Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Effect of cold war on chile
Anti communism in chile
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effect of cold war on chile
Allende officially came into power on 4 September 1970 and was the first Marxist to govern a country in a free democratic election. He took control of a country that was economically in debt and catering towards a small group of Chile’s elite. Allende’s party, The Unidad Popular, believed that the economy at the time was monopolistic, externally dependent, oligarchic and capitalistic. Allende wanted to create a period in history that would be remembered as a “democratic regime” by changing the economy of the country. Allende’s party was always focused on building the middle class and thought that the “national bourgeoisie” was essential in order to obtain socialism and a fairer society.
In 1971 the economy in Chile was at its peak and people
…show more content…
Relations had always been tense between Chile and America but when Allende came to power, that scared Nixon. That fearfulness led him and his government to try and prevent Allende from being elected. Nixon felt that if they helped Chile out, they’d have to help every other country in Latin America as well, therefore “[he] tend[s] to be against doing anything for ‘em”. He also believed that “it would be very detrimental to all of us if the Chilean experiment spread through the rest of the continent”, with the Chilean experiment referring to the attempt to have democracy. What Nixon most feared was that if Chile’s democratically elected socialist government prevailed, it would become a beacon of hope for other Latin American countries and they’d follow their example. Nixon wanted those countries under control which is why he was against Allende this much. Kissinger also shared Nixon’s opinions, and feared Allende more than Castro due to Allende’s “non violent path to socialism”. Despite America’s harsh attitude towards Chile, Allende had always made it clear that they wanted to maintain relations with the United States and understood its importance when dealing with the country. In one of Allende’s speeches, he mentioned that “It is the purpose of this government to maintain friendly and cooperative relations with the United States.” It is clear to see that the United States played a major role in Chile during the coup d’etat by refusing to lend them money in their time of need. They played such a significant role that some historians, such as Oppenheim, believed it to be the main cause of the downfall of the economy as well as the socialist
Part I: “Consensus in Argentine Society and the Rise of Perón”. Chapter one, “ The Crisis of the Liberal Consensus” begins explaining the low participation of the Argentinean population in the government due to electoral fraudulence and intimidation. Then, he goes on to detailed how the democratic liberalism governmental system was threatened by the elites of Argentina because they fear the possible loss of their power from the new sectors that were rising. After, the author expressed that the
Models for post-revolutionary Latin American government are born of the complex economic and social realities of 17th and 18th century Europe. From the momentum of the Enlightenment came major political rebellions of the elite class against entrenched national monarchies and systems of power. Within this time period of elitist revolt and intensive political restructuring, the fundamental basis for both liberal and conservative ideology was driven deep into Latin American soil. However, as neither ideology sought to fulfill or even recognize the needs or rights of mestizo people under government rule, the initial liberal doctrine pervading Latin American nations perpetuated racism and economic exploitation, and paved the way for all-consuming, cultural wars in the centuries to come.
The relationship between the working class and Allende is definitely a difficult to understand because it's hard to understand how a political party is supported by the same group who contributes to their downfall. The working class was not the only reason Allende lost power, but was a heavy contributor. The working class seemed to only use Allende as a reason to enforce reform, and Allende used the working class as a group of supporters. The two groups could only agree on the fact that Chile needed serious social change, and Allende was the best shot they had.
Chile was going through a time of change. After the death of President Salvador Allende, Augusto Pinochet took over. Ariel worked for Allende and wrote many not so nice things about Pinochet. In 1973 Pinochet didn’t fire Dorfman, instead he just exiled Ariel from the country. After being exiled Dorfman went to Paris he came down with a case of writers block, which left him poor for a while. He eventually recovered and wrote many famous plays and poems. In one of his poems “He describes Latin America as an enigma a vibrant, sprawling, messy reality which did not itself know where it was or where it was going…a series of half-formed nations trapped in a history not of its own, trying to invent an alternative.” (Former Exiled Writer “Dorfman” 21)
The first turning point in hope for the Chilean road to socialism was that of the election of Salvador Allende as president, which gave many Yarur workers the belief that a ‘workers government’ was on their side. “For the first time, a self-proclaimed ‘workers government’ ruled Chile, dominated by the Left and Pledged to socialist revolution” (Winn, 53). Allende’s role as president gave identity to the Yarur workers that they were being represented and because of so, their struggles of working in the factory conditions set by Amador Yarur would come to an end. This identification with Allende as being represented by there own voice became the first stepping-stone to the demand for socialization of the factory. “The election of a ‘Popular Government’ was a signal...
Time and rules have been transforming countries in many ways; especially, in the 1850’s and the 1920’s, when liberals were firmly in control across Latin American region. Liberalism can be defined as a dominant political philosophy in which almost every Latin American country was affected. A sense of progress over tradition, reason over faith, and free market over government control. Although each country was different, all liberals pursued similar policies. They emphasize on legal equality for all citizens, progress, free trade, anti-slavery, and removing power from church. Liberals declared promising changes for Latin American’s future. But Latin America had a stronger hierarchical society with more labor systems, nothing compare to the United States societies. Liberals weren’t good for Latin America. What I mean by “good” is the creation of a turning point or some type of contribution towards success. I define “good” as beneficial or helpful. The Latin American economy was stagnant between 1820 and 1850 because of independence wars, transportation and the recreation of facilities. I describe this era as, “the era when Latin America when off road”.
Salvador Allende promised to redistribute Chile's income (only two percent of the population received forty-six percent of the income), nationalize major industries (especially the copper companies), and to expand relations with socialist and communist countries. Allende's presidency presented a threat to the United States; a man with such aspirations would have to stray from United States policies and the policies of all other countries. Allende would neither respect nor consider the work the United States had done for them in the past. The United States would no longer be able to act as a parasite, sucking the money out of Chile. The U.S. decided it must stop this man from rising to power as soon as possible.
...icies from past Presidents. Furthermore, it was strongly detrimental to Latin America, for the reason that it eliminated the possibility of increasing Latin American exports to the United States, thereby destroying the hopes of Latin American countries focused upon President Nixon’s policy of “trade rather than aid.” During this time, the government justified itself by proclaiming that the United States needed to focus on avoiding involvement and learning from the mistakes made in Vietnam. All in all, over the course of the presidencies of Monroe, Roosevelt, FDR, and Nixon, the U.S. intervened in Latin America numerous times. Now, was it the right thing to do? At those specific points in time, the government thought so. Various arguments can be forged over the suitability of the actions of the U.S. during these times; however that is a discussion for another time.
After the revolution of 1943 Juan Perón shared control of the Argentinean government. Under Pedro Ramirez, Perón held three cabinet positions. With that he saw an opportunity. He did many reform programs and won a lot of the support of labor unio...
Kennedy proposed this cooperative program to replace prior failing efforts of the United States to aid Latin America. The intended alliance marked a shift toward a policy of expanded U.S. economic assistance to Latin America in the wake of Fidel Castro’s successful Communist revolution in Cuba. The United States was fearful of a communism spread due to the poverty and social inequities of the Latin American nations. The U.S. felt that the southern continent was ripe for violent radical political upheaval, which would eventually bring forth the spread of communism. The Alliance for Progress program was initially met with open arms by most Latin American leaders and immediately boosted U.S. relations throughout the hemisphere.1
Joseph Raymond McCarthy was a Republican Senator from the state of Wisconsin between 1947 and 1957. Between 1950 and 1954, McCarthy became noted for unsubstantiated claims that there were Communist and Soviet spies and sympathizers inside the federal government.
Klein, throughout various accounts of U.S. involvement overseas, explains that the U.S. commonly engages in a practice of ‘shock therapy.’ The U.S. brings bloodshed and warfare to foreign nations in order to restructure their economies and governments to serve U.S. interests. In the case of Chile, Klein argues that the U.S., in the midst of Cold War paranoia, wanted to maintain its political and economic hegemony in South America. Washington accordingly whipped the Chilean army into an anti-Allende, anti-communist frenzy, bringing about the bloodshed of ‘the Caravan of Death’ as well as the years of tyrannical military dictatorship. Also significant was the fact that the neoliberal economics implemented in Chile were taught to Chilean economists of the junta by Americans at the University of Chicago.
As a result, with the passing of the years Chavez created an atmosphere of division, violence and unrest within the population. Thus, created a marked difference between the supporters and opponents of his policies, a situation that President Hugo Chavez took advantage of for his own purposes, deploying a communist regime disguised as a socialist. In other words, Chavez tricked Venezuela’s people, offering the establishment of a socialism that was nothing more than a dictatorship adapted to their own purposes, becoming the most recognized leader of the left worldwide. Throughout the fourteen years that he remained in power, Chávez followed a strategy of introducing a socialist government in Venezuela in stages. According to Enrique Standish in the article titled “Venezuela Finally Turns Communist” it happened in four stages.
Higgins' book begins with a brief review of the way United States presidents dealt with Latin America during that era. It starts with President Franklin D. Roosevelt leasing Guantanamo Bay and President Dwight D. Eisenhower invading Guatemala in Operations Fortune and Success, which became the model for President John F. Kennedy's Bay of Pigs operation. The book provides more in-depth information on how Eisenhower's tactics and plans set up the invasion of Cuba, which was later altered, modified, and approved by President John F. Kennedy. The book addresses how the United States intervened around the world to combat communism. The United States focused specifically on Latin America, indicating the imperialistic mentality of the United States during that era, which I believe continues to this day.
American foreign policy directed and influenced its activities in Chile. United States although contradicted its firm belief of democr...