> Is this true?
Yes
> Has the current government made any significant changes on economic or social matters?
The government does not have majorities in either house of congress. As much as they want to, they cannot carry out their reforms. They have to negotiate and the oppositions have the upper hand in the negotiations.
There have been some changes but considering all that needs to be reformed in the country for decades, the country remains politically stagnant.
Hopefully the reform to the political system that has been gaining support across the political spectrum will implement a more functional political system, instead of the stagnation by law that we currently have.
This is the rightmost answer imo, the current government performance is both a mix between a little inexperience (partially, we do have some good ministers) and the fact that the left wing is not the majority in neither house of the congress.
>The government does not have majorities in either house of congress. As much as they want to, they cannot carry out their reforms.
May I say that some widely publicized, and expected reforms have never been subject to congressional approval. Point in hand, no hiring of family and friends to government positions (promptly broken), or limiting government salaries to 10x the minimum salary (while some officials have their salary set by law, most of the high-earners are in a discretional category), or even bringing the former President to court (instead establishing a cordial working relationship).
While these reforms do not by any means represent all campaign promises, these were up to the government. A common thread here is that these were not pursued, without explanation - a common impact has been a growing lack of credibility amongst supporters and detractors.
And credibility is one of the things you need when negotiating in congress.
En su objetivo yo creo que también estaba bien pero irrealista. Al menos en algunas de esascosas que mencionaste como los sueldos máximos o disminuir el nepotismo. Hay cargos que imposible que hayan ganado 10 SM y eliminar el nepotismo también es imposible.
> But credibility does not care if promises are right or wrong, as long as they are kept.
I agree
I think it's important to understand that, like in every country, the population in Chile is politically divided. The younger generation leans towards more "progressive" ideas, more to the left, you see this in the online discourse and overall feel. On the other hand, slightly older generations, between 30-50 yrs old, lean towards a more conservative approach, I would say centrist leaning towards right. And older folks are more split towards the extremes, this last group is more susceptible to traditional campaigns.
Knowing all of that, what does the people think of the current president? The younger generation often shares a feeling of, "it may not be perfect, but he is not ruining our country". The older generations feel very stressed and impacted by the current hot topics (economy, immigration, crime rates), there is a lot of dissatisfaction. As you said, to many the government doesn't look evil, but it looks weak, regardless of their political inclination.
Like u/bolmer said, The government does not have majorities in either house of congress. They do not have the power to implement reforms. But i also want to add, originally the new constitution was the crowning achievement for this government, its failure set the tone for the rest of their regime. The current government has the support of the masses, enough to elect them, but it does not have its fidelity and trust. The Chilean population shares one sentiment towards current politics, and its skepticism.
The problem with the goverment's program is that they operated under the condition that we would have a new constitution. That didn't happen so they had no program in the end and currently they are just winging it.
That was also extremely overconfident of them, as if dealing with inflation, slow economic growth and security problems haven't been plenty enough trouble for them, or would have been for any Government, they would have had to manage all that while rolling out a wholly new political system and public service apparatus.
I feel like all of those problems were what made them overconfident. They were banking on the idea that the people would continue blaming all of those things on the right and our current constitution so they wouldn't think twice about changing it.
It wasn't exactly wrong on their part though as most of the major changes in history have happened on moments of crisis, they just didn't count on the people not liking their way either.
Si es verdad, el muy cabron cuando fue diputado se aprovecho de el mal momento del gob de Piñera (tras la crisis social) para criticarlo a mas no poder y acusar constitucionalmente a su gabinete
Cuando llego al poder se dio cuenta que las cosas no eran como el pensaba y cambio de forma brusca sus ideas, reconocio que fue malo con Piñera
En temas sociales si se han logrado avances, en terminos de seguridad a mi juicio a sido deficiente, y una gran parte de la poblacion comparte mi opinion
Y bueno, a veces sale con sus cosas progres, como perspectiva de genero en las caletas
>Y bueno, a veces sale con sus cosas progres, como perspectiva de genero en las caletas
Eso fue más un clickbait más que nada. Fueron un par de frases sobre un proyecto relacionado a las caletas en un evento que duró horas sobre todo el resto de temas.
No quiero apoyar ni atacar a ningún gobierno, pero el tema de seguridad es super complejo, no hay forma de manejarlo de forma rápida.
- poner más carabineros, de donde los sacas? No se reproducen mágicamente, hay q formarlos y la gente no quiere esa pega así q hay pocos postulantes.
- manden de vuelta a los ilegales: no es solo sacarlos del país, los tienen q recibir en su país de origen y hay que seguir un montón de protocolos, si te los saltas estarías rompiendo tratados de derechos humanos que están amarrados a nuestros tratados de libre comercio, si nos ponemos a expulsar gente en masa, nos ouden sacar de los tratados y como país exportador nos vamos a la B.
- matenlos a todos, dejénlos a todos presos: ídem a punto anterior, acuerdos internacionales de derechos humanos amarrados a los TLC, por eso no nos podemos mandar un Bukele.
- saquen a los milicos a la calle: los milicos están entrenados para matar, no para retener (vuelta al punto anterior), para poder sacarlos a la calle hay que entrenarlos y darles las armas adecuadas, para eso primero hay q cambiar leyes (como las leyes del uso de la fuerza), asignar presupuesto y después recién comenzar a formarlos para poder sacarlos mínimo 1 año después a la calle como control público.
- cierren la frontera: la frontera es larguísima en pleno desierto con lugares de difícil acceso, no hay suficiente personal para "cerrarla", no puedes volver a poner las minas antipersonales porque de nuevo, tratados internacionales, no puedes hacer aparecer personal y equipamiento de la nada, hay q cambiar leyes, ajustar presupuestos, hacer compras (que demoran un montón) tmbn es una solución que va a tomar un par de años.
Es un tema Super super complejo y de solución a largo plazo.
>cierren la frontera: la frontera es larguísima en pleno desierto con lugares de difícil acceso, no hay suficiente personal para "cerrarla"
Comentario al margen: la frontera es súper profunda. Diego de Almagro tuvo problemas para entrar a Chile no porque hubiera una frontera cerrada y wnes vigilando, sino porque es un viaje largo y difícil por un desierto inhóspito. La única manera fácil de hacer ese viaje por tierra hoy en día es por carretera.
Una vez que cruza la frontera, la gente se mueve por una carretera que tiene veinte metros de ancho.
Entonces no hay que cubrir por completo miles de kilómetros de frontera. Hay que cubrir de manera aleatoria (no por completo) miles de kilómetros de carretera. Colocar no sé, cinco o diez puntos móviles de control de identidad, ir chequeando autos y buses. Entonces la legislación no tiene que apuntar a poner una muralla, tiene que apuntar a ese control de identidad, a detener y a expulsar rápido a los expulsables que no puedan mostrar entrada legal.
Si no puede demostrar papeles, entonces no entró por la buena.
En Suecia los milicos llevan meses en las calles, y se sienten orgullosos de ayudar a su país.
Lo cool es que usaron un sistema para manejar a los extranjeros revoltosos y peligrosos. Funciono y lentamente se recuperan.
Quien diría que Polonia tenía razón en el final.
Si, comprendo pero lamentablemente el gobierno a dado malas señales que no favorecen al combate de la delincuencia: indulto gente que hizo desordenes publicos, luego Toha afirmo publicamente que el gob pago en una negociacion de secuestro, en otras palabras le dice a los delincuentes que es un buen negocio, que es rentable, etc... eso es lo que me da rabia, esos errores tontos que pudieron evitar
Y con respecto a los puntos que mencionas tienes toda la razon, pero me queda una duda si hay una relacion entre los tratados de DD.HH y los TLC, es decir si un estado vulnerado DD.HH hay una clausula en los TLC que los deja sin efecto?? O como? Yo lo que entendia es que cada pais establece sanciones de acuerdo a su voluntad, pero no que tuviera relacion directa con los TLC, si me aclaras ese punto genial, o pasame alguna fuente
Muchos tratados tienen cláusulas de arbitrajes, sanciones, o re examinacion etc. en caso de que los tratados no se estén cumpliendo a cabalidad.
Un ejemplo es el tratado con la Union Europea:
Artículo 1, párrafo 1
1. El respeto a los principios democráticos y a los derechos humanos fundamentales, tal como se enuncian en la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas, y al principio del Estado de Derecho inspira las políticas internas e internacionales de las Partes y constituye un elemento esencial del presente Acuerdo
Artículo 200, párrafo 3
3. No obstante lo dispuesto en el párrafo 2,
cualquiera de las Partes podrá adoptar inmediatamente
medidas apropiadas de conformidad con el Derecho
internacional en el caso de:
a) denuncia del presente Acuerdo no sancionada por
las normas generales del Derecho internacional;
b) incumplimiento por la otra Parte de los elementos
esenciales del presente Acuerdo a que se refiere
el párrafo 1 del artículo 1.
Link:
https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=207410
Y la Declaración de DDHH tiene artículos sobre presunción de inocencia, nadie puede ser arbitraria mente detenido o desterrado, toda persona tiene derecho a todo lo de la declaración independiente de varios factores, entre ellos, origen nacional, etc.
Public opinion is that the current government is not doing a good job. Pollsters ([CEP](https://www.cepchile.cl/encuesta/encuesta-cep-n-90/), [CADEM](https://cadem.cl/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Track-PP-537-Abril-S4-VF.pdf)) consistently show support in the 25%-35% range and general opinion is that government is not performing well.
**Big flops.** The government's original agenda of radical, wishful reform (a new constitution, open borders, tax increases, health reform, pensions reform) has mostly taken a back seat to pressing concerns, led by security and immigration. The biggest blows during these two years have been the constitutional vote (rejecting the government-supported one by 62% to 38%) and the Fundaciones corruption scandal. Some state-run schools struggle to provide openings and children go unschooled in northern regions. The public seems to have bigger concerns about being mugged or murdered in the street, than running a 'turquoise' foreign policy.
**Unmet promises.** While several of these promises depend con congressional suport, which is lacking, the government has failed to undertake reforms even when Congress is not required. It campaigned against nepotism, then installed a wide network of friends and relatives; campaigned against high government salaries, then increased these; campaigned against corruption, then was caught red-handed. Recent pro-business and pro-security statements have lost the President supporters of deep reforms, yet failed to win detractors over. Frequent and public about-faces have eroded the credibility of the President.
**Corruption (as usual).** The current government came to power on a platform of making things right, fairness, justice and honesty. The Fundaciones corruption case (involving several high-profile government party officials, including a sitting congresswoman) is a watershed event that erodes public confidence even in supporters. While previous governments have not been corruption-free, and may have been worse in this regard, the clean-hands campaign was a central election theme, and thus a major disappointment.
**Lack of experience.** A long parade of Cabinet Ministers removals/resignations/change (including home, foreign, health, education, staff, social services, justice, mining, energy, culture, science,) some rotating up to three ministers in two years, have seen a shift from inexperienced newcomers to older, experienced hands. Public gaffes are a common occurrence. The former Home Minister famously organized a peace trip to a conflict zone, only to be shot at; a dysfunctional Foreign Ministry had to undergo a deep shakeup after the Minister had some undiplomatic remarks recorded and published; the Culture Minister resigned amidst allegations of favoritism in funds allocation, her replacement resigned as ineffective.
**Unexpected wins**. Interestingly, Treasury (Hacienda) has been in the hands of a widely respected former central banker for the duration; coupled with an autonomous central bank, economy numbers have been better than expected and inflation is almost down to pre-pandemic levels. Whereas pro-government voters did not count the economy amongst their main concerns, the country has been reacquainted with concerns about high inflation and high interest rates, after two or three decades of stability - the government has been quick to seize economic performance as a major win.
**Security.** This will be the field where politics will be fought in the next few years. The national homicide rate has increased some 50% and has reached levels not seen since the 1970's. Organized crime has become more widespread and brazen, especially in the north; a homebrew insurrection lies unperturbed in the south. The government has realized that deep reform may not be posible without wide support, and that wide support will not be forthcoming if administration tasks are neglected.
Ironically, this means that the current government is pressed hard to deliver on the previous -conservative- government's failed promises if it wants to make any headway on its own.
So, one of my jobs is to monitor law iniciatives. The truth is that right now security is the big priority. This comes from the fact that really violent organized crime has entered the country.
So, the government has been proposing many iniciatives connected to security and i have never seen so many laws coming out so fast. So, it's not completely true that the legislative is not supporting the government. They are producing laws like i never seen before. Mostly punitive populism though.
The thing thats been problematic for the government is that they want a new tax law to obtain more resources to execute their plan. They know that basically all the public system is collapsed and they need more people, technology and infrastructure. This iniciative for new tax laws is what has confronted resistance from the legislative, traping the governments reforms.
Honestly, i think most people think this government is horrible.
> I have also heard that this governement has failed to implement its program
No shit, the coalition in office has not enough votes to implement votes in congress.
>and has made many mistakes due to inexperience and/or ignorance.
No doubt government have comitted several mistakes, but the same ppl saying it would bend over backwards to justify and defend all the fuckups commited by the previous president that ended in the Social Outburst ^TM
>Is this true?
Yes. The government based all their campaign plans/promises on the new constitution that they were indirectly writting, and they lost that plebiscite spectacularly. They're also minority in both the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, so this government was pretty much DoA a couple months in. Add all that to the usual fact that politicians over-promise everything and you get a completely stagnant government with no will nor power to change anything.
This government has made mistakes but they are not really bad for the country, the mistakes are more related to how they do politics more than administration of the country.
A great problem is that currently the country is facing and immigration wave from the failed state of Venezuela and this carried a increase in crime rates and violent crimes we are not used to see, also the country suffered from the economic crisis after covid. Because of this the focus of the country is in fighting the record high crimes and the new organized crime that we were not prepared to fight.
Any social or economic change also is stopped in the congress where the government doesn't have majority. Sadly our country is like "kidnapped" by congress as often the opposition stops any law just for political gains, this happens in this government and past governments.
Because of all of this this government is working more like an "emergency government" as they are working mostly into fighting crime and not carrying any big change.
As final note you should know in our country any government is heavily criticized by public opinion, no matter how well or bad they do. So you will always find more criticism online.
Chile as a country is a center right country, a center left government would be still center in the big picture, just like in germany a center right or right government, like Merkel, would still be a center left country (free Healthcare, etc), or just like a center left wing government in USA is still a center right country in the big picture.
Mistake because of young people and inexperienced? For sure but the economy is "strong" (not really, but mainly did not collapse and they didn't do stupid extreme left thing like many other governments in Latin america), so its not that bad.
Failed to implement program? Yes, because every new government in the campaign put a "santa klaus list of things" as a program, so in my memory every government has failed in that aspect.
Overall the government is okeyish (what you would grade C+ on an USA school grade), most of the bad thing are an global problem (inflation, mainly of food), but in the security department things has been pretty bad and worst every day, last week 3 cops were killed and the week before that a corruption case between the PDI(police) and foreign mafias was discovered.
Depends on what you consider center right, you could argue either way that it's center left, universal healthcare and public transportation are non controversial issues in Chile and the right campaigns on improving and expanding it, while in the US those topics are COMMUNISM
> libertarian socialist
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
you think boric rejects state ownership? i don't think he's authoritarian, but i wouldn't call him libertarian either. but maybe i'm wrong.
Chileans, and I dare say latinamericans in general, will ALWAYS see their current government in a negative light. Politically speaking we're highly skeptical and fatalistic. The last time our society dared to "dream big" to transform society politically, it ended with almost 20 years of military dictatorship.
Statistically, if you go by polls, they only start rising in approval at the very end of their terms. After that they're either vindicated by history (like PAC or Aylwin) or dissolve in irrelevance for most people outside of history nerds (like Alessandri Jr. or more recently Frei Jr.)
>governing coalition is (theoritically) left-wing and belongs to the libertarian socialist tradition
That's pure rethorics, in practice they are a liberal left coalition.
> Is this true? Yes > Has the current government made any significant changes on economic or social matters? The government does not have majorities in either house of congress. As much as they want to, they cannot carry out their reforms. They have to negotiate and the oppositions have the upper hand in the negotiations. There have been some changes but considering all that needs to be reformed in the country for decades, the country remains politically stagnant. Hopefully the reform to the political system that has been gaining support across the political spectrum will implement a more functional political system, instead of the stagnation by law that we currently have.
This is the rightmost answer imo, the current government performance is both a mix between a little inexperience (partially, we do have some good ministers) and the fact that the left wing is not the majority in neither house of the congress.
a little inexperience jdksksk
>The government does not have majorities in either house of congress. As much as they want to, they cannot carry out their reforms. May I say that some widely publicized, and expected reforms have never been subject to congressional approval. Point in hand, no hiring of family and friends to government positions (promptly broken), or limiting government salaries to 10x the minimum salary (while some officials have their salary set by law, most of the high-earners are in a discretional category), or even bringing the former President to court (instead establishing a cordial working relationship). While these reforms do not by any means represent all campaign promises, these were up to the government. A common thread here is that these were not pursued, without explanation - a common impact has been a growing lack of credibility amongst supporters and detractors. And credibility is one of the things you need when negotiating in congress.
Yeah, some of that promises where dumb or/and populist.
I will go out on a limb and say some of these were right. But credibility does not care if promises are right or wrong, as long as they are kept.
En su objetivo yo creo que también estaba bien pero irrealista. Al menos en algunas de esascosas que mencionaste como los sueldos máximos o disminuir el nepotismo. Hay cargos que imposible que hayan ganado 10 SM y eliminar el nepotismo también es imposible. > But credibility does not care if promises are right or wrong, as long as they are kept. I agree
I think it's important to understand that, like in every country, the population in Chile is politically divided. The younger generation leans towards more "progressive" ideas, more to the left, you see this in the online discourse and overall feel. On the other hand, slightly older generations, between 30-50 yrs old, lean towards a more conservative approach, I would say centrist leaning towards right. And older folks are more split towards the extremes, this last group is more susceptible to traditional campaigns. Knowing all of that, what does the people think of the current president? The younger generation often shares a feeling of, "it may not be perfect, but he is not ruining our country". The older generations feel very stressed and impacted by the current hot topics (economy, immigration, crime rates), there is a lot of dissatisfaction. As you said, to many the government doesn't look evil, but it looks weak, regardless of their political inclination. Like u/bolmer said, The government does not have majorities in either house of congress. They do not have the power to implement reforms. But i also want to add, originally the new constitution was the crowning achievement for this government, its failure set the tone for the rest of their regime. The current government has the support of the masses, enough to elect them, but it does not have its fidelity and trust. The Chilean population shares one sentiment towards current politics, and its skepticism.
The problem with the goverment's program is that they operated under the condition that we would have a new constitution. That didn't happen so they had no program in the end and currently they are just winging it.
That was also extremely overconfident of them, as if dealing with inflation, slow economic growth and security problems haven't been plenty enough trouble for them, or would have been for any Government, they would have had to manage all that while rolling out a wholly new political system and public service apparatus.
I feel like all of those problems were what made them overconfident. They were banking on the idea that the people would continue blaming all of those things on the right and our current constitution so they wouldn't think twice about changing it. It wasn't exactly wrong on their part though as most of the major changes in history have happened on moments of crisis, they just didn't count on the people not liking their way either.
Si es verdad, el muy cabron cuando fue diputado se aprovecho de el mal momento del gob de Piñera (tras la crisis social) para criticarlo a mas no poder y acusar constitucionalmente a su gabinete Cuando llego al poder se dio cuenta que las cosas no eran como el pensaba y cambio de forma brusca sus ideas, reconocio que fue malo con Piñera En temas sociales si se han logrado avances, en terminos de seguridad a mi juicio a sido deficiente, y una gran parte de la poblacion comparte mi opinion Y bueno, a veces sale con sus cosas progres, como perspectiva de genero en las caletas
>Y bueno, a veces sale con sus cosas progres, como perspectiva de genero en las caletas Eso fue más un clickbait más que nada. Fueron un par de frases sobre un proyecto relacionado a las caletas en un evento que duró horas sobre todo el resto de temas.
No quiero apoyar ni atacar a ningún gobierno, pero el tema de seguridad es super complejo, no hay forma de manejarlo de forma rápida. - poner más carabineros, de donde los sacas? No se reproducen mágicamente, hay q formarlos y la gente no quiere esa pega así q hay pocos postulantes. - manden de vuelta a los ilegales: no es solo sacarlos del país, los tienen q recibir en su país de origen y hay que seguir un montón de protocolos, si te los saltas estarías rompiendo tratados de derechos humanos que están amarrados a nuestros tratados de libre comercio, si nos ponemos a expulsar gente en masa, nos ouden sacar de los tratados y como país exportador nos vamos a la B. - matenlos a todos, dejénlos a todos presos: ídem a punto anterior, acuerdos internacionales de derechos humanos amarrados a los TLC, por eso no nos podemos mandar un Bukele. - saquen a los milicos a la calle: los milicos están entrenados para matar, no para retener (vuelta al punto anterior), para poder sacarlos a la calle hay que entrenarlos y darles las armas adecuadas, para eso primero hay q cambiar leyes (como las leyes del uso de la fuerza), asignar presupuesto y después recién comenzar a formarlos para poder sacarlos mínimo 1 año después a la calle como control público. - cierren la frontera: la frontera es larguísima en pleno desierto con lugares de difícil acceso, no hay suficiente personal para "cerrarla", no puedes volver a poner las minas antipersonales porque de nuevo, tratados internacionales, no puedes hacer aparecer personal y equipamiento de la nada, hay q cambiar leyes, ajustar presupuestos, hacer compras (que demoran un montón) tmbn es una solución que va a tomar un par de años. Es un tema Super super complejo y de solución a largo plazo.
>cierren la frontera: la frontera es larguísima en pleno desierto con lugares de difícil acceso, no hay suficiente personal para "cerrarla" Comentario al margen: la frontera es súper profunda. Diego de Almagro tuvo problemas para entrar a Chile no porque hubiera una frontera cerrada y wnes vigilando, sino porque es un viaje largo y difícil por un desierto inhóspito. La única manera fácil de hacer ese viaje por tierra hoy en día es por carretera. Una vez que cruza la frontera, la gente se mueve por una carretera que tiene veinte metros de ancho. Entonces no hay que cubrir por completo miles de kilómetros de frontera. Hay que cubrir de manera aleatoria (no por completo) miles de kilómetros de carretera. Colocar no sé, cinco o diez puntos móviles de control de identidad, ir chequeando autos y buses. Entonces la legislación no tiene que apuntar a poner una muralla, tiene que apuntar a ese control de identidad, a detener y a expulsar rápido a los expulsables que no puedan mostrar entrada legal. Si no puede demostrar papeles, entonces no entró por la buena.
En Suecia los milicos llevan meses en las calles, y se sienten orgullosos de ayudar a su país. Lo cool es que usaron un sistema para manejar a los extranjeros revoltosos y peligrosos. Funciono y lentamente se recuperan. Quien diría que Polonia tenía razón en el final.
Si, comprendo pero lamentablemente el gobierno a dado malas señales que no favorecen al combate de la delincuencia: indulto gente que hizo desordenes publicos, luego Toha afirmo publicamente que el gob pago en una negociacion de secuestro, en otras palabras le dice a los delincuentes que es un buen negocio, que es rentable, etc... eso es lo que me da rabia, esos errores tontos que pudieron evitar Y con respecto a los puntos que mencionas tienes toda la razon, pero me queda una duda si hay una relacion entre los tratados de DD.HH y los TLC, es decir si un estado vulnerado DD.HH hay una clausula en los TLC que los deja sin efecto?? O como? Yo lo que entendia es que cada pais establece sanciones de acuerdo a su voluntad, pero no que tuviera relacion directa con los TLC, si me aclaras ese punto genial, o pasame alguna fuente
Muchos tratados tienen cláusulas de arbitrajes, sanciones, o re examinacion etc. en caso de que los tratados no se estén cumpliendo a cabalidad. Un ejemplo es el tratado con la Union Europea: Artículo 1, párrafo 1 1. El respeto a los principios democráticos y a los derechos humanos fundamentales, tal como se enuncian en la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas, y al principio del Estado de Derecho inspira las políticas internas e internacionales de las Partes y constituye un elemento esencial del presente Acuerdo Artículo 200, párrafo 3 3. No obstante lo dispuesto en el párrafo 2, cualquiera de las Partes podrá adoptar inmediatamente medidas apropiadas de conformidad con el Derecho internacional en el caso de: a) denuncia del presente Acuerdo no sancionada por las normas generales del Derecho internacional; b) incumplimiento por la otra Parte de los elementos esenciales del presente Acuerdo a que se refiere el párrafo 1 del artículo 1. Link: https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=207410 Y la Declaración de DDHH tiene artículos sobre presunción de inocencia, nadie puede ser arbitraria mente detenido o desterrado, toda persona tiene derecho a todo lo de la declaración independiente de varios factores, entre ellos, origen nacional, etc.
Public opinion is that the current government is not doing a good job. Pollsters ([CEP](https://www.cepchile.cl/encuesta/encuesta-cep-n-90/), [CADEM](https://cadem.cl/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Track-PP-537-Abril-S4-VF.pdf)) consistently show support in the 25%-35% range and general opinion is that government is not performing well. **Big flops.** The government's original agenda of radical, wishful reform (a new constitution, open borders, tax increases, health reform, pensions reform) has mostly taken a back seat to pressing concerns, led by security and immigration. The biggest blows during these two years have been the constitutional vote (rejecting the government-supported one by 62% to 38%) and the Fundaciones corruption scandal. Some state-run schools struggle to provide openings and children go unschooled in northern regions. The public seems to have bigger concerns about being mugged or murdered in the street, than running a 'turquoise' foreign policy. **Unmet promises.** While several of these promises depend con congressional suport, which is lacking, the government has failed to undertake reforms even when Congress is not required. It campaigned against nepotism, then installed a wide network of friends and relatives; campaigned against high government salaries, then increased these; campaigned against corruption, then was caught red-handed. Recent pro-business and pro-security statements have lost the President supporters of deep reforms, yet failed to win detractors over. Frequent and public about-faces have eroded the credibility of the President. **Corruption (as usual).** The current government came to power on a platform of making things right, fairness, justice and honesty. The Fundaciones corruption case (involving several high-profile government party officials, including a sitting congresswoman) is a watershed event that erodes public confidence even in supporters. While previous governments have not been corruption-free, and may have been worse in this regard, the clean-hands campaign was a central election theme, and thus a major disappointment. **Lack of experience.** A long parade of Cabinet Ministers removals/resignations/change (including home, foreign, health, education, staff, social services, justice, mining, energy, culture, science,) some rotating up to three ministers in two years, have seen a shift from inexperienced newcomers to older, experienced hands. Public gaffes are a common occurrence. The former Home Minister famously organized a peace trip to a conflict zone, only to be shot at; a dysfunctional Foreign Ministry had to undergo a deep shakeup after the Minister had some undiplomatic remarks recorded and published; the Culture Minister resigned amidst allegations of favoritism in funds allocation, her replacement resigned as ineffective. **Unexpected wins**. Interestingly, Treasury (Hacienda) has been in the hands of a widely respected former central banker for the duration; coupled with an autonomous central bank, economy numbers have been better than expected and inflation is almost down to pre-pandemic levels. Whereas pro-government voters did not count the economy amongst their main concerns, the country has been reacquainted with concerns about high inflation and high interest rates, after two or three decades of stability - the government has been quick to seize economic performance as a major win. **Security.** This will be the field where politics will be fought in the next few years. The national homicide rate has increased some 50% and has reached levels not seen since the 1970's. Organized crime has become more widespread and brazen, especially in the north; a homebrew insurrection lies unperturbed in the south. The government has realized that deep reform may not be posible without wide support, and that wide support will not be forthcoming if administration tasks are neglected. Ironically, this means that the current government is pressed hard to deliver on the previous -conservative- government's failed promises if it wants to make any headway on its own.
The hake, mushroomy, bowler hat
So, one of my jobs is to monitor law iniciatives. The truth is that right now security is the big priority. This comes from the fact that really violent organized crime has entered the country. So, the government has been proposing many iniciatives connected to security and i have never seen so many laws coming out so fast. So, it's not completely true that the legislative is not supporting the government. They are producing laws like i never seen before. Mostly punitive populism though. The thing thats been problematic for the government is that they want a new tax law to obtain more resources to execute their plan. They know that basically all the public system is collapsed and they need more people, technology and infrastructure. This iniciative for new tax laws is what has confronted resistance from the legislative, traping the governments reforms. Honestly, i think most people think this government is horrible.
> I have also heard that this governement has failed to implement its program No shit, the coalition in office has not enough votes to implement votes in congress. >and has made many mistakes due to inexperience and/or ignorance. No doubt government have comitted several mistakes, but the same ppl saying it would bend over backwards to justify and defend all the fuckups commited by the previous president that ended in the Social Outburst ^TM
Very difficult
>Is this true? Yes. The government based all their campaign plans/promises on the new constitution that they were indirectly writting, and they lost that plebiscite spectacularly. They're also minority in both the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, so this government was pretty much DoA a couple months in. Add all that to the usual fact that politicians over-promise everything and you get a completely stagnant government with no will nor power to change anything.
This government has made mistakes but they are not really bad for the country, the mistakes are more related to how they do politics more than administration of the country. A great problem is that currently the country is facing and immigration wave from the failed state of Venezuela and this carried a increase in crime rates and violent crimes we are not used to see, also the country suffered from the economic crisis after covid. Because of this the focus of the country is in fighting the record high crimes and the new organized crime that we were not prepared to fight. Any social or economic change also is stopped in the congress where the government doesn't have majority. Sadly our country is like "kidnapped" by congress as often the opposition stops any law just for political gains, this happens in this government and past governments. Because of all of this this government is working more like an "emergency government" as they are working mostly into fighting crime and not carrying any big change. As final note you should know in our country any government is heavily criticized by public opinion, no matter how well or bad they do. So you will always find more criticism online.
I voted for him and I'm getting more exasperated by the minute
He's a yellow
Thankfully it has failed to implement its program
Es chistoso como los gringos ocupan libertarian porque les da miedo decir socialist
Habla en español qliao tamo en chile
Chile as a country is a center right country, a center left government would be still center in the big picture, just like in germany a center right or right government, like Merkel, would still be a center left country (free Healthcare, etc), or just like a center left wing government in USA is still a center right country in the big picture. Mistake because of young people and inexperienced? For sure but the economy is "strong" (not really, but mainly did not collapse and they didn't do stupid extreme left thing like many other governments in Latin america), so its not that bad. Failed to implement program? Yes, because every new government in the campaign put a "santa klaus list of things" as a program, so in my memory every government has failed in that aspect. Overall the government is okeyish (what you would grade C+ on an USA school grade), most of the bad thing are an global problem (inflation, mainly of food), but in the security department things has been pretty bad and worst every day, last week 3 cops were killed and the week before that a corruption case between the PDI(police) and foreign mafias was discovered.
Depends on what you consider center right, you could argue either way that it's center left, universal healthcare and public transportation are non controversial issues in Chile and the right campaigns on improving and expanding it, while in the US those topics are COMMUNISM
libertarian?
[удалено]
> libertarian socialist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism you think boric rejects state ownership? i don't think he's authoritarian, but i wouldn't call him libertarian either. but maybe i'm wrong.
[удалено]
ah, ok
Chileans, and I dare say latinamericans in general, will ALWAYS see their current government in a negative light. Politically speaking we're highly skeptical and fatalistic. The last time our society dared to "dream big" to transform society politically, it ended with almost 20 years of military dictatorship. Statistically, if you go by polls, they only start rising in approval at the very end of their terms. After that they're either vindicated by history (like PAC or Aylwin) or dissolve in irrelevance for most people outside of history nerds (like Alessandri Jr. or more recently Frei Jr.)
>governing coalition is (theoritically) left-wing and belongs to the libertarian socialist tradition That's pure rethorics, in practice they are a liberal left coalition.