Pinochet, a ruler of evil

by m-a.soucisse on November 13, 2013 - 12:26pm

Dictatorships ruled over several countries during the 20th century.  From Stalinist-Russia, to Nazi-Germany and Pinochet’s Chile all had repressive leaders that crushed and abused the rights of their civilian.  With the help of the United-States of America, Pinochet’s military regime overthrew Salvador Allende’s “Popular Unity coalition”, which was democratically elected by the people.  Allende was a man beloved by his people.  He was a left-wing politician that wanted the best for his people.  The American’s though, strongly opposed communism and any form of left-wing government, so they decided to support Pinochet and helped so that he could accomplish is long awaited coup-d’état.  Now looking back, I read articles that helped me better understand the impact of the Pinochet regime in our current time.
The first article I read, “CHILE CONTINUES PLODDING SEARCH FOR TRUTH”, approached the re-trialing of Augusto Pinochet for “Abuse of Human Rights”.  The article was very objective and much more factual than anything else.  It spoke about Augusto’s probable guilt of abuse, quoting both sides in the process.  Viviana Diaz and her organization of Pinochet-era families claim that Pinochet abused the people of Chile and that his re-trialing is what her organization is striving for.  On the other hand, a pro-Pinochet group claims there may or may not have been abuse on the Chilean people during the Pinochet-era.  
The second article I read , “The Politics of Memory and the Memory of Politics.”, went more in depth on the early days of the coup-d’état and the impact it had on many countries and people in the process.  The author refers to Allende’s leadership has a glimmer of hope.  It was the long awaited dream of the Chilean people.  Finally a leader they could maybe trust and build a better country with.  Until one day the dream was eradicated by Pinochet’s military regime.  The author managed to raise some good about the Pinochet regime.  It raised the awareness of people all around the world, creating groups like “Friends of Brazil” and “Fair play for Cuba”.  It also got many researchers to look in to Chile’s failed attempt at socialism, more specifically what had and could’ve failed at some points in history.
I personally preferred the second article much more. The first article was slightly off topic from its title and failed to keep my interest from beginning to end.  It was very superficial and only promoted factual, historic statistics and information that increased the knowledge of people that do not know about the situation.  On the other hand, the second article felt much more complete.  It gave opinions and came in depth with professionals and increased my knowledge of the Pinochet-era.  It contained pictures and kept me hooked from beginning to end.  This is where we can truly see the big difference between peer-review and not peer-reviewed.  Peer-reviewed article brings much more knowledge to the reader, because the author himself has a much better knowledge than your average magazine editor and journalist.  If you’re ever interested in the Pinochet era, take a look into the second article, which was to me a real eye-opener.

About the author