elected president and installed a dictator through armed insurrection. The facts couldn't be more contradicting to your argument.
@@Sebastian-zn3dx literally everything you just said is wrong. Allende was democratically elected and appointed as president, notoriously didn’t use violent means, publicly and diplomatically lobbied against the chokehold American industry put on Chile, and the Allende government was actively gaining more support prior to the CIA orchestrated coup. Allende was not a dictator.
@@upnhere8513 please correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember that the CIA actually assassinated the Commander-in-chief of the Chilean Army in order to lead an military uprise, René Schneider（Who got assassinated) was an honourable general who believed exclusively in military-political mutuality
Yeah, I couldn't believe my ears when it came to this part... Was Allende a dictator? A Marxist doesn't mean that.
If you're doing South American history at the moment, don't forget the 1964 Brazilian coup d'état, Perón & Eva in Argentina between 1940s-1970s, Che Guevara in Cuba/Bolivia, and US involvement in the governments of Guatemala/Nicaragua/El Salvador.
They should also do a video covering Allende's government and the September 11, 1973 coup.
so wishy washy and didn't even mention Operacion Condor masterminded by Henry Kissinger.
@Endless Weapons Is that fish?
Operation Condor was not masterminded by Kissinger. If anything it was founded by Chile and Argentina, with the U.S. simply providing support to an operation that would have already gone ahead with or without U.S. support
@@TWE_2000 still is a big part which is usually omitted, specially when the interlocutor speaks English
I think he wants to avoid upsetting people who don't like Allende because of his Marxism - unfortunate, as this lead to omissions of real facts about what happened and the wider context. A historian covering events such as this is going to alienate some people no matter what, and the truth should be more important than the viewer count
Operation condor was necessary to defeat Cuban Communist influence in South American. America actually had nothing to do with the Chilean or Argentine coups, or operation condor for that matter, but they did approve of them to enforce the American sphere of influence which already had been punctured in Cuba. As Nixon said communists in Chile and Argentina would create a “red sandwich”
You're missing a lot of context that led to the price controls in Chile...
Like the US deliberately funding Trucker strikes, that led to the blocking off the trade and distribution of goods within Chile.
Also he wasn't implementing "Marxist" policies without it being approved by the OPPOSITION controlled congress.
Kind of disappointed with the lack of detail, Khan Academy
Why was a strike even necessary? Was it because truckers were fed up of dealing with very high inflation for which Allende's policies contributed? It is easy to blame USA and CIA for everything. Part of the blame is definitely Allende's absolutely disastrous economic policies. The statistics do not lie. Look up inflation rates in Chile in 1970,1971,1972,1973. No one would have been prone to striking if there wasn't hyperinflation.
@@ForTimtwopointzero Please do not try to reason with fanatics. Just insult them and ask them to go to your crowdfunding page for a fleet of helicopters.
@@ForTimtwopointzero Trucker strike was a huge reason for the inflation.
@@HaploPrime Incorrect. Look at the actual inflation statistics before and after Allende was elected.
@@ForTimtwopointzero I'll look at the figures over a nice glass of Pinochet '73. Oddly, it's red and it travels well - especially in helicopters.
PD: this video is missing the whole ussr involvement in allende's regime, this guy was heavily helped by the warsaw pact with money, weapons and information.
Good video as always. Though I have a minor criticism: it seems unnecessary to point out who is a good guy / bad guy. Just let the viewer decide from the facts your provide.
Correct! The point is that the video doesn’t show the facts, but the leftist view of them.
@@lautarob how is this a leftist view?
@@noanikqi1721 pretty obvious sir: not a single mention to the Russian activities to help Allende, not a single mention to the influence of Fidel Castro in the GAP an other paramilitary groups promoted by Allende, not a single mention to the continuous Allende’s contempt with the other democratic powers in Chile (congress, Supreme Court and comptroller) and many others.
@@lautarob But there was also not a single mention of right wing paramilitary groups like Patria y Libertad nor the German torture camps such as Villa Dignidad and Villa Baviera which unsurprisingly were run by Nazi refugees and there's evidence of Joseph Mengele's precense in those camps.
The video doesn't explicitly endorse Allende either, he only called Shcneider a "good guy" for not wanting to have a coup and Pinochet a "bad guy" because political prosecution, murder and torture are crimes universally agreed to be bad things, or at least to everyone except Pinochetists
@@noanikqi1721 Democratically elected president is overthrown in coup staged by a foreign power and what follows is years of brutal, fascistic dictatorship.
Geniuses: Hey don't try to tell me who the good or bad guy is here alright
and how come the United States have the right to decide what the government of Chile has to be like?
Because we're stronger and socialismo no functiona.
Rabid Caboose lol what about the Chilean monetary crisis that Pinochet caused. I’m from a post socialist country and I can definitely tell you that socialism works.
@@theta3302 where are you from? Because if it's from a "post Soviet" communist nation. Then it's not a "true Marxist state", because a "true Marxist state" is like Venezuela or North Korea. And look where that's gotten them?
@@kalebthehistorian5928 As a historian you might find it interesting to learn that US economic sanctions imposed on Venezuela have contributed to tens of thousands of deaths in the country. Here's the analysis cepr.net/images/stories/reports/venezuela-sanctions-2019-04.pdf
I love how the Kaleb guy literally just made up "marxist state" even though Marx was anarchistic, and they're talking about socialism... the guy is mixing and mashing his terminology.
You are missing the most important issue. If Allende wanted Cuban regime, he has been done it longtime before Pinochet replace general Prats
@Endless Weapons false, why Allende didn't do it in 3 years? Meanwhile Pinochet arrest and killed people as soon as he seized power. You are fascist
Tuck What does that have to do with this?
@@bvaldes3703 pinochet had military access thats why.
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
@@Sebastian-zn3dx owning marxism by becoming a fascist. Wow
One correction required. At the time of Allende, Kissinger was NOT Secretary of State. He was National Security Advisor.
Actually you are correct. However just few weeks later after this operation by the end of September of the same year he was rewarded to Secretary of State. "coincidently"
So are you ever going to re-do this video? 10 years is more than enough time to revise your perspective on this event given the CIA’s admission of deep involvement, and the easily accessible understanding of American neo-liberal strong-arming of Chilean industry. Not to mention Allende was never a dictator, nor a violent threat to democratic values.
I think you may want to look further into this. I have read that Fidel Castro was providing armament to Allende, so he can eventually stay in power just like him.
@@Thomas-rj9kl what’s the source? Though I’ve never read any academic literature suggesting that to be true, the notion of a communist in Fidel Castro supporting another latin communist in Allende with a coup on the horizon is not ridiculous. Allende didn’t need arbitrary military force to stay in power, he was elected by a majority in a free and fair democratic process. The only reason he would need arms to maintain power, is as a safety-measure against a US-backed military coup to overthrow his perfectly legitimate government.
@@SweetieWithAHat You may very well say that, but look at other examples in Latin America where communist leaders have staid in power beyond what one would call democratic. It's a true fact that in Chile we found a lot of military weapons hidden by the MIR , I know because I was a kid in the 80s in Chile aware of those news. Well now that history is repeating itself down there with Allende 2.0 (Boric), we'll but this question to the test and come back here in a decade or so and see how things turns out! By the way, have you ever wonder why Latin America is so poor and behind compare to Asia?
@@Thomas-rj9kl Aware of news... from Chile... in the 80s. Under Pinochet. That's called propaganda lmao.
Free helicopter ride offer for you sir
I wish this was more factual and less opinionated.
@Jay 2A Wayback history
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
@@Sebastian-zn3dx based
@@Sebastian-zn3dx Not even close
@@Sebastian-zn3dx That's not true. He was a Liberator. The Tyrants were the Capitalists and the CIA.
René Schneider's death was a story on its own: he was kidnapped by a group within the military who wanted to use him to push the armed forces to take action against allende. But those kidnappers had been infiltrated by mir agents who shot him and fled the scene, they spoiled the kidnappers' plan and delayed the coup d'etat roughly 2 years. It was top notch spy drama.
Chilean here. MIR means Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria (Revolutionary Left Movement, basically, a guerrilla army). However, the intellectual authors of Gen. René Schneider attempted kidnapping and assassination were Gen. Roberto Viaux and Gen. Camilo Valenzuela, who were convicted for their crimes. Declassified CIA documents revealed they were financed by the CIA. There were so many MIR agents infiltrated there as there were Antifa and FBI agents storming the Capitol on January 6.
Please, prove me wrong *with sources.*
So, the point is unlike what's been reported in many western stories Rene's Schneider's death did not come during the kidnapped. He was kidnapped, controlled, then assassinated.
My country was communist and took chilean communist refugees but the funny part is that when they actually saw how communism work they left the communist countries to be refugees in Sweden and West Germany.
hahahaahahahahahahahahah
Your country was probably Soviet style socialist not Democratic style
I've got quite interested in this & US involvement in South America in general and would suggest that the US is all for democracy as long as it suits them, interesting stuff is the School of Americas & the IMF/World Bank operate/get their money. There seems a lot of blind 'flag waving' and conflation with 'Capitalism' in the comments. Also a artificial binary placed on Communism & Capitalism. One of the things I've noticed in all this (& modern stuff like Iraq/Afghanistan is, like the 'Domino Effect', how much of what is assigned as 'Communism' is in fact nationalism & the aim of self determination. The simple question to ask is how much would the US accept behaviour towards them of a similar nature?
*AHEM* You forget that the KGB were the one's who were helping Allande.
@@kalebthehistorian5928 By giving him loans, which they stopped doing when he refused to be a puppet.
It’s pretty simple: if you can’t build your own businesses and other countries companies have to get your resources out of the ground for you, it’s impossible (and rightfully so) to kick those companies out without doing some type of Marxist nationalization program, and yes the other country is usually going to resist pretty hard and try to hold their position, especially when the opposition is openly Marxist such as in Chile.
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
haha
"I'll just put some unambiguous horns on him."
wow 10/10 definitely not biased...
I think many ppl acctually dont know how horrible Pinochets Coup was, the world knew at the time. Many ppl say today that the journalist at the time didnt know about the concentration camps and torture that was happening within the country, this is false.
The journalist knew about the horrors, one swedish journalist Leonardo Henrichsen was shot by a chilean officer in a jeep the day the coup started because he was recording the horrors of the coup on the street. Jan Sandquist his colleague tryid desperately to save him but almost lost his life aswell. Another swedish journalist Henrik Janbell barely escaped being sent to one of the many concentration camps for torture, after the horrible crimes against humanity he witnessed he commit his life to help refugees escape Chile, totaling around 25,000 to Sweden.
Just flat out not true that Chile's economy did well under Pinochet. *Average annual growth under him was 1.6%* (increased to 7% over the decade after), *unemployment and poverty skyrocketed to 18% and 45%,* respectively. Even inflation was still incredibly high, 80% during Pinochet's rule. 1986 GDP per capita was lower than that of 1973! Social democratic reforms in the years after Pinochet were what created significant growth and poverty reduction, not economic liberalization.
Also, Allende was not a Marxist-Leninist (i.e., Soviet communist) as you seem to believe, but a relatively moderate socialist who was known for his commitment to democracy rather than violent revolution.
Many other details are incorrect about here, too, but these are probably the most egregious in this video. It sounds like this video came out of an early 2000s textbook written by a poorly funded state board of education.
Came here through being interested in Gustavo fring lmao
😉
what right did the soviet union had to decide which government the hungarians, czechslovakians, east germans, poles etc etc have?
Soviet Union had nothing to do with Allende being elected...
Chilean people did that
Two wrongs dont make a right
Neither the soviet nor American have the right to do that. If you want to use this argument to devalue Allende, remember that Allende didnt side with the Soviet. He was elected in a democratic way, and didnt implement authoritarian rule like most countries did. Instead he implemented peaceful and progressive reforms, in a democratic way, which costed his life. (Cuz the US empire didnt want to see him succeed)
Junta in this context means a comittee of the heads of the 4 branches of the military.
@@puppet1-170 Viva mi general
@@puppet1-170 ok boomer
@@puppet1-170 no, like a 2020 survivor of communism
@@puppet1-170 lol no - most people barely survive socialism. In Venezuela they mass exodus to the US and vote against Biden/Harris...they know the truth!
Pretty good video but missing a few things. For example, you bring up the "counter argument that the CIA would not have wanted to assassinate Schneider because that would have only made Alleinde more popular." But, like you said, it was meant to be a kidnapping attempt that went wrong when they shot Schneider. The plan before the shooting of Schneider was to claim Alleinde supporters kidnapped Schneider and would not release him until Congress voted to approve of Alleinde's steps into office. The idea was that the kidnapping of Schneider would have made the public look at Alleinde's supporters as a violent mob that would have been dangerous to run the country and thus support for Alleinde would plummet. But the plan failed because Schneider was shot. I'm not saying I'm an Alleinde supporter, but that counter argument fails to take into account why the plan was to kidnap Schneider in the first place.
Also, there are a lot of comments on bias here. And while you're clearly opinionated on what the facts mean, that does not mean the facts are wrong. You might have missed a few things, but what you did say are indeed things that happened. As a historian, I must say that this is one of the most headache inducing aspects of what I do. I get it from my conservative friends and from my Marxist friends, "If the facts don't align with what I believe politically, then we can simply say you're biased shrug our shoulders and pretend this never happened." It seems most agree that we need to learn from the mistakes of the past to have a brighter future; however, the more I observe, the more depressed I am when I notice that we haven't even made it to the first hurtle first. We cannot begin to learn from the past because we are so tribal in our politics that bringing up a fact of the past that is potentially uncomfortable, it becomes commonplace to simply ignore that fact and tarnish the speaker. I'm not saying there aren't people who embellish the truth or lie to match an agenda, but that's why we have peer reviewed journals... Or at least, that's why we're suppose to. But in this day and age where everyone is an expert on everything, blog historians have overtaken peer reviewed research in the popular minds of citizens.
I am interested to learn about this period of Chilean history, but I don’t know where to start....
What/where do you recommend ?
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
Indeed
Well said my friend.
Hindsight is 20/20 vision.
Personal bias is human.
@@Sebastian-zn3dx You are Misguided and Misled My Friend.... Another One Gone
You omitted a key factor between 1970 and 1973, which was both Congress and Supreme Court condemning the President for constitutional violations and armed robbery. The military was responding to a popular demand to end these right violations.
The economy crashed again in 1982, 14% of the work force had to apply to govt. "make work" programs that paid less than minimum wage, while investors enjoyed a massive public bailout that ended up costing 10% of Chile's annual GDP.
By 1990 average wages were 10% less than they were in 1970, before Pinochet.
deeponeperfectmorning exactly, and the 27.3% unemployment rate he caused, and the monetary crisis. I’m from a post socialist country and would definitely want the old days back. 1/5 Americans live in absolute poverty lol and they wanna tell us how to run our economy
Thank you for explaining in a simple way. I have tried to understand what happened in chile with several books and materials and none of it made sense.
By the way he wasn't a capitalist. He really didn't have any political views and for the first couple years he followed many of Allende economic policy's to failure.
At the time of the military coup. I was teaching school in Medellin Colombia. I was preparing to travel to Arica Chili. The border was closed. And sandbags were unplaced outside of the American Embassy in Medellin. The news there reported what was happening with live videos of the coup. It was obvious that the CIA was involved. 1973. I made it to Ecuador. And lived inOtovalo tutoring the Katchur Indians. What a long strange trip it’s been.
@ 4:42 why do you call allende a dictator, he got the highest number of votes
Highest number of votes, but he didn't win the majority votes. He won ike 36% of the votes, which meant 64% of the votes weren't for him. The 64% figure later came from the votes of the Democratic Christian Party too
Also he tried to remove the influence of Chile's Congress and the courts back then. He wasn't really a dictator, but he did try to shift Chile to an authoritarian socialist state
morphy 360 Does that make him a dictator?
Hitler got the highest number of votes too 😃
@@rexchiliae Completely ignoring how Hitler orchestrated a Reichstag burning that gave him dictatorial powers. By the way CAPITALISTS from all around the world FINANCED Hitler. He was not a socialist at all.
Better video than I thought
You _think_ they would've been worse? I guess human rights violations aren't a big deal after all. I had it all wrong. Thanks, pepe.
"I don't care about how anything turns out just as long as it's legal" -the only good guy in all of this
yeh OK buddy
What General Schneider meant is "whoever wins will assume the presidency" because that was the law.
That is how democracy works.
These comments are a horror show.
@Alex Libman Allende was a socialist, supported by a coalition of political parties and movements, among which were the communists, socialists, the MIR, Christian Democrats and others.
@ okay. That's certainly an opinion that you have. I agree. I don't think capitalism works either.
@ haha, cool. I'm glad we can agree something.
Personally, I'm not sure what would work best, but lean towards a mix of both. It's hard to balance reasonable wealth with reasonable equity, though, that's something I'm sure about.
What are your opinions? I'd love to hear!
Alex Libman apparently not, this crime against humanity was perpetrated by Capitalists, you brainwashed maroon
@@deathless3518 Why do you say that?
This was a great video for using but a single frame the whole time. I also see that it's old compared to now. 3 million subs? You probably did well to deserve it!
The economy did not do well under pinochet... real wages stagnated all the years of his rule... wealth became much more concentrated at the top... calories consumed by the poor dropped during his rule... real wages of the poor dropped too... the economy had a silver lining in that the rich were able to consume much more... luxury shops expanded... but the consumption of the poor did not expand... public education was placed into private hands... a huge cause of yearly strikes even to this day.
R.I.P SALVADOR ALLENDE
"junta" just means together or combined in Spanish.
But the context xD
No, in this case it's more like a "meeting". A meeting of the military, that is, a military group.
Your leaving out alot of important details
I wish my teacher should have explained me the way you explained in just fifteen minutes.
Salvador Allende was only a Marxist tyrant, his dream was to make Chile another socialist dictatorship through armed and violent means. The Allende government broke democracy and for this reason the vast majority of Chileans, as well as the Chilean Judiciary and the National Congress, asked the military to overthrow the Allende government and repress its Marxist terrorists.
In this series of videos about 20th century I hear new names from important people all over the world who played effective role in the history of their country in particular and in the world history as a whole. So, here in Salvador Allende and Pinochet.
Just because the CIA were sympathetic doesn't mean they were directly involved don't pretend like the kgb weren't doing the same if not far worse
Y si, Allende cometió todos los errores que nunca debió haber cometido, pero no fue un dictador ni un asesino.
Allende podrá ser asesino, torturador, borracho, viejo verde, comunista, pero nunca una estrella de porno
The "economic miracle" is nonsense. After Pinochet wages fell by 65% and unemployment exploded.Most of the profits came from extractive industries like copper, which Pinochet wisely renationalized after his first policies bombed. (Much of this growth came from capital investments the govt. made before him.)
Besides mining Chile also specialized in export agriculture (apples, grapes, etc) that were done usually unsustainably and had little value added.
Nice touches: 11:54, 12:59
@AQGOAT24 true. But I believe it is the role of the khanacademy to actually do check what they publish. They are a great source of knowledge, IMHO, this kind of video plays against their quality levels and hence: reputation. What saddens me in the bottom line, is really that putting this in a US centric vision of the world the video/project looses reach.
The US is the center of the world
you have a talent for teaching IDK much about politics but i learn alot from your vids because it's from a General Human Being point of view not a democrat, capitalist, communist, etc. thank you. :)
it's refreshing to see nice people in this comment section
Actually, the main thing that hurt the economy was not price controls and increased wages, but American companies refusing to sell machinery parts. The first couple of years, things improved greatly. Inflation actually increased during the first two years of the dictatorship.
Yup, from what I’ve seen, working class wages and consumption was increasing, production was increasing, and this was despite the managerial and owner class going on “strike”, but as I understand it the workers completed their jobs as usual anyways.
You're trying to downplay the role of the US in the demise of Allende. They masterminded the whole thing!
they just didn't though
Venezuela you’re next?
@A Scam Involving Corndogs dude, venezuela can't get any worse, even being helped by Isis would be fine
Hopefully, Maduro has got to go
I remember when being an open Marxist was looked at negatively.
Yay, Latin America. This is great stuff. I expect there to be a history of everything on your site & on here within a few years, Khan!!!
You have my undying appreciation for bringing all of this knowledge to the masses.
"Unfortunately for America and unfortunately for Chile, this guy is one of those big time tyrants."
Lolz xD
i only subscribed yesterday (because of your hem vids) and i already respect you as an individual, you for free, spend your time trying to help others learn while at the same time trying to be impartial and even telling people to on some level and check information independently
Chilean economy did "well" just fore some, for look what happened on October 2019 that led to writing a new constitution (in the works) and made Gabriel Boric, a student leader, president this year, amongst many other social, cultural and political changes we`ve been going through.
Why wouldn't Salvadore Allende be considered an unambiguous good guy.? He followed his beliefs won the plurality and kept his promise to the people. And for being a person of integrity he paid for it with his life. To me that's an unambiguous good guy!
Im not Chilean but i agree with that.I know his decision in economy may not work out,but it definitely can be fixed over time with his party.Throwing a dictator in to rule the country instead of keeping a democratically elected leader is the worst thing we can ever think of
Super! This was really good.!!!!
Yes, the economy did well during that time (as long as you weren't on 'the list') :) Good scaffold video.
As long as you weren't poor you mean
The chilean miracle of Pinochet's government is a myth. The economy remained stagnant throughout his entire tenure and it only started to grow with the governments of Concertación. Pinochet apologists like to take credit for all of it, as if everything was part of the same Pinochetist whole. As minimal as they were, the post-dictatorial governments implemented crucial reforms to deal with the country's stagnation and promote growth. You can google Chile's GDP if you don't believe me. In fact, if you wanna know when the chilean economy really skyrocketed, it was during the center-left governments of socialists Ricardo Lagos and Michelle Bachelet.
@@Diego-zz1df You're right about Pinochet. I do not apologize for him, nor for Milton Friedman who advised him on fiscal policy. However, I'm also not a socialist either. Democracy and capitalism are essential to each other, two sides of the same coin.
what's up with AT&T and Allende?
With respect, I know it is hard to get all the facts, but you left out some key points:
1) Congress, upon electing Allende president, did so on the condition that he sign a formal document declaring that he not bring the country into Socialism & Communism. I’m pretty sure it stated that such acts were grounds for removal from office too.
2) Allende was overstepping his authority to forcibly bringing Chile into a fully socialist and communist nation.
3) Left wing extremists were assassinating their political opposition throughout the time that Allende was in Power.
4) Congress and the courts declared that Allende was overstepping and requested that the military remove him from office. Meaning that in this case, the coup was legal and constitutional. (For example, would you say that it was illegal if Trump lost in his impeachment process, didn’t step down, and the military was forced to remove him? This is actually a pretty close parallel to what happened in Chile.)
5) When this decision was taken, there were arms being shipped from the Soviet Union and their puppet states in order to arm Allende’s army effectively initiating a civil war.
6) The Chilean economy was collapsing under Allende, there was a food shortage, and malnutrition was a real risk for many. (points to you for recognizing both sides of Pinochet’s free-market shock economic recovery program)
7) The justification for not having elections was that democracy had just failed to provide a government which adequately protected the population. This may not be enough to justify the removal of democracy, depending on where you stand. But, for many Chileans (maybe even a majority at the time), it was.
8) After like 18 years, and after a vote, Pinochet peacefully and willingly returned the country to democracy. This is something that I don’t think has ever happened under any other Latin American Dictatorship (even if it may have been overdue after 17ish years - this issue is still debated in Chile).
9) While it is undeniable that Pinochet was brutal in his treatment of his political opposition, so was his opposition. Many here in Chile believe that Pinochet saved Chile from a worser fate, that being communism. This position is seconded by many who live in other Latin American countries where dictatorships haven’t relinquished power and the consequences of those regimes were much more dire (Venezuela, Argentina, Colombia, Bolivia, Panama, etc…).
I’d like to let you know that I am not really on either side of this, I interact with Chileans on a daily basis and it truly does seem that living under Pinochet was no cake walk. But this situation was quite a bit more complex than simply the CIA interfering with a foreign government. This was the Cold War, both sides were guilty of interference, and in many respects, we (the USA) were better stewards than our counterparts. Nobody can say what the world would look like if the US didn’t participate in the cold war, but a fair number of books & movies have imagined gloomy alternate futures in which Communism conquered. There are arguments to support our participation in these conflicts and it isn’t so Black and White.
In the spirit that the author of the vid sets forth at the beginning of this vid, I invite you to read from various sources on both sides of the fence, verify or debunk my perspectives based on the various sources I have read over the years, and come to your own conclusions.
Jon M As a former Council Officer in an Indigenous Native American Tribe , I can say now that although a “negative official leaves” for whatever reason we certainly can’t assume that office will be served by a “positive” one.
I held several terms as an elected position and when it got aggressively exhausting I acquired some Great Wisdom from a Tribal Elder...Always consider the opposition as a gift. 🙇🏻♀️🙏🏽❤️🕊🇺🇸
@@stephallan2543 Thanks for your reply!
In regards to your 1st paragraph, I would certainly agree! In fact, any change should be carefully measured as to replace with something better (This in no way detracts from the value & need for change).
In regards to your 2nd paragraph, I am a bit confused as to the message you wish to communicate. could you elaborate?
"many in Chile believe Pinochet saved them from communism" so why did boric get elected then
@@dariolol3565 I'm assuming that you don't actually want an answer to that as the 2 things can obviously co-exist.
This part of subject in highschool in us?
Allende *was* indeed a Marxist, and *did* admire Castro, but his domestic policies were *very* different from Castro's. Allende, unlike Castro, believed in freedom and human rights.
Chile has a complex, globally unique political system (there are not one but two different kinds of coalitions there). Allende's electoral coalition won the 36% plurality, and then formed a congressional coalition that had 78% support. But that coalition was shaky and collapsed. That left the Allende administration with an opposition-controlled Congress.
Allende's electoral coalition included both the Socialist and the Communist parties. The Socialist Party was ideologically diverse and contained a far-left segment that was to the left of the Communist Party (and the latter was actually moderate left, advocating basically social democratic policies, at the time).
Allende's economic policies were initially successful: poverty went down, and the economy expanded. The problems came later. Some were almost certainly due to the policies themselves. Others were due to deliberate economic sabotage by the USA and Allende's opponents. Kissinger and Nixon deliberately created economic disruption in Chile. There was also foreign interference aimed at disrupting Allende's efforts to rebuild his shattered Congressional coalition.
I am not aware of any lack of basic political freedoms under Allende. The mass media remained mostly under the control of Allende's wealthy opponents and freely excoriated Allende daily. There were regular anti-Allende political protests that were allowed to freely take place.
The economy did not do well under Pinochet. There were some severe contractions and deregulation-induced crises under Pinochet. There was overall growth over the 17 years, yes, but it was not shared amongst all in society. The rich benefited greatly, the middle class to some degree, the poor not at all. Poverty rate was over 40% under Pinochet, and only started going down after Pinochet left and democracy was restored.
Pinochet was not just another Latin American strongman, he was probably the worst dictator South America saw during the 20th century. His government was a state sponsor of international terrorism. Google the names "Orlando Letelier" and "Carlos Prats" for starters.
David Barts can you even comprehend how people in comments are defending Pinochet just because he deposed a “communist”. Like you said Pinochet was directly responsible for the disappearance of thousands of people.
Allende didnt believe in human rights, you're so wrong.
David C. Yes he did
@@Cuban20 how could he believe in human rights when he protected anarchists stealing lands, land owners even died and he did nothing to stop that.
We need a Pinochet to give all Marxists free helicopter rides!
3:50 I don't think you should say that a military general who blindly follows the president is a moral figure. I think we should all know from history that "simply following orders" isn't a justification for evil behavior. Sometimes defending your own nation means resisting the leadership.
For a 15 min summary it's very good. Some details: Allende wasn't Marxist, he was socialist. Allende never put in danger free press, the largest newspaper El Mercurio had all the freedom during his period to express opinion. USA supported strongly Pinochet until the killing of a former Allende Minster and his USA citizen secretary in Washington by the Chilean secrete services (they put a bomb in the car just couple of blocks from the White House. Finally, Pinochet finish his period in 1990, thereafter he used his military position only to protect himself and his circle, but he didn't rule the country.
In the 1970s, anyone socialist was automatically called a Marxist. Today it's anyone who is in favor of ANY policy unless it primarily helps those MOST wealthy get even more wealth. Even not being enthusiastic enough about helping the 43 top billionaires get more money.
I was in Chile when the dog was elected. They said he was more communist than the Communist Party of Chile
Socialist and Marxists only destroy anything they touch
rodctenis Allende was too soft, he needed a heavier hand against the right wing scum
thx for the conciseness of your video
VIVA CHILE PINOCHET
NoSoyRapero
Recuerde a los disaparacidos bajo Pinochet. I was there from 72-74 and am ashamed of my country for the damage done to Chile. Left alone, Allende would have been voted out the next election and the many murdered and tortured by the Pinochet regime would have lived. Que lastima
NoSoyRapero Pinochet is dead yay!
Que Estupidos Pinochet SALVO EL PAIS EL MISMO QUE COMENTA EL VIDEO DICE QUE ALLENDE TENÍA PENSAMIENTOS COMO LOS DE CUBA O URSS INFÓRMENSE!!!
Well those 15 minutes sure flew :). Thanks for the neutral-stand video :D
Subjectively，allende did not implement extreme communism, he just want under such a social system to protect vulnerable groups, more but based on this platform, in the practical action appeared a lot of deprivation and assaults on private property, and a batch of the vital interests of the vested interests. Chile was a country dominated by comprador capitalism, and Allende tried to change that, but unfortunately, his opponents were too powerful. Allende was the democratically elected president of Chile, and his last moment of martyrdom was a defense of the rights and duties entrusted to him by his people.
Correct... You Just Said What Was On Mind... 👍👍👍👍👍
the only rational comment in the sea of larpers, soy facing at the thought of corny helicopter jokes
Pinochet and the legacy he left behind warrants its own 5-part video series. You can’t squeeze in a detailed summary of the Pinochet era in a 4 minute section of a video, but this more or less gives an accurate account of the events that took place.
The truth, however, is that Pinochet did a lot of good as well as a lot of bad. Leftists refuse to acknowledge this fact because they cannot fathom that so many CHILEAN people wanted the beloved Saint Allende out of office, not just the American leadership.
Pinochet implemented measures that saved Chile from a terrible famine and established both a strong private sector and a separate, public utility system for the poor. The healthcare and educational programs that so many praise today are directly built on the foundation that the Pinochet regime placed.
Yes, Pinochet was a complicated man, but why don’t leftists ever comment on Videla from Argentina or Stroessner from Paraguay? You know, openly fascist dictators that stole, raped, and destroyed minority communities in their respective countries. There are far more radical dictators, especially in Latin America, that the Left could criticize the U.S. for supporting. Pinochet is rather irrelevant on that front.
That’s not even mentioning how Pinochet threw the Chilean oligarchy into jail. He was hated by the country’s richest classes because he destroyed the corruption and the growing black markets that were flourishing because of Allende’s failures.
Also, Allende himself appointed Pinochet as head of the military when he was president. Even using Allende supporters’ logic, you’d have to either admit that Allende made a grave mistake in appointing Pinochet to that position or that Pinochet simply took matters into his own hand and did what he deemed necessary to save his country from ruin.
At the end of the Pinochet era, he held a plebiscite that asked the citizenry if they wanted another 8 years of Pinochet or if they wanted to build “democracy,” which in turn would remove him from office. Ultimately, Pinochet lost, but he still won 46% of the vote. Nearly HALF of the country wanted Pinochet to remain in power, many of which were working class people that suffered under Allende, despite them being hopeful that a socialist government would bring them prosperity.
"because they cannot fathom that so many CHILEAN people wanted the beloved Saint Allende out of office."
Yet it was Allende who was elected in, not Pinochet, fascist muppet
"Not so pleasant chapter in world history." Pinochet killed ~30k people. I wonder how you would describe Mao's Great Leap Forward or the Holodomor.
3,000 not 30,000
Yes 3000 not 30000. Really not that many. That includes the disappearances.
For people interested in hearing more of this story from an on-the-ground but personal, fictionalized/novelized perspective, The House of the Spirits was a really good book (and was why I looked up this video, the story stayed with me and I wanted to know more about the CIA involvement, which the book doesn't really mention I don't think)
A very biased romanticized book wrote by a relative of Allende.
I love it how you put humor in your videos :)
Rest in Peace Salvador Allende.
I love how the commies and the fashies spew their radical views on here and claim ur biased.
In reality you mentioned both viewpoints and affecting factors on the nation.
Thx for this video its short good and not giving into the radicals with their one sided views
This was good. Very good teaching style.
Whoa, I just ran across this while watching some awesome Pinochet vids on UA-cam, Sal. lol! What's up?! The answer to 1917 is 1973! ;)
P.S. Milton Friedman & the Chicago Boys went down there to help Pinochet get the economy kicking. :)
@@JasonPizzolato Look for "The Shock Doctrine" documentary by Naomi Klein.
@@JasonPizzolato just write "jew", don't be an f-word
moral of the story is that the person who does the noble thing gets wacked first.
Dude, I'm from chile and this was a WAY better history lesson on the subject than the sum of all the history lessons I recieved DURING MY WHOLE SCHOOL LIFE
Which is embarassing. I only know this stuff cause I'm from a politically active family
Really interesting
Allende was literally a Soviet/KGB backed Marxist. He wasn't a liberal in any way. Marxist militias were being armed by the Soviets, assassinating politicians left and right. People in his party were talking about murdering *1 million Chileans* to accomplish their socialist paradise. They discussed *openly in public* the need for a socialist dictatorship. In comparison, Pinochet only killed a mere couple of thousand, most of them terrorists or socialist militiamen. Pinochet's Friedman inspired reforms are the reason Chile is today the best economy in Latin America. Take a look at Venezuela if you want to see what Chile would look like had Allende succeeded.
Also a commonly overlooked but important detail, the Chilean legislature ASKED for a military coup. They were desperate because they realized what the Communists were going to do. Pinochet was a hero. Not the hero they wanted, but the hero they needed.
Well said.
According the the disciples of Erdoğan, he only arrests terrorists so there can't be anything wrong with this...The soviets ended the nazi regime so the repressive methods they used were totally justified. Only fascists were killed...
You see how this is akin to your argument?
@@lineb98 most people the soviets killed were ukranians and minorities lmao not fascists
@@888nevik the soviets were part of the allied forces who combatted nazi germany. But they later installed the DDR and oppressed anyone who disagreed with stalinism, labeling them as fascists and class traitors
@@lineb98 the americans did the same so really yes from the point of view of the soviets it was perfectly justified yet theres also the difference that it was an occupation of a foreign country not chileans revolting against their goverment. Its more alike the spanish civil war.
There are already admissions by the cia about operation condor in Latin America. The USA was actively interfering in foreign governments all over Latin America at that time.
It's so ridiculous this attempt of staying neutral in this class. There is no such thing as neutral history.
Kissinger did not become Secretary of State until about two weeks after Pinochet took over power in Chile. Something to think about.
How can you be so neutral ? “I’ll let you decide who’s the bad guy who’s the wrong guy…” I don’t know if I’m the USA we teach this event like this but in France Allende is clearly an innocent radical social-democrat who was in the people’s side and Pinochet a cruel tyrant who repressed his people and is considered as a criminal. In France, they also teach us than the USA played the bad role by supporting the army in the putsch. Between 1970 and 73 the teach us Allende’s social realizations not only how was the right opposition and the expectations of USA I think this video is definitely too much politically oriented in right/pro-American side.. Dommage
I agree
First person to science up on this vid.Woo!
@hedonism13 I'd refer you to the wikipedia article on the matter:
Many here see Allende as a hero&martyr. many don't see Cuba as a failure but expl.
to many, 'marixst' isn't a bad word, 'capitalist' is, and thousands of death & life-long dictatorship isn't seen as a good price for economical success.
point: This video takes the negationist posture of ignoring the proved CIA strong involvement in all of LA especially at this period.
“Actively overthrowing dictators” the military actually supported Pinochet but why did you say that in Allende part like if the nationalization of industries and minimum wage increase was bad
Excellent. Could you do one on Iran and the CIA/MI6-backed overthrow of Mossaddegh, the reign of the Shah and how he was deposed by the Iranian revolution? I think it will help people understand the current situation down there better.
Great video, thanks! Just remember the "T" in Pinochet is not silent like it would be in French.
@Kelly Miles yeah that's because we are chilean and don't enounciate the letters at the end of words jajaja but you wouldn't argue "it's pronounced Lope" for a person named Lopez. it is not wrong to enounce the T at the end for us, we just fail to do it. people who get paid to talk properly in the news or in government videos do enounce the t.
Allende was a comunist and destroyed Chile with his comunist policies. Pinochet stoped comunism in Chile and transformed the countrywith free market policies. Although there were human rights violations in his regime I think with comunists would have been worse
pepetv1000 1982 monetary crisis? 27.3% unemployment rate, 70% fall in wages, human rights violations worse than in the USSR, literal cannibalism? I don’t think that’s “economic upheaval” that his great “laissez-faire” policies created
Sad that its not animated but its good
It's a wonder he didn't bankrupt the country with all the helicopter fuel expenditures.
how do you get the name René Schneider? that guy there is Carlos Prats Gonzalez, former chief of the military. After he resigned Pinochet came into this position...
What you say happened after Schneider was assassinated. The CIA used Pinochet to take over the government.