|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Salvador Allende article.|
|Salvador Allende has been listed as a level-4 vital article in People. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.|
|The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Please supply full citations when adding information, and consider tagging or removing unciteable information.|
|Please be calm and civil when you make comments or when you present evidence, and avoid personal attacks. Please be patient as we work toward resolution of the issues in a peaceful, respectful manner.|
|This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details.|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on November 4, 2014.|
- 1 Was Allende a Catholic?
- 2 Flushing the Chamber of Deputies Resolution of August 22, 1973 down the memory-hole
- 3 Historical revisionism (negationism)
- 4 Foreign relations during Allende's Presidency section
- 5 http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende#Death_and_myth
- 6 Disputed
- 7 Extraction
- 8 Soft redirect
- 9 Ironic Discrepancy
- 10 Completely garbage article.
- 11 Richard Pipes?
- 12 His second name dispute
- 13 POV dispute template
- 14 Citation/POV issues.
- 15 Was Salvador Allende a Marxist?
- 16 Fiat currency and reference #30
- 17 80,000 hectars
- 18 Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
- 19 Date of Birth
- 20 Dates of presidential term
- 21 Request for Comments
Was Allende a Catholic?
Hello everyone, the article states that Salvador Allende was a Roman Catholic Christian (info box). Although I'm sure that he had been raised a Roman Catholic, in my opinion two facts give rise to doubts about this claim:
- Allende was a freemason as well as some of his ancestors. So as I know, especially in the Hispanic world freemasons' lodges strongly disapproved of the Roman Catholic Church and her doctrines (cf. Fascists persecuting freemasons after the civil war in Spain). This was mutual since the Vatican declared inconsistence of membership in the 'Holy Mother Church' and a lodge long time ago.
- Allende once said:
-Wir respektieren das christliche Denken, wenn es das Denken ist, das dem Wort Christi folgt, der die Händler aus dem Tempel geworfen hat. (original quote in German)
-We respect Christian thought if it is the thought following the word of Christ, who threw the money changers out of the temple. (my modest translation)
This quote makes me believe that Allende did not consider himself to be a Christian, but a critic pointing out the contradiction between today's christianity and the role model of Jesus of Nazareth in the Christian bible.
I'm chilean and I can tell you that Allende WAS NOT catholic. He was atheist and all chilean people know that. I don't understand why he is described as a catholic in the english wikipedia. In the spanish wikipedia you can read the next: "Durante la ocupación de su cargo, Allende —que era ateo— apoyó un enfoque más ecuménico de las festividades nacionales y promovió la participación de la pequeña comunidad chileno-judía en el festejo de la Independencia de Chile, que ha sido tradicionalmente celebrada por la Iglesia Católica." ^He meant that whilst he didn't practice Catholicism that Salvador was either born or raised Catholic. Then he became an atheist. (18.104.22.168 (talk) 09:59, 8 November 2012 (UTC))
"During his administration, Allende, who was an atheist, supported a more ecumenical approach of national holidays and promoted the participation of small Jewish community in Chile, the celebration of the Independence of Chile, which has traditionally been held by the Church Catholic." (english translation)
Flushing the Chamber of Deputies Resolution of August 22, 1973 down the memory-hole
Editors please keep an eye on the concerted efforts of (Marxist?) revisionists to erase or at least marginalize the importance of the Chamber of Deputies call upon the armed forces to physically remove Allende.Mike18xx (talk) 22:11, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps a more effective or permanent way to deal with people inserting material that keeps transforming this biography into a blog of irreconcilable views on Allende’s presidency would be to introduce a sound section on Allende’s Chile on the historical revisionism (negationism) page. This would discourage editors inserting bias material that aims to equate the universally recognized (including 5 successive US administrations) US involvement in the military coup with the Soviet involvement in Allende’s Chile (that some claim justified the coup). A similar solution could be given to material that aims to equate the alleged crimes committed under Allende with the crimes against humanity universally recognized to have been committed by Pinochet.
The reductio ad absurdum attempt of the right-wing in Chile to present such a distorted version of what occurred in Chile between 1970 and 1990 to the new generations of Chileans (many of whom make their presence felt on this page) is only comparable to the falsification of history under the Stalinists in the USSR or the holocaust denial of Nazi sympathisers. Moshe-paz (talk) 20:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that there is a constant and brutal historical revisionism (negationism) in this page. I disagree though that is only from the "right-wing" faction, but also (and mostly) from his supporters who suppress any attempt at a historically balanced view of his persona and administration. The only way to deal with these issues is to keep on taking out the most blatantly partisan commentaries. As for whether the US administration claims are historically accurate or not (the last five administrations? that would mean since Carter, no? It cannot be since Reagan and Bush father never subscribed to that view, and Obama has not had time yet to express any view) is dubious since some have given one version but others have given a completely opposite one. That topic is not for this page to discuss, but only to report. As the policy says, we're not supposed to report the TRUTH, but just the FACTS. --Mel Romero (talk) 01:56, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Excuse me Moshe-paz but you are talking nonsense and clearly taking a defensive position typical of left-wing denial to the new information that puts Allende as manipulated and dependent of the USSR politics.
"A similar solution could be given to material that aims to equate the alleged crimes committed under Allende with the crimes against humanity universally recognized to have been committed by Pinochet."
Those crimes have been well documented.... why do you feel the need to make a comparison with Pinochet? to make you feel better?
"The reductio ad absurdum attempt of the right-wing in Chile to present such a distorted version of what occurred in Chile between 1970 and 1990"
I dont think you have the monopoly of the truth, nor that any new information presented by respected schoolars is "right-wing propaganda".
"is only comparable to the falsification of history under the Stalinists in the USSR or the holocaust denial of Nazi sympathisers."
Why is Allende such a "sacred cow" of the left? why cant people accept that his government, US intervention aside, was unconstitutional and horribly manipulated by the USSR, Cuba and the marxist terrorist groups in the country? Agrofelipe (talk) 04:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Furthermore on this "revisionism" topic, the left has a pretty well established record of historical revisionism and manipulation, right now there are people still deny the Soviet intervention in Chile, the support of Allende`s government for illegality, violence and terrorism, the smuggling of cuban weapons by the UP with Allende`s authorization and even today some believe that the "US invaded Chile" or that "the US was preparing to invade Chile in a second coup", quite frankly is just sad. Agrofelipe (talk) 20:32, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Reply to Agrofelipe:
- Firstly, I am not going to discuss with you the issue of historical revisionism because in your reply you prove that you may lack the capacity to really understand it. Also, a brief reading of your edits and comments leads me to conclude that your knowledge of history seems to be entangled with a form of ontological insecurity! Secondly, you don’t know my political views, and this project is not about people imposing their political agenda. Nor am I going to enter a discussion about my political views with people here. The Wikipedia project claims to be a project that aims to present its readers with established facts that are referenced with reliable sources.
- Now if you are contributing to a page in the project you need to present information (as opposed to views) that are adequately sourced and are known to be facts beyond reasonable doubt. You cannot claim that under the Allende government “Marxist terrorist groups” operated and committed human rights violations and not provide a reliable source for such statements.
- Where are the victims of the Allende government?
- Where are the victims of these “marxist terrorists groups”?
- Where are their graves?
- Where are their widows?
- Where are their lawyers?
- Where are their memorials?
- There were a handful of military officials and police officials assassinated in Chile but not under Allende – these people were assassinated under the Pinochet regime. These people were not civilians they were functionaries of a military dictatorship that did not tolerate any political opposition which established a secret police along with secret detention centers as part of a state policy of subjecting political opponents to forced disappearances. This is a fact. This is not my idea or my wish or my political agenda nor my attempt to discredit the right or Pinochet.
- Now this debate can be concluded simply by starting pages listing the victims of the Pinochet regime. I have started List of MIR (Chile) members assassinated by the Pinochet regime, there should also be a corresponding list of victims of the pinochet regime who were members of the Communist Party of Chile, a list for those who were members of MAPU and one also for those who were members of the Socialist Party of Chile.
- You claim that the “crimes” of Allende and his “Marxist terrorist groups” have been well documented. When? Where? By whom? If you have such information then maybe you could begin the list of those victims; who they were, what they did, when they fell victims to “Allende and his Marxist terrorist groups”. Maybe you can get the assistance of Likeminas or Dentren to fulfill that task!------ Moshe-paz (talk) 14:54, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Fist off I will say that I don't agree with Agrofelipe one bit, much less with his rather rude tone of discussing this issue.
- I will also ask, however, that Moshe-paz not get me involved in his fringe theories of socket puppetry.
- Moshe-paz you know me very little and if you were to at least read what I’ve said on this talk page or see my list of contributions you would’ve realized you’re making a fool of yourself by making silly and unfounded spurious accusations against me.
- Finally , just a piece of advice;
- If you guys want to keep a constructive editing environment I’d suggest you all, to avoid discussing the editors and focus only on dicussing and improving the article, nothing else.
- Likeminas (talk) 16:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I hit a socialist nerve it seems, well let me reply to this nonsense. Although before I do I want to make clear that this is for Moshe-paz directly.
"Firstly, I am not going to discuss with you the issue of historical revisionism because in your reply you prove that you may lack the capacity to really understand it."
In other words you just cant define "historical revisionism" without saying that only your truth is the "acceptable one"... hahaha!
"Also, a brief reading of your edits and comments leads me to conclude that your knowledge of history seems to be entangled with a form of ontological insecurity!"
Could you be a little more vague?
"Secondly, you don’t know my political views, and this project is not about people imposing their political agenda. Nor am I going to enter a discussion about my political views with people here. The Wikipedia project claims to be a project that aims to present its readers with established facts that are referenced with reliable sources."
Fine, lets get to the real issue.
"Now if you are contributing to a page in the project you need to present information (as opposed to views) that are adequately sourced and are known to be facts beyond reasonable doubt. You cannot claim that under the Allende government “Marxist terrorist groups” operated and committed human rights violations and not provide a reliable source for such statements.
You must not be a chilean if you ask for proof of Allende's link to terrorism. You can search on your own the doings of the MIR, the MAPU and the VOP in Chile during that time, also there is a complete record of the cuban weapons smugled by Allende`s government to arm these terrorist groups, you can find it here under the "cuban packages scandal".
Another thing my contributions were not aimed at that point but to show that Allende was a puppet of the USSR and Cuba, I did that with plenty of sources from soviet officials and intelligence documents, however a fellow wikipedia editor added sources about political violence an terrorism during Allende's years...... they were deleted.
Where are the victims of the Allende government?
Dead I guess, or simply living their lives as any other citizen.
Where are the victims of these “marxist terrorists groups”?
Where are their graves?
You want a map?
Where are their widows?
What an absurd question
Where are their lawyers?
Unlike the left-wing, the right-wing people cant get the state to hire lawyers to ask for compensations.
- Where are their memorials?
People protecting their property, rights and liberty from socialist criminals dont get memorials, only marxist terrorists a la Che Guevara do, don't you know that?
- There were a handful of military officials and police officials assassinated in Chile but not under Allende
Where are your sources????!!!!
Sorry I couldn't resist.
Your are right, police officers were killed during Pinochet years by marxist terrorists as well as during Allende years
"– these people were assassinated under the Pinochet regime. These people were not civilians they were functionaries of a military dictatorship
The FPMR, the marxist terrorist organization guilty of these crimes payed by the cuban dictatorship and whose members belonged to the communist party of Chile, also killed innocent civilians in bombings of public places, kidnappings and armed robberies to banks.
The only bank robberies perpetrated in Chile during the Dictatorship was carry out by the CNI. At the beginning of March of the ' 81, the Bank of the State of Chuquicamata was, robbed. The Manager and the cashier of the Branch were missing. Almost three months after a report of investigations revealed what had happened. The thieves were the head of the local CNI, mayor Gabriel Diaz Andersen and agent Ernesto Villanueva. The employees of the Bank had been killed and their bodies dinamitados. In his confession, Diaz Andersen said that obey orders from his regional superior, the Chief of the CNI Arica, mayor Juan Delmas. --Angel de la Guardia (talk) 00:16, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
"that did not tolerate any political opposition which established a secret police along with secret detention centers as part of a state policy of subjecting political opponents to forced disappearances."
I never denied this, however those "political opponents" were mostly terrorists.
- Now this debate can be concluded simply by starting pages listing the victims of the Pinochet regime.
How is that relevant?
You mean a list of MIR terrorists killed during Pinochet years, dont you?
"there should also be a corresponding list of victims of the pinochet regime who were members of the Communist Party of Chile, a list for those who were members of MAPU and one also for those who were members of the Socialist Party of Chile."
"MIR, PC, MAPU"......You seem pretty fond of terrorist organizations, well to each his own.
I wont deny that marxists are exceptionally good at crying for money, and even now there are cases were "missing" socialists were in fact very much alive while their families received a monetary compensation.
Its all about the money.
"You claim that the “crimes” of Allende and his “Marxist terrorist groups” have been well documented. When? Where? By whom?
I suggest searching for chilean newspapers of the time as well as the statements of the supreme court of justice and the declaration of the chamber of deputies of Chile of 1973.
If you have such information then maybe you could begin the list of those victims; who they were, what they did, when they fell victims to “Allende and his Marxist terrorist groups”.
Maybe I will if I get the time, however it is somewhat tricky, first because the courts of justice during Allende`s regime were unable to trial the terrorists responsible for the violation of property and rights of people, second because the record of those crimes are very old and third because the marxist criminals guilty of those crimes were executed by military tribunals 30 years ago. Agrofelipe (talk) 19:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- My, my, my. I think you've alienated many people from your country. in reality, the MIR was not the best organized in Chile. MANY branches did not have access to arms, and did not resort to extreme tactics. Agrofelipe, instead of calling anything socialist terrorism, perhaps you may want to look at some important documents. I'm fed up with you slamming everything that is against Pinochet.
- P.S. :
- Before you decide that Allende was loco, look at how many fell under the Pinochet regime. All opposition to the military junta was terminated.
Agrofelipe is a very well known pro-Pinochet chilean with close connections to the chilean neo-nazi movement. In Germany this guy would end in prison for his views.
Wikipedia should not be a playground for severe accusations without real sources. Do you really mean that accusing Salvador Allende to have personally received payment by KGB is a constructive action? That is propaganda my friends and coming from people that usually are unfriendly to our Wikipedia movement. I use Wikipedia for teaching and I am an advocate of Open Access but with people like the ones defending the "Soviet involvement" section, accepting severe criminal accusations are undermining the credibility of Wikipedia.
- Re- credibility of Wikipedia- you mean like leaving pompously critical comments but not signing them? Here is a reference on Allende's KGB payments-  as for criticism of the Soviet involvement, consider that in the cold war era of the '70's an American investigative reporter had the opportunity to win a Pulitzer prize for exposing foreign intervention activities of his government's intelligence agencies. His Soviet counterpart had the opportunity- no, the guarantee, of a one way trip to the Siberian Gulags for his efforts.Batvette (talk) 14:42, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
You must be joking when you give that article as a reference for Allende receiving money from KGB!! The article relies only on the tales told by one person! NO DOCUMENTS! Sorry my friend but I am a scientist and you would never approve a PhD thesis with me. On the other hand we have hundreds of documents from the USA involvement during the Allende era. Please be serious about your accusations and not blinded by your anti-communism.
To inform others: This is the type of people trying to defame Allende:
June 2009 Comments to Batvette; Dougweller (talk) 18:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC); Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on New World Order (conspiracy theory). Please read that the comment was "shifty and dishonest arguments" which clearly addresses his contributions. This is in contrast to "I went to your user page and it sounds like you're a crank". Sound familiar? It was in his first reply to me. Welcome to earth.Batvette (talk) 22:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- You asked for real sources, the one provided meets the wiki criteria for reliable sources, discarding it would be your own original research and would not be considered acceptable. You are a scientist? Great! What does that have to do with a wiki article on Allende? Your credentials certainly aren't helped by the petty, immature tactic of trying to attack my personWikipedia:No_personal_attacks to lend credibility to your own POV on Allende, which incidentally phails to the "nth" degree as you only provided my rebuttal. Notice the other editor claimed "shifty and dishonest arguments" was a personal attack, by C/Ping it here you only proved you can't read or are equally clueless. "blinded by my anti-communism"? Please review Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith and do not assume anything about the intent of my contributions to wiki. What you call the tales of one person is actually the factual dissemination of intelligence documents wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitrokhin_Archive that the FBI calls "the most complete and extensive intelligence ever received from any source". This one person happened to be a KGB major who oversaw the movement of the entire archives of the bureau over a twelve year period, and took notes of everything he saw. His notes have been extensively reviewed by scholars, and have withstood skeptical review as authentic. Your dismissal of them because they do not look favorably upon your POV only discredits yourself as ignorant of their significance. Oh, and please sign your comments, "Mr Scientist".Batvette (talk) 17:48, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Why the CIA rejected Mitrokhin? was because he was “just” a librarian or because his documents were not originals? Is it possible that Mitrokhin could have smuggled and transcribed thousands of KGB documents, undetected, over 30 years?. We must pointed out that Mitrokhin did not bring either the original documents or photocopies. Instead, he brought handwritten/typed notes of the contents of the documents. "In 1992, after Mr. Mitrokhin had approached the UK for help, our Secret Intelligence Service made arrangements to bring Mr. Mitrokhin and his family to this country, together with his archive. As there were no original KGB documents or copies of original documents, the material itself was of no direct evidential value, but it was of huge value for intelligence and investigative purposes”. Jack Straw Several factual and methodological problems result as a consequence, and these need to be identified for purposes of future progress in understanding. For example, the book speaks many times of the KGB having forged or fabricated documents around the world as a technique of spreading disinformation. Doubtless this was standard operating procedure for Intelligence agencies but it is left completely impossible for the average reader to come to any assessment whether a given document mentioned was genuine or forged. Another important detail: In February 2003, Andrew accepted the post of official historian for the Security Service MI5, being chartered to write an official history of the service due for their centennial in 2009. This appointment - which entailed Andrew's enrollment into the Security Service - drew criticism from some historians and commentators. In general, these criticisms drew heavily on the suggestion that he was too close to MI5 to be impartial, and that indeed his link with the Service (formalised with his privileged access to the defectors Gordievsky and Mitrokhin) made him a "court historian" instead of a clear-eyed and critical historian.--Angel de la Guardia (talk) 23:37, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
"Agrofelipe is a very well known pro-Pinochet chilean with close connections to the chilean neo-nazi movement. In Germany this guy would end in prison for his views."
LOL, that one made me laugh, aparently for some people one cant denounced the crimes of a socialist regime or introduce historical truth without being a "NAZI".
Angel the CIA didnt rejected Mitrokhin, they simply failed to undertand the importance of his files and by the beginning of the 90's the CIA was receiving tons of KGB material following the fall of the Soviet Union.
You can doubt the veracity of the files, however at this moment the files have been confirmed genuine by the MI-6, the FBI and the CIA, so your main concern is gone.
However I see now that there is a very strong effort to wash the image of Salvador Allende and pretend that the whole soviet involvement in Chile never happened, I simply dont have the time or the will to keep fighting over this. Agrofelipe (talk) 18:25, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Foreign relations during Allende's Presidency section
This section keeps referring to relations with Russia, i.e. Russian aid, Russian investment etc, during Allende's era. That is incorrect. The correct term is Soviet Union, as the Russian SFSR was only its largest constituent part. The USSR may be an extension of Russia, but legally they are not the same. Akaloc (talk) 15:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Correct. I am assuming that whoever put the references to the so-called "Soviet involvement" did not care to be accurate.
- Accuracy is key. If the article is not accurate , it is worthless.Compression09KingExtreme Wikipedian 15:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Excuse me, but I wrote the article, or should I say expanded it, and Russia was the master country that dominated all the others in the Soviet Union, so any form of political or economic intervention in Chile or assistance to Allende`s government was coming directly from Moscow. Agrofelipe (talk) 04:23, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Did anyone see this? Those who are commited to maintaining Allende commited suicide will be busy all year!
Compression09KingExtreme Wikipedian 15:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Arguing over a dead man is not my idea of scholars. Forget it.
- You guys can fix it. Who's stopping you?
- I am tired of constantly fighting. So I changed my name , and my habits.
- No more arguing over old Allende.
- Now where did I put that coffee?!?
Compression09KingExtreme Wikipedian 15:54, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Some sources regarding Allende's death:
- The death of Allende: Officially a suicide
- Wife admits Allende suicide with gun Castro gave him 
- Leftist Journal Concludes Allende Killed Himself 
- Allende's Last Day 
- French Socialist Says Allende Once Spoke of Suicide if overthrown 
Since this is the most widely accepted view of his death, there are tons of sources corroborating it. But obviusly I don't have the time nor the motivation to list them all. I mainly say this just to put to rest all the other fringe theories about Allende being murdered. Likeminas (talk) 15:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah , ever theory needs a rest. I decided no more Allende until my book is finished.
- Who would have known being an author would be so strange?
- And yes , every theory has holes in it.
- Just plug them up with "He died ,and that is that. Don't matter how."
Compression09KingExtreme Wikipedian 16:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Have you not looked at the edit history of the article and realised that the content is disputed? I have restored the tag and will continue to do so. Compression09King-Extreme Wikipedian (talk) 14:39, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry Moshe-paz. I didn't realize some browse with small screens. I'll have to do something to the logo. Like shrink it.
Am I missing something here? Why is the section Death being disputed now? We have already established with ample evidence (see sources above) that the most widely accepted version of his death was suicide.
I don't think the lede should contain a wikilink to a soft redirect to a wikisource translation of Allende's last speech. I've tried to compromise with the editor who wants to add it by adding the wikisource page as a ref, but maybe there is a better way. What do others think? --John (talk) 15:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Ever notice how this Death of Salvador Allende attributes the suicide ruling to Dr. Guijón and not his personal doctor Dr. Enrique Paris Roa. I'm supposed to be retired, but I could not resist pointing this out. The person who attributed the statement to Roa oughta make a public apology, IMHO.
The beginning of this article reads very poorly and sounds extremely bias. I came to learn a little about Allende but expected to find an article that at least sounded like it wasn't biased. Somebody please revise the opening as it makes it appear that allende was somehow as bad as Pinochet, which anyone who has ties to these parts knows is false. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 05:01, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Completely garbage article.
"His economic policy resulted in inflation which exceeded 300 percent a year"
- This isn't very well covered on Wikipedia at the moment; this should be expanded.  mentions inflation over 200%. Rd232 talk 15:22, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
The first couple of citations are that of Richard Pipes, the ardent anti-communist always cited by right wingers along with his son Daniel Pipes. A bit much POV on this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 14:57, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I see the question was raised but not answered. It's completely absurd to include his words here. Other sources should be used. Pipes was a lifelong rabid anticommunist. I'll be back to make changes if nobody addresses this. The words of the rabid don't belong in the histories of those they have bitten. Jackhammer111 (talk) 08:01, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
His second name dispute
Here in this page web is the birth certificate of Guillermo Salvador Allende Gossens his real name. http://www.chileatento.com/portada_meio.asp?NEWS = 1735 --Angel de la Guardia (talk) 03:52, 6 March 2011 (UTC)--Angel de la Guardia (talk) 17:06, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
POV dispute template
- For starters, there's the never-ending problem of the concerted efforts by barely-(if at all)-disguised Marxist revisionist "historians" (and editors) deliberately seeking to conflate (i.e., tell a lie by falsely equating) two disparate events: (a) the Chamber of Deputies authorized military removal of Allende (of which, said removal being authorized, did not amount to a "coup d'etat" any more than if, say, an alternate-history Richard Nixon refused to leave the White House and was removed militarily after being impeached by Congress), and (b) the after-the-fact decision of Pinochet to not return government power to civilian authority (the "coup" proper rendering Chile a junta). The revisionist, after airbrushing the Chamber of Deputies authorization from popular consciousness, seeks to present Allende as a martyr falling to the forces of fascism rather than his removal being sought by the very civilian government whose authority he had grossly exceeded. This propaganda is shot through virtually every article on Wikipedia dealing with the subject, for example 1973 Chilean coup d'état, which gets it wrong from the second sentence onward.Mike18xx (talk) 07:52, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
- It's probably best to not spread this discussion awkwardly across lots of article talkpages. I suggest discussing it at Talk:History of Chile, and return here when there is some kind of an outcome there, to discuss the relevance of that outcome for this article. Rd232 talk 11:30, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
- Why wait? It's not a matter of historical dispute. The outcome of the Chamber of Deputies resolution was front-page news in Chile. It shouldn't take twenty years after the fall of the Soviet Union to finally expunge the lingering remnants of its propaganda from the pages of Wikipedia (where it's still going strong in English-page histories of Latin America).Mike18xx (talk) 21:21, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
- It's probably best to not spread this discussion awkwardly across lots of article talkpages. I suggest discussing it at Talk:History of Chile, and return here when there is some kind of an outcome there, to discuss the relevance of that outcome for this article. Rd232 talk 11:30, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
"Viaux's kidnapping plan had been supported by the CIA, although the then U.S. National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger claims to have ordered the plans postponed at the last moment. Many believe Kissinger's statement to be false and evidence points towards CIA director Richard Helms following orders directly from President Nixon to do whatever was necessary in order “to get rid of him”, referring to Allende. Nixon handed over a blank check to Helms, which allowed him to use full discretion in ridding Chile of Allende’s presence and “making the economy scream”. Schneider was a defender of the "constitutionalist" doctrine that the army's role is exclusively professional, its mission being to protect the country's sovereignty and not to interfere in politics."
This is a huge block of information without a single citation. I think some of it is from the declassified government documents, but who knows...I tried to Google it but didn't find much other than the same information regurgitated over and over again. Also, I think there's a POV issue at the end of the quote with some random, out of place, praise for Schneider.
Oh...I'm writing this from a university so my IP might have some bad edits associated with it.
Was Salvador Allende a Marxist?
- The opening of this article had me surprised:
- 'Salvador Allende Gossens (Spanish pronunciation: [salβaˈðoɾ aˈʝende ˈɣosens]; 26 July 1908 – 11 September 1973) was a Chilean physician and politician who is generally considered the first democratically elected Marxist to become president of a country in Latin America.'
- The link provided is to a BBC profile that doesn't state its sources. Is Allende 'generally considered' to have been a Marxist? By whom? Are there alternative interpretations? I wondered about the Marxist claim as it was repeated several times in Niall Fergusons The Ascent of Money, but I have not heard it stated so bombastically elsewhere - apart from US sources at the time of the coup (I discount these as biased beyond usefulness as I would have expected them to have been backed by subsequent 'hard evidence' of Allende's alleged Marxism, which Pinochet's regime would probably have published if available - see also Operation PBHISTORY)
- Mojowiha (talk) 13:35, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- Is the BBC not reliable? Here's another source, from a peer-reviewed journal: "Such was the discredit of market-based policies that in 1964, the Conservative and Liberal parties – the only two parties that advocated economic liberalism – had no option but to withdraw their candidate from the presidential race in order to prevent the victory of Salvador Allende, the Marxist candidate."
- - FAUNDEZ, JULIO. 2010. "Chilean Constitutionalism Before Allende: Legality Without Courts." Bulletin Of Latin American Research 29, no. 1: 34-50. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=45694041.--Lacarids (talk) 18:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- It looks like the above link to the article I cited on EBSCOHost isn't working anymore. Here's another link to the same article: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1499077_code1348672.pdf?abstractid=1499077&mirid=1 --Lacarids (talk) 02:49, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
- I may just be quibbling, but the article initially uses a more ambivalent description, "Six years later, in 1970, Salvador Allende, the leader of a coalition of Marxist and Social Democratic parties, was elected President on a platform that promised to bring about a peaceful transition to socialism." (pp. 1)
- Thank you for providing a peer-reviewed source with a bibliography, it's much appreciated. This source is certainly much better than the BBC one, though I would prefer a source actually analysing the ideology of Allende, rather than having it as a side note in an article on "CHILEAN CONSTITUTIONALISM BEFORE ALLENDE: LEGALITY WITHOUT COURTS".
- As it is, the Marxist description ought to remain.
- Mojowiha (talk) 19:27, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Fiat currency and reference #30
Is the reference to Chile having a fiat currency even worth noting? It seems to imply that having a fiat currency was in some way part of the issue regarding rapid inflation.
Reference #30 links to 'Figures are from November, 1986, pp. 4–12, tables 1.1 & 1.7'. Figures from where? If the information is unverifiable then perhaps the whole proceeding block of text should be removed.
Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessaryily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
- Triggered by
\bhalshs\.archives-ouvertes\.fron the global blacklist
- Triggered by
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
Date of Birth
The Wikipedia article gives his dob as JUNE, but his Biography gives it as JULY?
Biography President (non-U.S.) (1908–1973)
July 26, 1908
September 11, 1973
Dates of presidential term
In the box at the top of the article it says "4 November 1970 - ...". In the last paragraph under Election it says "Allende assumed the presidency on 3 November 1970 ...". Is this a contradiction? Mathyeti (talk) 03:26, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages.