Talk:Salvador Allende/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 12

The Allende Debray interview

The article makes the following claim in the intro:

"Allende later told Regis Debray that he signed them in order to become president, but did not intend to abide by them."

In fact this is not correct. There are several versions running around of what lies in thos interviews (aside from the interview itself, which I will refer to shortly). One version of Allende's comments comes from [1] José Piñeras of the Cato Institute (certainly no left-wing ideologue). His account goes as follows (emphasis mine)

El diputado Orrego afirmó también que el Presidente Salvador Allende no estaba respetando el Estatuto de Garantías Democráticas que había hecho posible su elección. Este listado de derechos individuales había sido incorporado a la Constitución en 1970 como condición para que la Democracia Cristiana lo eligiera con sus votos como presidente, pues el candidato socialista sólo había obtenido el 36.2% del voto popular y, por lo tanto, el Congreso podía elegir a la primera magistratura a cualesquiera de las dos primeras mayorías relativas. Más tarde, Allende reconocería que él firmó este Estatuto sólo como una maniobra "táctica" (Regis Debray, The Chilean Revolution: Conversations with Allende, 1971).

What Allende actually says in response to Debray's question refering to the Statute of Guarantees: (see Conversación con Allende, siglo xxi editores, 1971 p 116)

Era absolutamente necesario? Era imprescindible negociar este EStatuto de garantías democráticas?

Allende responds

Si y por eso lo hicimos... Léelo y compáralo con nuestro programa de gobierno para llegar a la conclusión que no cambiamos ni una coma del programa. En ese momento lo importante era tomar el gobierno.

To extrapolate from the interview (and even from Pinera's account) that Allende had no intention of keeping the guarantees is a fanciful attempt at mind-reading. At best one could say "It is generally believed that Allende agreed to the Statute of Guarantees as a tactical move to achieve power".--CSTAR 04:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

My spanish isn't good enough to really understand the above, though I've also had some doubts about that claim in the intro, it seems at best to be taken out of context. Could you maybe translate the relevant parts? Or look for an english source? Thanks.--Caranorn 12:24, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Piñera's "account" (which is not a quote by the way) says merely that ALlende signed the guarntees as a tactical move.

In the interview Debray asks Allende "Was the signing of the guarantees absolutely necessary" and ALlende responds yes, explaining (the political situation withn the left/center left in Chile at the time that is not in the "ellipsis" part of the quote) and saying "At that moment the important thing was to take power".

You can interpret this any way you want, but you can't take one interpretation and put it into what is supposed to be a politically neutral encyclopedia.

One other thing. The anon keeps referring to "La Portada" newspaper as a source for the allegations of torture. Do a search: Go to any major university library or Google. There is not, nor was there any major newspaper in Chile by that name. It's possible there was some obscure periodical with that name, but that's hardly a reliable source.--CSTAR 16:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Your Leftist bigotry prevents you (and your little cabal of totalitarian Leftists) from seeing the obvious - namely that Allende did not sign the Statute of Guarantees because he believed in them but only as a way of getting power. Needless to add once in power he then abused that power {or as an unreconstructed Leftist like yourself would say - the ends (the creation of a socialist tyranny) justify the means.

You assert that the weekly La Portada (Santiago) (November 1970) does not exist. An interesting suggestion. Although you are content to include a laughably bad article by KGB "agent of influence" Richard Gott, you seek [in good Leftist freedom of information mode] to excise the memory [and no doubt given the chance the existence] of any article written at the time which accused his regime of using torture.

Somebody from Chile - not a know nothing Leftist bigot from the USA - can settle this question by going along to a good library.

—The preceeding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.239.95 (talk • contribs).

Aside from the question of the existence of "LA Portada", your reference is flawed on the face of it. The issue you claim alleges torture is from November 1970, Allende took office on November 1970. That seems pretty quick to get the torture racks up and running doesn't it? Not even the Uruguayan generals were so efficient.

As to the non-existence of La Portada consider: revistas de Chile,periódicos diarios de Chile. The most prominent weekly belonging to the center/right was "Que Pasa".--CSTAR 01:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Well I am pleased to note that you can read and so have registered that the date November 1970 is November 1970 - I admit that producing such a newspaper article after he was in power for only one month did strike me as a bit on the early side [it is hard not to have contempt for people who instead of making that obvious point simply delete information that does not serve their Leftist myth making] but credit where credit is due you eventually did spot that [and even went to the trouble of reading the Allende - Debray interview unlike your Leftist chums who sought to delete any reference to it] but a change of political masters sometimes leads to rapid changes and so it is not on those grounds implausible. As for denying the existence of La Portada [clearly the sort of newspaper Marxists close down given half a chance] I do not regard the matter as settled until somebody from Chile does a bit of research for me. It is possible an error has been made in the date (these slips happen) or even in the spelling of the newspaper (which may indeed no longer exist) but it is interesting to me that even in a section devoted to his critics a reference to an article which attacked the use which the Allende government was making of torture is deleted. If somebody does some research and discovers that the reference is made up (highly unlikely ) I will of course delete it. I am interested in the truth. The fact that you have not heard of that newspaper means precisely nothing.

— The preceeding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.239.95 (talk • contribs).

Que Pasa, Ercilla were opposition weeklies and El Mercurio was a vociferous opposition daily. None of these were ever shut down. I have given you two websites which list all dailies and newsweeklies published in Chile. La Portada is not there. It's as simple as that.--CSTAR 03:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

The reference to the way in which extreme Leftists shut down sources of opposition once they get power (see C20th history) is a reference to the way they are re-writing and censoring the Allende entry in the Wikipedia! Having said that I would be extremely surprised if Allende did not demonstrate the same intolerance. Although CSTAR keeps making reference to newspapers which are currently published in Chile it is unclear why he thinks that is relevant. Until I personally read the article or somebody in Chile does it for me I am prepared to delete the reference to the article. I am pretty confident it exists - since a reference to it was made in a scholarly tome - but even reliable scholars make errors and so I will delete that mention of it for the time being.

—The preceeding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.239.95 (talk • contribs).

"Que Pasa, Ercilla were opposition weeklies and El Mercurio was a vociferous opposition daily. None of these were ever shut down."

That doesn't mean that Allende and the UP didn't try to censor the media.

Only that the economic and political support from the opposition to keep those newspapers running were stronger.Agrofelipe (talk) 23:18, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Edit wars

Due to recent edit wars I think this article should be either semi-protected, or all controversial text should be deleted from the lead section (some of it could be inserted in other sections), or both. Vints 15:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Vints I plan to trim down the introduction anyhow. I've been pushing it out the past few days as I just can't concentrate for long enough with my cold. I also agree that semi-protection could be a good idea. Essentially the lead section should only include the main chapters of Allende's life, the details and particularly supporters' and opponents' views belong into the other sections and/or into separate articles.--Caranorn 15:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

There are no edit "wars" just a bunch of Leftist bigots such as yourself deleting information - it is called political censorship- because it upsets their [long discredited] Leftist fairy tales. For those on the far Left like yourself there is no such thing as truth only power - which is why you seek to re-edit sources of information such as Wikipedia.

You want a major re-edit to bring the Allende more back in line with orthodox Leftist disinformation about Allende - who could have predicted it!

— The preceeding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.239.95 (talk • contribs).

Okay, after two warnings I've now requested intervention for repeated violation of the NPA policy[[2]].--Caranorn 23:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Another note, the annon seems to just have broken the triple revert rule on the article. He's also once again broken that reference... I'm just too tired to track down the correct channels to report this latest violation. I only re-added the POV tag which he also removed every time.--Caranorn 23:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

It is interesting to see the way in which Leftists rely upon threats. I have had two warnings it seems! The totalitarian cast of mind is evident - start to think the way we think or we are going to punish you! Is the Left capable of letting something like Wikipedia exist without re-writing and censoring entries in order to suit its agenda. An article on President Allende is a good test case.

— The preceeding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.239.95 (talk • contribs).

In addition to reinserting several erroneous and unsourced claims, the anonymous user has added an incorrect amount ($350 000) for the US election campaing funding in the lead section (and this amount is not even mentioned in the article he cites). Figures of the US funding are available in the Church report [3]. The CIA spent about $1M, ITT $350 000, other US companies about $350 000. The figure of Soviet spending seems to be underestimated. This article[4] says: "actual and proposed payments to Chile's Salvador Allende totaling $420,000 both before and after his election as president in 1970." In the cited Times article $90,000 are just the figures of October and December 1971, and $60,000 of those were proposed, ie it's uncertain how much was actually spent.

I will request that this article be semi-protected at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, also because of the continuous personal attacks. Vints 10:12, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I am happy to endorse any refinment of the amounts which Allende and his opponents received from the Soviet Union /Cuba and the United States respectively, although of course Cuba is still run by a Leftist gangster and so information is limited. In recent years there has been much greater access to KGB and CIA records. I look forward to attempts to supply something more substantive than Leftist fairy tales.

— The preceeding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.239.95 (talk • contribs).

trimming of lead/intro section

I'm seriously trimmed the intro section (maybe too much). All that material was then reinserted into the relevant sections. In cases where this material was already in said sections I only deleted their intro entry. I slightly expanded on the ethnic tensions in accordance with its reference. I have not reinserted the torture claim as that is still unsourced, requests for a source have been issued repeatedly the past weeks yet have not received any favorable response, as such there is no need to insert that material with a fact tag, deletion seems entirely appropriate and in line with wikipedia policy.--Caranorn 13:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Innacuracies

The article continues to have major problems. For example, though clearly there were some issues of economic mismanagement by the government which should be mentioned, there were other contributing factors including

• subversive activities by the right, in part funded and encouraged by the CIA and other agencies,
• subversive activities by partisans of the left which pressed for radical change, including unauthorized land seizures.

In any case, most of this material on the economy of Chile during the Allende years should be somewhere else.

This article on the whole is very amateurish. --CSTAR 16:49, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

To be honest I actually laughed out loud when I saw some of the comments and the re-edits. The one where some Leftist numbskull discusses deleting a link to an article that dares to question the Leftist version of events in Chile is a classic!

OK. I admit it. This was an experiment. How reliable is Wikipedia? Is the frequently heard accusation that Leftists are rendering it almost useless as a source of political information true? The verdict - watching Leftists having to pretend that they are interested in truth is amusing, and their selective editing and disinformation is instructive (it gives you an insight into their delusions) but sadly the emerging consensus that Wikipedia is about as reliable as the Soviet Encyclopedia as a source of information about politics is more true than false. Shame. It was a nice idea.

— The preceeding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.239.95 (talk • contribs).

Just in case you haven't seen it, may I suggest you have a look at this guideline: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point? In particular, the section State your point; don't prove it experimentally. Now that you have stated your point, your further experimentation and disruption are no longer necessary it would seem.--CSTAR 21:17, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Indeed.

— The preceeding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.239.95 (talk • contribs).

Accusations of Racism

The sixth paragraph of the section “Accustions of Racism” was altered and placed out of context. It was originally introduced as:

• Surviving personal friends of Allende have completely rejected Farías accusations of racism and anti-semitism for two main reasons: Allende’s mother Laura Gossens Uribe was of Jewish-descent (though converted to Catholicism) and Allende himself considered himself a socialist Internationalist for most of his adult life. Or somewhere along those lines. - Чисто Золото 14:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it was altered by the anonymous user here [5]. Vints 14:27, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Salvador Allende was an anti-Semite who held fascist ideas in his youth, says a controversial new [2005] book.

The disclosures come from Allende's 1933 doctoral dissertation which had been kept secret. In it he asserts that Jews have a disposition to crime, and calls for compulsory sterilisation of the mentally ill and alcoholics.

Victor Farias, the book's Chilean-born author, quotes Allende approving of a "cure" for homosexuality, which was then a crime: "It could be corrected with surgery - small holes would be made in the stomach, into which small pieces of testicle would be inserted. This would make the person heterosexual."

Farias, who teaches at the Latin American Institute of Berlin's Free University, says that it was only opposition from medical associations in Chile prevented Allende, a medical doctor, from introducing a compulsory sterilisation program when he was health minister from 1939 to 1941.

The Allende family accused Farias of "manipulating documents". His supporters note that such views were common in the 1930s, and assert that he should be judged on his political record, not on his early writings. —Precedingunsigned comment added by88.110.229.10 (talk) 01:06, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

Communist?

The PBS documentary about Milton Friedman just had a section on Allende. It said that when he was elected he installed a communist government. Is that correct? I thought he was a socialist. Badagnani 04:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

He was a socialist, and while he was allied to various more radical groups his policy was neverless socialist. Sad to hear that a public channel makes such errors.--Caranorn 13:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Allende's political coalition was formed by the Socialist, Communist and Radical parties and other political parties and movements. Allende was member of the Socialist Party, which had a marxist-leninist orientation and supported violence as a political method (see spanish language article es:Partido_Socialista_de_Chile. baloo_rch 01:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

There's something wrong there. They did not support violence as a political method, that's a calumnia, it doesn't appear anywhere in their program, in their manifestoes, nor during their goveirnment. If you call "supporting violence as political method" as using burgeoise State's forces, as police and army, to repress social initiatives that threatens the stability or foundations of the burgeoise State itself, that's done by nearly every institutional government at some rate, in any time and any country, and any party, not only Allende's, being him pretty modest at that part, compared to others. I mean, "democracy" founations, itself, legitimates usage of police and army against certain kind of demonstrations, even when they're not necessarily a "social danger or threaten", nor they're necessarily violent. Otherwise ask the ones who where on Seattle on 97, or on Genova, or next years, to protest about G8. DeepQuasar 10:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

"supporting violence as political method as using burgeoise State's forces, as police and army, to repress social initiatives that threatens the stability or foundations of the burgeoise State itself"

You sound like a true socialist fanatic.

I will only say that any government that uses "social change" as a justification to break the constitution and the laws, uses violence against political opponents and violates the private property, the individual rights and the liberty of its people is not a legitimate government but a gang of criminals that pretended to pass as "democrats" but ultimately revealed their true face as violent totalitarian marxists.Agrofelipe (talk) 00:40, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Full name

In this very pro-Allende article, someone gave Allende's full name as "Salvador Isabelino del Sagrado Corazón de JesúsAllende Gossens". I, for one, would be very interested in knowing where did that unknown historian get that name from. I haven't seen Allende's original birth certificate, but I know for certain that he NEVER used or acknowledged the "Isabelino del Sagrado Corazón de Jesús" part. The only instance where such a name is used is in a 1967 satyrical book called "The cave of the Senate and the 45 senators" by journalist Eugenio Lira Massi, where he, in jest, reports hearing such name used as demeaning rumor against Allende. Could anyone provide hard data to back this bit of historical information? Mel Romero 03:14, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The Spanish article es:Salvador Allendes says in note 1: "Su nombre completo, según algunas fuentes1 parece ser Salvador Isabelino del Sagrado Corazón de Jesús Allende Gossens, aunque muchos discrepan." which babelfish translates to: "Its complete name, according to some sources seems to be Salvador Isabelino del Sagrado Corazón de Jesús Allende Gossens, although many differ" :Vints 08:35, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure... that's what I mean... the "some sources" are the book I already mentioned, but in that book is clearly stated (I own a copy, by the way) that such name is a "rumor spread out by his political enemies...". The book was published in 1967, when he was President of the Senate, and 3 years before he was elected President of the Republic. As for the link you include, they are not even sure of what name to include, they even quote a different name (Salvador Guillermo Allende). Hence, it's definitely not clear, and less likely that it's true that his name is as quoted in the article. Mel Romero 12:37, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

It's a well known fact that THAT was his full name. He changed it later to "Salvador Guillermo" as he was an atheist and marxist and didn't like to have such a christian name. —The preceding unsignedcomment was added by 64.117.137.69 (talk) 12:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC).

I don't know why you say that such a change is a well known fact, when in fact nobody has ever indicated that such was the case. If that were the reason he would have gotten rid of the Salvador also. Please indicate your sources. Mel Romero 12:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Quote from article:

Allende was born in 1908 in Valparaíso.

<references/>

How is this guy Lagos' former affiliation relevant here? Is this meant to suggest that Lagos' claims regarding Allende's date and place of birth should be taken with caution because of his potential bias? If Allende date and place of birth are somehow controversial (LOL), then that should be stated clearly. Otherwise, this sounds kinda funny. --91.148.159.421:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Why do you consider the article "very pro-Allende". Would you mind listing those points you find biased? And are you from Chile -which city and if Santiago which suburb? just curious...

I assume you're referring to my commentary. I find the article "very pro-Allende", because it only focuses on defending his actions while president. The man was in politics for 40 years BEFORE his presidency, for God's sake! Nonetheless, there's very little about his life before that time. This is supposed to be a BIOGRAPHY not an APOLOGY. I don't see what importance it has where I come from and specially what suburb, but yes, I originally come from Chile (you can see my personal page) and grew up in San Miguel (do you even know where is that?) Mel Romero 02:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I also knew about "Salvador Isabelino del Sagrado Corazón" (I'm not the same 64.117.137.69 who wrote above). However, since he changed his name to "Salvador Guillermo" I think Wikipedia shouldn't have his former name in the first paragraph.64.117.137.69 14:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

There are no sources who, officially or unofficially, have ever claimed that a change of name ever took place. The only place where the "Salvador Guillermo" ever appears is in a footnote to an article in the "La Tercera" newspaper about XX Century Chilean people, that for all we know could very well be a typo (even they do not cite any sources.) Mel Romero 03:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I have been watching this section carefully for some days now, to see if anybody had noticed a very relevant information recently published in La Estrella de Valparaíso, a local newspaper. It shows a copy of Allende's birth certificate, and it clearly shows two things: 1. His name was Salvador Guillermo, and 2. He was born in Santiago. Look for www.estrellavalpo.cl, the 3 April 2008 issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by200.29.179.34 (talk) 19:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Direct link to the newspaper article cited above (sadly, flash encumbered)http://www.estrellavalpo.cl/prontus4_noticias/site/extra/pdp/pdp.html?sec=2&ts=20080403001122&fp=20080403&pag=10 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fernio (talk •contribs) 16:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Relationships

Author Isabel Allende's own website claims that she is the cousin of President Salvador Allende,[6] not his niece, but the same site has her referring to him as her "uncle" in answer to an interview question.[7] The exact familial relationship should be verified and corrected on both this page and Isabel Allende's own Wikipedia page. Aramink 16:25, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

No need. Given the context BOTH relationships are correct, at least in Spanish. Isabel Allende's father and Salvador Allende were first cousins (in other words they shared common grandparents). In genealogy, that would make Isabel Allende and Salvador Allende "cousins in second degree" (in other words, cousins). Nonetheless, in Spanish, when you have a younger child and an older relative who are not in a direct line, the younger will always refer to the older as "tío" ("uncle"), even when that's not really accurate. The term "cousin" is only used when the relationship is a direct one (first cousins) or when there's a very minor age-difference.Mel Romero 02:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

What a Mess!

This page is so full of contradictions, irrelevant information, POV and basic grammatical errors that it's next to worthless. I don't know enough about Allende to be competent to edit the page but I wish someone who knows what they are talking about would have a go. It seems to illustrate a trend across Wikipedia where articles on relatively recent events are mutilated by too many people with an axe to grind.NBeddoe 12:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The Cold War is still being fought.--Mike18xx 21:27, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Ref www.nodo50.org/americalibre/eventos/azocar21.htm

I am not sure if this can be taken as a reputable source. I do not doubt that some Chileans did work around the strike, but this reference cannot be relied upon to give accurate information about the magnitude of that strike. The article itself is largly a fluff piece and does not cite any references. Americalibre is a netzine geared for Latin American Marxists. There is no problem including information about UP supporters working around the strike, but we need a better ref.JoeCarson 15:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Distortions regarding Soviet relations

Please see my comments] regarding the distortions regarding the alleged support that Allende received from the Soviet Union from the Mitrokhin Archive. I will try to fix them on this page when I get a chance, but I have linked to the appropriate pages in the original source book if others want to correct the errors. Notmyrealname 03:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Possible non-Picture Perfect POV?

Why is it that the articles' main picture seems so unflattering. Just to point it out, Augusto Pinochet's picture on his article clearly shows him grinning like a fool, so why should the Good Doctor's be any different? It seems to me that someright-winger is trying to make Allende look as condascending and sinister as possible. Any thoughts?172.206.72.250 18:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Sadly, it was changed briefly to a rather nice one, and now it's back to another one which just wants to make him out as "evil" again. It should be changed. 172.213.210.144 (talk) 20:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:EL

• ? I don't delete but the links are not good and should be reviewed by someone else
• Y ok, don't see any problems
• N no way, I'll delete it

explanation for each link.

• ?Official Government biography (in Spanish) (I'll change to mainsite because the biography can not be directly linked(javascript)) the site is ok but hardly accessable
• ?Spartacus Educational Biography
• ?Chile under Allende and Pinochet reliable,unique and informative ? I doubt that.
• NChile during and after Allende's presidency mainly advertisement for a book, not informative and absolutly not neutral in tone
• ?History of Chile under Salvador Allende and the Popular Unity by Ewin Martinez{{{cross}}} longstanding but not really reliable nor unique
• NAllende Memorial Site (in Spanish)
• ?Salvador Allende's "Last Words" at least it is unique, in information can neither found in the article nor other EL's
• ?Caso Pinochet. (in Spanish)
• NPopular Unity of Salvador Allende (in Spanish) not even unique
• Y Previously unreleased interview with Allende(in Spanish)
• ?Alternate source
• N"Never Again: An essay about the breakdown of democracy in Chile" only one link per website
• ?Map of the Sorroundings of La Moneda Palace (in Spanish) the map is unique but the rest is questionable

-- Stan talk 20:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)