The article discusses the contrasting views of the Chilean right, specifically focusing on the comments made by Evelyn Matthei regarding the Pinochet dictatorship. Matthei's justification of certain aspects of the regime is contrasted with the staunch opposition to all dictatorships expressed by Mario Vargas Llosa, a prominent figure known for his liberal and democratic beliefs.
Matthei's assertion that the 1973 coup was 'necessary' and that initial deaths were 'inevitable' due to civil war is challenged. The article points out that there was no civil war, only a state-sponsored massacre against defenseless civilians. This argument is then supported by citing numerous specific instances of torture, murder, and disappearances committed under Pinochet's regime. The article further disputes Matthei's attempt to attribute these crimes to rogue individuals, asserting that the repression was systematic and planned.
The piece highlights the stark difference between Vargas Llosa's unwavering condemnation of all dictatorships and the apologetics present in certain sectors of the Chilean right, represented by Matthei and others. This ideological rift raises questions about the Chilean right's commitment to democratic values and human rights.
The article concludes that these historical debates hold immense contemporary relevance, underscoring that understanding the perspectives of political leaders on such issues is crucial for protecting democratic values. The ultimate question is whether Chile's right wing will embrace democracy fully or cling to authoritarian legacies.