Douglas Pollock
Against all odds, Chile was once again saved from having a new Constitution (12/17/23) soaked with progressist footprints and DNA of the UN’s ‘Agenda 2030’ that also included a climate change chapter. The 1980 Constitution, thus, remained in force.
The chances of rejecting the new text seemed to vanish since the most right-wing party (Republican), together with woke companies and unions, called to approve the new proposal even before knowing its draft. The “In Favor” option had thus everything to win: the right, the left and the money. The other option had nothing except courage and awareness to expose the huge threat that the former posed.
The scenario for those who promoted the “Climate Constitution”, Republicans and the center-right (the extreme left didn’t promote anything), was favored by blaming libertarians for “voting the same as the communists” who said they would vote for the “Against” option. It is not clear why that wing acted in such a contradictory manner, since they were more than happy with the “In Favor” option because they would finally achieve a Venezuela-like Constitution and of other Marxist paradises.
The fact is that advocates of the “Against” option called to vote without caring whether the communists agreed with them or not and, instead, to be aware of the text that was being offered to the country in which they saw a socialist, progressist and globalist document. The patriots’ alleged loyalty to the communists turned out to be, apart from false, a weak argument that served, at best, to narrow the difference of a comfortable victory.
In the end, without resources, using only the social media along with the awakening of people’s common sense, conservatives achieved a clear victory of 55.8% against 44.2%, a great defeat for the entire political establishment.
This success, however, did not stop Chile’s journey towards the cliff.
For example, along with the commitment to John Kerry’s “Global Methane Hub” that includes Chile, the US and 11 other countries, Chile also signed the “COP28 UAE Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Action”, which will soon become an attack on national and Western agriculture and livestock.
In parallel, climate policies in Congress continue to progress. One is the “Energy Transition Law”, that aims to incorporate electricity transmission as a sector enabled for carbon-neutrality, a guise that actually seeks to save European renewable energy companies from bankruptcy. This bill, dispatched by ‘president’ Boric as a matter of urgency, arose from a one-day visit to Chile last June of Ursula Von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, asking him to “solve the problem”. With this new climate action, electricity rates will continue to skyrocket along with the country’s social and economic crisis, but saving the planet and foreign companies at taxpayers’ expense.
Climate policies of a country that doesn’t exist for the purposes of preventing the climate from changing on the planet, along with a political right on the verge of extinction not quite because of global warming but for its violent turn to the left, are the bitter return to reality after the triumph of freedom against tyranny, hence, with hope of solution.
American politics has become so bizarre I struggle to follow sometimes. Other nation’s politics are even harder to understand.
If it makes sense, they support the opposite.
All political parties are mafia gangs. The character of the candidate has no bearing; once elected, he has to execute party (mafia) policy or get sued/ assassinated. The economics policy of your government, IS your state religion, and all resources are expended upon serving that economic policy/ religion. The religion of the Bolshevik is communism, because it collects all property under one account, which all belongs to their King anyway.
There, a yearning for blood sacrifice, enslavement of the nations, and mutilation of children’s genitals, that is all you need to understand about party politics, whether is the US, UK, EU or anywhere else that does business with the IMF or any other part of the Federal Reserve System.
If you disagree with any of this way of running things, you are obviously a right-wing extremist, the greatest danger to democracy EVVAH!
The one thing I agree with you is “All political parties are mafia gangs.”
Yeah I lost track after that as well.
God Bless Chile.
Can, or will they try again?
Next year or the year after . . .
Not sure. They’ll have to vote (again) on whether they want another rewrite of the constitution, elect another 50 politicians to sit on the council/committee to rewrite it then have yet another vote on whether to adopt it. All this takes time – about a year for the process to run its course and this is the second rewrite that’s been rejected by the Chilean people so who knows?
The 10 parties that support the current disastrous far-left government promised that they would not insist on another constitutional process if the “Against” option won. That is, for the next two years. However, since the Constitution that they want to abolish and replace it with the one that was rejected on Sunday remains in force, they have the perfect excuse to blame it for all the evils that afflict the country today. Most likely they will try again in three more years… with a little help from their friends, the right. Best regards.
I have read this article twice and am sorry to say I’m still struggling to comprehend the gist.
“As of October 2023 there are 25 legally constituted political parties in Chile” (Wiki).
That may explain my problem, Chilean politics per se seem to be incomprehensible.
I thought it was perhaps just me, but clearly the writer has a style of confusion recognised by others.
The sentence structure and reasoning are as convoluted as a climate model. I think something good happened in Chile. Perhaps the author is an engineer?
It’s missing huge chunks of context that need to be included to explain the story.
As I understand it, Chile is still trying to transition away from the Pinochet years and voted to reform the constitution – the centre-right/right coalition won 22 seats on the reform council, another centre-right coalition won 11 and the left had just 17 meaning they couldn’t challenge or veto the right’s rewrite of the constitution.
The leftist media outlets were bemoaning the fate of Chile which would be saddled with a ‘far-right constitution’ and comparing it to Bolsonaro and Milei getting into power. That doesn’t seem to have happened – the rightwing groups appear to have delivered a more leftwing, climate orientated constitution, which they supported because they wrote it. The left appear to have voted along party lines and voted against it mainly because it was written by the right and so defeated it.
I think.
I may be missing other bits of context about the rest of the rewritten constitution which might include parts which were unacceptable to many groups, but not totally clear on that.
Does this help?
I think, Richard, that you have captured some of the major moving parts of what’s happening in Chile. The feeling is that Pinochet (led a coup to prevent total communism) was worse than Allende (a Marxist who invited Cuban military to assist in controlling the country). Chile flourished under Pinochet and the release back to democracy, but kept electing cycles of far left and center-right politicians, resulting in strong swings to the left and returns only to the middle (same as USA current cycles). The net effect is moving to the left, toward socialism or worse. Chile was, until recently, the most modern culture and economy in all of Latin America, now they are in decline. Disclaimer: I recently was on vacation in coastal Chile, and will return shortly, so obviously it isn’t too bad.
A net zero Chile will have problems producing so much copper, no?
No they’ll just turn a blind eye. The copper mining and production will be labelled ‘green’ and everyone will shake hands and smile heartily, knowing that the right palms were greased and their virtue signalling is plain to see.
I think the legacy of the disappeared will always taint whatever Pinochet achieved in Chile.
Sorry, just to be clear – it was accepted by 33 votes to 17, the exact split along right/left lines of the council/committee that wrote it, then put to a plebiscite where it was rejected by 56% of the voters.
Yes, that helps a lot
Thank you.
In the first line of the first paragraph the words “”new Constitution” appear, linked to the WUWT article from a month ago where the whole backgrond of this matter is exhibited. Maybe it will clarify the essence for you.
It might have been useful to have repeated some of the highlights in this article rather than rely on one, small link that wasn’t readily identified as the background to this piece.
Sorry to be picky but, despite the link to the earlier piece, I didn’t see it for what it was and had to go wading through the internet to get some background.
Let us hope that this is a pattern for a revolt of the repressed in all other countries and that the use of social media along with a return of good old common sense, will allow the truth to be seen again and the ‘Climate Agenda’ be seen as a lunatic waste of people’s money.
Or just hope that the Chilean people continue to be smarter than their politicians?
Remember to bow low to Ursula.
Doesn’t she demand the full prostration these days?