[To understand what the population rejected on 4 September, we
have to look at the left’s lack of an economic programme to overcome
neoliberalism; the impossibility of producing a persuasive narrative
to oppose the smear campaign against the text.]
[[link removed]]

CHILE: “WE ARE CURRENTLY WITNESSING AN ACCELERATION OF
AUTHORITARIANISM AND THE DEPRIVATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS”  
[[link removed]]


 

Nazaret Castro
June 2, 2023
Equal Times
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ To understand what the population rejected on 4 September, we have
to look at the left’s lack of an economic programme to overcome
neoliberalism; the impossibility of producing a persuasive narrative
to oppose the smear campaign against the text. _

The right wing has taken almost total control of the political agenda
while the government has abandoned the initiative,” says Alondra
Carrillo (pictured)., (Foto cedida por Alondra Carrillo)

 

Alondra Carrillo, a psychologist by training and member of the
Coordinadora Feminista 8M (8 March Feminist Coordinator), was part of
the Constitutional Convention of Chile elected at the ballot box in
2021. On 4 September 2022, a referendum was held on the new
constitutional text drafted by this body – the composition of which
was resolutely left wing and feminist. Around 62 per cent of voters
rejected it, a historic milestone which came as a major blow to the
left, both inside and outside of Chile.

Less than a month ago, on 7 May, the far-right wing Republican Party
won a resounding victory in the ballot box to elect the 50
constituents that will draft a new constitution proposal for the
country (which still lives with the constitution inherited from the
dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet, a constitution that the Republican
Party is in favour of maintaining).

How do we explain the lurch of Chilean society, from left-wing
positions and from the demands for sweeping social reforms – towards
the extreme right? Alondra Carrillo sheds light on the complexity of
this historic constitutional process, as well as the impact of the
feminist wave which has swept Chilean institutions and society.

THE SOCIAL OUTBURST OF 2019
[[link removed]] IN
CHILE, A COUNTRY THAT HAS OFTEN BEEN DESCRIBED AS A MODEL FOR THE
LIBERAL MODEL
[[link removed]],
CAME AS A SURPRISE TO MANY OUTSIDE THE COUNTRY. HOW DID THOSE OF YOU
WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS EXPERIENCE IT?

A few months earlier, in 2018, we [the Coordinadora Feminista
8M] organised the first feminist general strike in Chile
[[link removed]] with
the aim of becoming a major transformative social force. We wanted to
interrupt the neoliberal normality, to open a new historical period
characterised by cycles of mobilisations that would overthrow
neoliberalism and challenge those politically responsible for its
implementation.

So while we didn’t imagine the outburst taking the particular form
that it did, we did expect a large-scale movement, which we believed
could be a profound interruption of neoliberal daily life. A few days
earlier we were at the Plurinational Encounter of Women, Lesbians,
Transvestites, Transgender and Non-binary People in La Plata,
Argentina, at the same time that the revolt was taking place in
Ecuador, and it was our great hope and belief that people in other
countries would rise up as well. We returned to Chile shortly before
the revolt and found that display of popular strength, rage and
creativity that has been one of the most exciting and moving moments
of our lives.

IN THOSE YEARS, THERE SEEMED TO BE AN ACCELERATION OF HISTORICAL TIME.
IN MANY COUNTRIES, 2018 SAW AN UNPRECEDENTED MASS EMERGENCE OF
FEMINIST MOVEMENTS. HOW WOULD YOU SUM UP THE CHANGES THAT TOOK PLACE
AT THAT TIME?

I think one of the most significant developments is that feminism has
become a permanent presence in many social spaces, though certainly
not in all. There are some spaces where it is not even on the horizon,
including in certain very precarious and rural territories. But in
many others, such as schools, workplaces, the media and universities,
feminism, its critique and the way in which it renders the invisible
visible, has allowed us to break with the established norms of
patriarchal oppression.

THE GLOBAL PANDEMIC TOOK PLACE AT THE SAME TIME. HOW DID THE PANDEMIC
AFFECT THE COORDINADORA FEMINISTA’S ORGANISING WORK?

The pandemic had a variety of impacts. In terms of our organising
work, it certainly prevented us from being able to meet in person,
with all that that entails for political organisation. More
significantly, it also meant even greater impoverishment, the
deterioration of the living conditions of the majority of the
population and the weaponisation of fear as an effective tool for
those in power, as evidenced by the many societies that have taken an
authoritarian turn during the crisis. The pandemic is much more than
just a health crisis: it has brought about a worldwide reorganisation
of our living and working conditions.

In our country, the health crisis and the inflationary impact of some
of the economic measures taken to combat it, such as the withdrawal
of workers’ private pension funds
[[link removed]],
have decimated women’s employment.

At the same time, we have been able to start meeting in person again.
This year we held a fifth Plurinational Meeting of Women and
Dissidents in Struggle, which was the third time we met face-to-face
after two years of virtual meetings. Against this backdrop of
precariousness, this more stable organisational structure, while not
without difficulties, has given us a degree of stability within a
context of generalised instability.

HOW DO YOU INTERPRET THE ‘NO’ VOTE ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL TEXT IN
THE PLEBISCITE OF SEPTEMBER 2022? ONE OF THE MOST WIDESPREAD
INTERPRETATIONS IS THAT, DUE TO ITS RADICAL NATURE, THE TEXT DID NOT
CORRESPOND WITH THE MAJORITY SENTIMENTS OF THE CHILEAN PEOPLE. DO YOU
AGREE?

I believe that simple interpretations of the results of the plebiscite
are always misleading.

The result of the plebiscite is the expression of an extremely complex
political situation. It was also the first vote in Chile with
compulsory voting and automatic registration, which is the most
complete in-depth look we have of our people [more than 85 per cent of
the electoral roll – more than thirteen million people – voted].
The fact that the vote was compulsory, compared to previous votes in
the process, means that there are four million people who did not
participate in the previous stages of the process but did participate
in this final stage. There were also several obstacles preventing the
text from being made available to the public, so many people did not
have the opportunity to learn what was actually in it.

There was a lot at stake in the plebiscite: certain fears were stoked
among the population, such as the fear of losing ownership of private
pension funds, which completely displaced the discussion on the
pension system that we need to guarantee decent pensions for all
[[link removed]].
Another was the fear of losing ownership of housing, which displaced
the discussion on the housing crisis we are currently experiencing.
Yet another was the fear of the effects of plurinationality, which was
presented as a dissolution of national identity, in a country where
property and nation have become subjective pillars for broad sectors
of the population who find in them the only certainty within a context
of widespread uncertainty.

Rather than being explanatory or comprehensive, the idea that the text
was too radical was useful for forming preconceptions about what was
at stake and what the proposal represents.

It is essential that we analyse the process in a way that doesn’t
place all the responsibility for the defeat on the ‘usual
suspects’. To understand what it was that the population rejected on
4 September, we have to look at the left’s lack of an economic
programme to overcome neoliberalism; the impossibility of producing a
general narrative that would be easily understandable and persuasive
in the face of the enormous smear campaign that was deployed against
the text; and the unforeseen and contradictory consequences of the
measures used to combat the precariousness of the pandemic.

WHAT LESSONS CAN BE LEARNED FROM THIS PROCESS AND HOW CAN WE DEAL WITH
THE DISILLUSIONMENT THAT THE ‘NO’ TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL TEXT
ENTAILED FOR THE FEMINIST MOVEMENT AND, IN GENERAL TERMS, FOR THE
SOCIAL MOVEMENT?

Any disillusionment that may have arisen in the feminist movement
following the plebiscite must be viewed within the context of the new
process in which the parties have agreed to deliberately exclude the
social movement. But I also think it is important today to think about
the state of the movement in relation to the extremely complex and
difficult conditions we are facing.

We are witnessing the acceleration of authoritarianism, the
deprivation of fundamental rights and guarantees, and the erection of
an apparatus of persecution. The right wing has taken almost total
control of the political agenda and has focused the discussion on
insecurity and crime, while the government has abandoned the
initiative. We have seen the approval of legislation that even the UN
has denounced as extremely dangerous, such as the ‘Naín-Retamal’
[[link removed]] law,
which grants privileged self-defence to the police, a trigger-happy
law that deprives the migrant population of rights in an unjustified
way and which equates migration and crime. This law will be used
against us when we have to take to the streets because living
conditions continue to worsen.

WHAT IS YOUR OPINION OF THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT OF GABRIEL BORIC?

While we called on people to vote for Gabriel Boric to prevent the
election of the ultra-right wing José Antonio Kast, we never placed
great hopes in his government. This government, which presented itself
to the public as a feminist and environmentalist has ratified the
TPP-11 [_editor’s note: a contentious free trade agreement
[[link removed]]_] and is
on the verge of ratifying the modernisation of the agreement between
Chile and the European Union. It has also renounced parity in the
ministerial cabinet and its latest appointments only consolidate a
certain political direction.

To understand the current health of the student movement, let’s go
back almost two decades. Your introduction to politics came as part of
the student movement, particularly during the so-called ‘Penguin
Revolution’
[[link removed]] of 2006
[editor’s note: named so because the students, in their black and
white school uniforms, were said to resemble penguins], in which you
took part in as a high school student. What was your experience of
those protests?

In 2006, some older students [from the Colegio Latinoamericano,
founded by returnees from exile, Communist Party supporters and
leftists during the dictatorship] had organised a series of
assemblies, where we linked up with student organisations from the
south of Santiago. It was my first experience of political
mobilisation, my introduction to student organisation. It began with a
very specific demand related to transport but later turned into
widespread protests against the Organic Constitutional Act of Teaching
imposed by the civil-military dictatorship [which essentially
privatised education].

WHAT ARE THE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THAT STUDENT MOVEMENT AND THE
‘SOCIAL OUTBURST’ OF 2019?

The student movements of 2006 and 2011, along with the mobilisations
against HidroAysén
[[link removed]] [the
planned hydroelectric megaproject in Patagonia], against
subcontracting
[[link removed]],
and the various feminist movements, brought to light a series of
conflicts related to the functioning of neoliberalism and its
continued deployment in our country: as a structure that guarantees
power and enrichment for a small sector of our society, which
appropriates social wealth, and whose legitimacy is based on the
institutional legacy of the dictatorship as administered by the
transition governments, all against a backdrop of growing
precariousness of the majority of the population. Like the other
social movements that have emerged over the last 30 years, the student
movement is the result of the sectoral conflicts that arise from the
functioning of neoliberalism.

IN YOUR OPINION, IS THE CHILEAN STUDENT MOVEMENT STILL ALIVE AND WELL?

It’s no longer what it used to be. Many of the organisations that
were powerful in those years have been weakened or no longer exist,
including the Federation of Students of the University of Chile, which
was one of the most dynamic and active organisations during the years
of struggle that shaped us politically. While there is an important
and very relevant feminist current within the high school movement
which took to the streets on 8 March, the student movement in general
lacks the strength it had in those years.

This article has been translated from Spanish by Brandon Johnson

_Nazaret Castro is a Spanish journalist. She has been working as a
correspondent in Latin America for eight years, contributing to media
such as Le Monde Diplomatique, Público and La Marea. She is a
co-founder of the Carro de Combate project, which investigates the
social and environmental impact of the goods we consume, palm oil
among them._

* Chile
[[link removed]]
* Chilean student movement
[[link removed]]
* democracy
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]