I have heard many people claim many things about Capitan General Augusto Pinochet, but never that he was fighting a war for "modern democracy."
A man who seized power, set up a military junta, invalidated the Constitution, canceled elections, banned political opposition, tortured those opponents to death and ruled with one party rule for nearly a quarter of a century was fighting for democracy?
You can't make an omelet without breaking and beating some eggs.
* "Allende is seeking the totality of power, which means Communist tyranny disguised as the dictatorship of the proletariat." — Statement from the National Assembly of the Chilean Christian Democratic party, May 15, 1973.
* "Of all of the leaders in the region, we considered Allende the most inimical to our interests. He was vocally pro-Castro and opposed to the United States. His internal policies were a threat to Chilean democratic liberties and human rights." — Henry Kissinger, Years of Renewal.
* "The Popular Unity government represented the first attempt anywhere to build a genuinely democratic transition to socialism — a socialism that, owing to its origins, might be guided not by authoritarian bureaucracy, but by democratic self-rule." — North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA) editorial, July 2003.
sounds like Augusto Pinochet chose the lesser of two evils
"[Pinochet] was fighting for democracy?" - Yes, for there's nothing more antidemocratic than communism.
What many people forget is that Salvador Allende did NOT win an electoral majority in 1970. He won only 36% of the vote. The conservative candidate Jorge Allesandri got 35%, and a candidate from the center-left Christian Democratic Party got 28%. Within a year of Allende's election, both the conservatives and CDP had formed a position against him, giving them a majority anti-Allende coalition in the legislature. In short, Allende was vehemently opposed by 2/3rds of the voters of Chile.
A few months before the 1973 coup the legislature declared Allende in violation of the Chilean constitution himself, for seizing and nationalizing private companies and farms. Viewed in light of those events, a strong case can be made that it was Allende himself who overthrew the constitution. Pinochet stepped in amidst an already existing constitutional crisis, forcefully ended it by ousting the main agitator Allende, and put events into motion for the restoration of democratic government, which was achieved again over the next two decades.
No, he was trying to preserve liberty for the majority of Chileans, which is a whole different thing
Pure democracy means that if 50%+1 vote to strip you of your property and your life, then that's it. The results of that are visible in Zimbabwe, among other places
In liberty, you can retain the fruits of your work without it being arbitrarily taken away. You can choose what you do for a living, without being assigned. And you can dare to hope your kids will have a better life. Under Pinochet, you had good cause to be afraid if you were attempting to undermine Pinochet's rule, and could get on with your life if you stayed out of that sphere.
As I've said before, Pinochet was better for the lives of the average Chilean than Allende would have been