[Egregious Philbin]

I think your liberal friends' drivel is just the biased view on the other side of this biased view. Allende was not a complete failure, Pinochet not a complete success. We did, in fact, help a military dictator to overthrow an elected socialist. What the people of Chile did not get was "liberation," rather an American-sponsored regime change that may have curbed socialism in Chile, but at the cost of democracy. Allende's potential damage to Chile is worse than the real damage caused by Pinochet? This spin, in particular, I find sickening:

It was also a teaching opportunity on freedom, the importance of limited government and the rule of law. It was a lob that the secretary could have hit out of the park, Allende's abuse of power being such a clear violation of classical liberal values and constitutional democracy. It was a chance to explain why even an elected president in Venezuela lacks the moral authority to trample individuals, press freedoms or property rights.

Freedom! A military dictatorship is not freedom. What about Pinochet's well-documented abuse of power, his violation of classical liberal values (other than economic) and constitutional democracy? It wasn't until 17 years later (17!) that Pinochet stepped down from power. A serious whitewash of his record. What gave Pinochet, the unelected president, the "moral authority" to trample individuals and press freedoms (oh, but he spared property rights!) The author calls Pinochet "the lesser of two evils." Here, she sounds like she sees no evil at all in Pinochet.

[chilepepper]

Allende's potential damage to Chile is worse than the real damage caused by Pinochet?

Absolutely. The dirty little secret the Left never mentions it that Chile was well on its way to a LEFTIST coup which would have installed another Castro, and it would STILL BE IN POWER, and Chile today would be more like Zimbabwe than like Spain or Portugal.

The days before the coup were ones of numerous assassinations and terror by the LEFT against the enemies who would stand in their way to total power. I have Chilean friends of both the left and the right and the picture of those days is quite different than the socialist written pap that passes for history...

[BlackElk]

Well, socialism is NOT freedom even if apparently sanitized by 36% in a "democratic" election. More relevantly, neither is communism freedom. Bear in mind that Dr. Allende was a communist. On September 11, 1973, Salvador Allende got what he deserved. Subsequently, Pinochet saw to it that there would be no epeat performances and that many Allende supporters got what they deserved. Communism, democratically elected or not, is NOT acceptable. It is per se a violation of many of the most important human rights and not only property rights.

Someone who argues for the continuation of democratically chosen communism ANYWHERE sounds like a fool or an enemy of freedom. Pinochet was a hero who saved Chile. If that spin bothers you, go back to Democrat Underground or have a few glasses of Beaujolais with Her Satanic Majesty, the junior Senator from New York.

Allende was not a complete failure. He made a very good target.

We should imagine you a conservative because.....???????

[Skywalk]

But classical liberal values have a LOT to do with the economic. Indeed without economic freedom there IS NO Freedom.

Conversely, simply being able to vote is worth far less than other institutional liberal values, as evidenced by voting in the Soviet Union.

[colorado tanker]

Allende's potential damage to Chile is worse than the real damage caused by Pinochet? This spin, in particular, I find sickening

You need to educate yourself about communism in the 20th Century. I would suggest the Black Book of Communism. The authors conservatively estimate that 80 to 100 million people died in the effort to establish communist states. The regrettable loss of life in the Allende coup would have increased a hundred-fold had Allende succeeded in taking Chile communist despite the fact a majority in Congress opposed such a move and he only received 36% of the vote. The moral equivelence for which you argue is not present in this case.

[BlueLancer]

There's never a Pinochet or Franco around when you need one.

[chilepepper]

Chile is the true success story of South America -- this is Pinochets' true legacy. He actually tried the economics that Milton Friedman expoused.

Living here, I can unequivocally state that if Allende had stayed in power, the Communists would STILL BE HERE. Chile is very much like an island, so the parallels with Cuba are very strong.

Pinochet was no saint, and he overstayed his welcome. If he had left power after 5 or 10 years, he would be wildly popular today (as opposed to just wildly popular with a significant fraction of the population)...

He did, however, leave power without a fight, albeit reluctantly -- Castro and Chavez are the real dictators, and they will never leave power on their own.