|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Jun 10, 2018 4:20:36 GMT
How could Salvador Allende lose the 1970 Chilean election, thereby sparing Chile from an Allende presidency that was disastrous, and resulted in the coup that brought Pinochet to power? What would the repercussions of the Socialist Party of Chile losing the 1970 elections be for the whole of the Americas?
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,984 
Likes: 49,385
|
Post by lordroel on Jun 10, 2018 7:21:48 GMT
How could Salvador Allende lose the 1970 Chilean election, thereby sparing Chile from an Allende presidency that was disastrous, and resulted in the coup that brought Pinochet to power? What would the repercussions of the Socialist Party of Chile losing the 1970 elections be for the whole of the Americas? So Jorge Alessandri wins the presidency. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Jun 10, 2018 11:23:43 GMT
How could Salvador Allende lose the 1970 Chilean election, thereby sparing Chile from an Allende presidency that was disastrous, and resulted in the coup that brought Pinochet to power? What would the repercussions of the Socialist Party of Chile losing the 1970 elections be for the whole of the Americas?
Probably depend on how he lost it. If foul play, either by electoral fraud or outright intimidation and violence you are likely to build up pressure for a more radical regime to emerge later on, and/or to do so by violent means itself. In which case it might be even more brutally repressed that Chile was under Pinochet as the extreme right had too much support at that point, especially from the US.
If there is a degree of moderate reform that meets some of the needs of the bulk of the population that could prompt a victory for Alessandri, but could that itself survive the more reactionary elements in Chile?
|
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Jun 10, 2018 19:19:56 GMT
Funnily enough, would a tainted election that leads to Allende's defeat precipitate a Chilean civil war though? It might be a replay of the Spanish Civil War, although some other General besides Pinochet would emerge as the authoritarian dictator who might behave in a similar fashion to Sanjurjo.
Of course, it might also lead to a much more violent, openly fascist regime in Chile that would make Franco wince. It might also have an effect on what will happen in Argentina as well (the Argentine junta might have also existed as well).
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Jun 10, 2018 22:03:38 GMT
Funnily enough, would a tainted election that leads to Allende's defeat precipitate a Chilean civil war though? It might be a replay of the Spanish Civil War, although some other General besides Pinochet would emerge as the authoritarian dictator who might behave in a similar fashion to Sanjurjo. Of course, it might also lead to a much more violent, openly fascist regime in Chile that would make Franco wince. It might also have an effect on what will happen in Argentina as well (the Argentine junta might have also existed as well).
That might have happened if Allende and the left were defeated by fairly open corruption. As you say a civil war is almost certainly to be won by the right because the left forces would have been isolated and if the CIA wouldn't accept a democratically elected Allende I can't see them tolerating him coming to power as the victor in a civil war. Neither would any of his neighbours. It also is likely to led to a much bigger bloodbath than OTL's coup, both because of the civil war and because of the crack-down that is likely to come afterwards. You might get someone even nastier than Pinochet. 
Suspect the rather weak Peron government in Argentina is likely to go into a military dictatorship as OTL. Might be a bit earlier if a civil war in Chile but don't know enough to tell.
The other butterfly is that Chile has border disputes with Argentina, Bolivia and Peru so there is the possibility that one or more of them might intervene in a Chilean civil war, to 'help the right' but with a cost of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Jun 10, 2018 22:41:56 GMT
Except that Bolivia and Peru have weaker militaries than Chile, plus Peru might have its problem with the Shining Path guerrillas. Argentina on the other hand, might become the big winner here, with the settlement of the Beagle Islands conflict in their favour, but I'm not sure if they would have the resources to pull it off. It will however, butterfly the Falklands War though.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Jun 11, 2018 14:56:14 GMT
Except that Bolivia and Peru have weaker militaries than Chile, plus Peru might have its problem with the Shining Path guerrillas. Argentina on the other hand, might become the big winner here, with the settlement of the Beagle Islands conflict in their favour, but I'm not sure if they would have the resources to pull it off. It will however, butterfly the Falklands War though.
They have weaker militaries normally but if Chile is in a bloody civil war that can change things, if only in the minds of some of the political and military leaders involved.
An Argentinian success in a war with a divided Chile could give them gains with regards to the Beagle Channel but it might not butterfly the Falklands. If they suffered badly in the war, or are worried about a vengeful and reunited Chile that has got its act together, then the conflict with Britain is unlikely. If Chile is still divided and weak then the junta in Argentina - who are the most likely to make such a move - could suffer some 'victory disease'. Which could possibly mutate the OTL Falklands into a more complex conflict if them Chile sees the chance for revenge as Argentina starts to go down.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,984
Likes: 49,385
|
Post by lordroel on Jun 11, 2018 15:08:59 GMT
Except that Bolivia and Peru have weaker militaries than Chile, plus Peru might have its problem with the Shining Path guerrillas. Argentina on the other hand, might become the big winner here, with the settlement of the Beagle Islands conflict in their favour, but I'm not sure if they would have the resources to pull it off. It will however, butterfly the Falklands War though. That would be worrisome, a Argentine that has manged to bully ore threaten itself to ownership of Beagle Islands, could this have a effect on the Falklands, and how much does it effect the war if Chili is not pro-British ore what ever they where in OTL. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Jun 11, 2018 15:33:10 GMT
Except that Bolivia and Peru have weaker militaries than Chile, plus Peru might have its problem with the Shining Path guerrillas. Argentina on the other hand, might become the big winner here, with the settlement of the Beagle Islands conflict in their favour, but I'm not sure if they would have the resources to pull it off. It will however, butterfly the Falklands War though. That would be worrisome, a Argentine that has manged to bully ore threaten itself to ownership of Beagle Islands, could this have a effect on the Falklands, and how much does it effect the war if Chili is not pro-British ore what ever they where in OTL.
Chile was quietly pro-British in that they allegedly provided some intel and also by some reports allowed entry to some SAS men who operated in Argentina during the war. TTL unless totally under the Argentinian thumb, which seems unlikely I suspect they would be fairly eager to get some revenge by helping cut the Argentinians down a bit. [Presuming that they conflident Britain wouldn't leave them in the lurch so this might be limited to intel support as OTL.
Mind you with a 1970 POD a hell of a lot could happen by ~1982, especially if there has been civil war in Chile followed by intervention by Argentina and possibly others. Britain and the US could have totally different leaders, relations with the Soviets and China also different and a hell of a lot of other things could be different.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,984
Likes: 49,385
|
Post by lordroel on Jun 11, 2018 15:38:47 GMT
So there might be a real change that if Salvador Allende had lost the 1970 Chilean Election there might be a civil war, would that not result in a certain military Junta stepping in to prevent that ore restore order if there is serious civil unrest leading up to a 2nd Chili Civil War.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Jun 11, 2018 15:52:42 GMT
So there might be a real change that if Salvador Allende had lost the 1970 Chilean Election there might be a civil war, would that not result in a certain military Junta stepping in to prevent that ore restore order if there is serious civil unrest leading up to a 2nd Chili Civil War.
Not quite following here? If Allende was defeated, especially by foul means, then it could well end up in a civil war, which unfortunately the right is likely to win and you get a junta like Pinochet's, albeit possibly not lead by him. If there is an Argentinian attack and resultant loss of territory you could see Chile likely to want revenge, especially if Argentina then gets into a conflict with Britain. However not sure how a 2nd Chilean civil war enters into this?
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,984
Likes: 49,385
|
Post by lordroel on Jun 11, 2018 15:54:46 GMT
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Jun 12, 2018 9:41:46 GMT
OK thanks. Thinking of you talking about a 2nd civil war post 1970. Understand now.  |
|
eurofed
Banned
Posts: 586
Likes: 62
|
Post by eurofed on Jun 16, 2018 21:24:50 GMT
All of you are ignoring a key fact about the 1970 election that made foul play utterly unnecessary to keep Allende from power. Allende won no majority, only a narrow plurality that threw the election to the Chilean Congress to choose a President between the two candidates with the highest number of votes. All it takes is for the Christian Democrats to ignore precedent and vote for Alessandri, perhaps because of perceived extremism of the Unidad Popular platform, or covert pressures from the army or the USA, or because Alessandri plays a 1824 and does a better bargain than Allende. Alessandri takes over as President according to the Constitution with no foul play, and the left-wingers are stuck in opposition, unless frustration (it would be third time in a row Allende loses an election) drives the Communist radicals in their coalition to start a civil war like they did in 1970s pre-coup Argentina. If that happens, the government unleashes the army on them with the blessing of the Chilean moderates and the Western powers, and the Reds are curbstomped with some bloodshed but much less than OTL and stuck as the villains in the eyes of everyone but the far-leftists. Or for that matter, just let any kind of political butterfly switch the electoral results of Allende and Alessandri, since only a 2% margin separated them.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Jun 17, 2018 7:00:25 GMT
An Alessandri victory would also have a major effect on US politics, I reckon, as the absence of Allende would have killed the possibility of the Chicago School becoming a prominent force in economics.
|
|
