Chile and Octobrism

By: Ricardo Israel - 30/04/2023

Will Chile have been cured of Octobrism?

On October 18, 2019, unexpected violence rocked Chile. Its level was such that the government was impotent to contain it, Carabineros, the national police, was overwhelmed, and everything indicates that the Armed Forces did not want to intervene, probably because the government did not want to modify the legislation, and without that, surely that intervention would have finished in the prosecution by the justice of the military.

The streets were occupied by the Octobrism, a de facto alliance between ultras, anarchists, soccer bars, lumpen and drug traffickers, in places and towns occupied by them. Also strong was the presence of the latter in the attacks on police stations.

For Chile it was a before and after. For all practical purposes, the government sank into irrelevance, the role of the political center disappeared, and those on the left and right who claimed the inheritances of Allende and Pinochet, respectively, acquired greater importance. Instead of the consensus that the center left and the center right sought for 3 decades, the next presidential election was won by Gabriel Boric, the youngest and most voted president in the history of Chile, with the promise of total change. Chile had been convinced of the falsehood that in those 30 years nothing good had been done.

What began in October 2019 received the name of "Octobrism", in the sense of the attempt to profoundly transform the country, and together with the acceptance of violence, the country crossed the borders of what is possible and what is acceptable. It was hard for those Chileans who thought that the institutions were strong and that they worked. It was equivalent to those who in previous generations mistakenly thought that there were no coups d'état in Chile, taxed then as now, to that idea that has done profound damage to the country, that of a supposed exceptionality in relation to the rest of Latin America.

Personally, I must admit with all humility that I did not know my country as well as I thought. I did not expect this level of violence and destruction, nor the massive acceptance of violence, the "midwife of history" for some, and since then, a tolerable part of the daily landscape for many. It caught my attention that people I knew, valued and loved had no words of condemnation for the violent and many for the Carabineros, who almost alone tried to control public order, with the excesses that come with confronting organized mobs, without the adequate weapons and support from the authorities and the political world, be they police in Chile or in the USA.

Here friends and close friends of a lifetime were included, as well as WhatsApp. It produced a change in me. As I appreciated them very much, at this point in my life I preferred to safeguard that relationship over the correctness of the argument, which was happening for the first time in my life since it did not even happen during the Pinochet dictatorship, so much so that those who knew beforehand that my critical opinion was going to bother them, I did not send them my writings that could bother them, despite the fact that there was no reciprocity from some who continued to applaud. I must add that I am happy to have achieved the survival of what I value most at this stage of my life, friendship and family relationships, which I hope will be maintained until the distant end.

After October everything changed. The government dedicated itself only to surviving and President Pinera did not use all his legal powers, and apparently only wanted to avoid judicial and international complaints of human rights violations, in a country that is very sensitive to this after more than 3,000 victims, dead and disappeared between 1973 and 1990.

Pinera was the best expression of the so-called cowardly right and offered something that was not being requested, a new constitution. It was not the only one, the now defunct former agreement did not defend its best creation, the Chile of the great agreements, the Chile in democracy after the dictatorship, and that delivered poverty reduction, economic development and social progress indexes, internationally recognized as the best in the history of Chile.

For its part, the left of the system applauded what was happening and for the radical left it was a period of acceleration, where shamefully the first line of violence was received with honors in the building of the old Congress of the Republic, and the press, above all, TV applauded and highlighted the violence that gave birth to the new Chile. I imagine that these journalists, communicators, actors and actresses made use of the freedom of expression of democracy, but the greatest responsibility does not fall on those faces but on those who allowed it, companies that have directories and owners, including television companies owned by two from the richest families in Chile, who applauded the destruction of the jobs of many modest Chileans, as well as the property of small businessmen.

Without exaggeration, it was a period where democracy itself was in danger, and not only the economic and social system. At some point, the government itself faltered and there were days when mob violence could have reached the takeover of La Moneda, the seat of government, in repetition of what happened in Sri Lanka and other countries. Probably there were days, where only the Carabineros and their excesses prevented it, perhaps part of their contribution to saving democracy and a debt, since the national and militarized structure of the Carabineros was part of the dictatorship and had its share of rights violations. humans then.

The truth is that history could have repeated itself in Chile, in the form of the overthrow of a government not wanted by the majority, where despite an impeccable origin from the different democratic rules, its fall could have brought about the destruction of the democratic system. It happened with Allende.

In any case, the change in Chile could have occurred if the plebiscite called for this purpose had approved the proposal for a new constitution, since the majority of the elected constituents proposed the most radical transformation of the Chile built since 1810, with a total modification of the State, society and the economy of the country.

The achievement of that plebiscite was to save known Chile, and that victory was not the work of the political parties, but of ordinary Chileans. They resisted a huge offer of guaranteed and unfunded “rights” that have sunk and disillusioned many countries in the region. In Chile, a surprising 62% of compulsory voting maintained the Chile that we all recognized, and the most striking results took place in districts and territories with an indigenous majority (except for Easter Island), where in several places of predominance and/or a strong presence Mapuche and other ethnic groups, the rejection exceeded 80%.

Chile has been a true electoral lottery since 2019, including the appearance and defeat of Octobrism, since different elections have produced different results. Once again, everything changed again from that plebiscite on September 4, since the constitutional reform that called for that constitutional process established that, if the proposal for a new constitution was defeated, the current legislation and constitution would be maintained.

However, instead of hearing a result as resounding as 62%, the political parties reached an agreement for a new constitutional process, a very curious one, since the current law and constitution indicated that, as is customary in many democracies, The responsibility then and now fell entirely on Congress, in addition to one recently elected in 2021 together with the current president Boric, only that the majorities, in the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, are of a different sign, opponents of his mandate.

But, political majorities that included the right, the former agreement and Boric's Broad Front gave rise to a curious dream, since, instead of assuming their responsibility in Congress, those forces agreed to elect the 7th of May to 50 constituents very similar to them, elected only on partisan lists, but who will be very controlled and will not have real power.

In other words, the constituents of the failed Convention traumatized them in such a way that they agreed to designate two Committees, one of supposed "experts" who in practice will deliver a proposal already written to the elected constituents. To them is added another appointed commission, which will have the controlling power to veto proposals from the constituents that stray from the political agreement of the parties.

What if something or everything goes wrong with this partidocracia design? Let us remember that partidocracy is a deviation from the democratic ideal, known since Roman antiquity, where today it refers to party leaders that replace the true sovereign, which is the majority that votes and the republican institutionality.

The right wing that has strongly supported this idea is convinced that

it will definitely be able to prevail over the deep-rooted idea that the current one is the "Pinochet constitution", due to its origin in a dictatorship, when in fact it bears the signature of President Lagos and his ministers, and having been the most modified in history , now has an impeccably democratic content.

If the new plebiscite approves the new proposal, it would now bear the signature of President Boric. But, again I ask again, what if something goes wrong?

This partidocracy could be wrong and could give new wings to Octobrism instead of burying it. And it is not the only thing that matters, since Chile has once again changed. Boric's government has presented such a level of incompetence that its majority has collapsed and gone from crisis to crisis. There is also a crisis of expectations, a deteriorating economic situation and the country's international relations are seen to be seriously deteriorated.

For its part, as has happened in other countries, violence has become unstoppable, especially crime, which is why hatred of the Carabineros has turned into 79% support, according to polls.

The problem with this design of the partidocracia is that today there is little interest in constitutional change, and the desire of the majorities now seems to fall on security, order and stability, so that the new constitutional process can conspire instead of contributing to this I wish, and unlike the defeated process, this time the traces of the political parties are present everywhere. In other words, in this Chile that has changed again and that today prefers stability and personal progress, these parties and the system can be blamed if something goes wrong and the feeling of crisis and helplessness continues to deepen.

That is why I am not sure about the end of Octobrism, and I think that it could reappear if something goes wrong and the crisis becomes the main concern of Chileans. At least, on social networks the call for a new outbreak of violence seems to be alive and the criticism of the business community and "neoliberalism" continues, adding this time the disappointment with the Boric government.

Perhaps, ultimately, in relation to promises and expectations, as dangerous as trying to change everything is that afterwards (almost) nothing changes, since it is ignoring the power of abrupt change as Chile has had, including the mood swings of the electorate and how fragile is memory for these effects.

«The opinions published herein are the sole responsibility of its author».