I always feel quite ambivalent as to Franco and Pinochet because of the blood on their hands, immensely more in the case of Franco. I certainly would not have wanted to live under either of them, dictators of any stripe not being to my taste. However, they saved their countries from Communism, brought undreamed of prosperity to their nations, and laid the frameworks, Franco most unwillingly, to subsequent democratic governments. If any Leftist rulers accomplished such feats, Leftists would have them tattooed on their chests.
Both Franco and Pinochet were “iron surgeons” see Joaquin Costa. The socialists and communists in Spain and Chile when they came to power presided over an increasingly unruly, lawless society. A key part of their governing strategy was the persecution of all things Catholic. This extremism resulted in a counter prevailing mistrust of the so-called democracy that had brought the socialist and communists to power. We often assume, erroneously in this country that democracy brings with it a respect for institutions, and the rights of the minority. Even a casual reading of history shows this belief to be unfounded
@ Thomas D: Eloquent.
IMO, what Pinochet provided was a period for Chile’s deeply pathological political economy to recover and recuperate. He identified the advocates of salutary policy and put them in charge and his security services acted to suppress obstructive veto groups. Also suppressed were the bad actors in Chile – politicians, labor bosses, and most of the the chatterati. By 1988, Chile’s orderly prosperity was of a quality that was second to none in Latin America. That and goings on in Eastern Europe put the usual crew in Chile on their back foot.
==
The red haze left (among them Judge Garzon and the Institute for Policy Studies) are not going to forgive Gen. Pinochet et al for accomplishing something.
I always remind myself that David, Joshua, and Judas Maccabeus did not fight by modern rules in the process of creating and saving a nation.