This is a film about politics, focusing on an important page in Chile's history, namely, the fall of the Chilean dictator Pinochet government. In 1988, according to his promise, Pinochet held a referendum, but unexpectedly failed. He ruled Chile's dictatorship for 17 years, and has since come to an end. The film describes the process of this referendum campaign. Through the TV propaganda war between the two sides, this historic moment is presented to the audience.
Interestingly, Chile also filmed another film called "Machuca" (also translated as "The Sunshine That Year"), which is also related to Pinochet. It describes the coup that took place in 1973. In a coup, General Pinochet overthrew President Allende and began his long dictatorship. "Machuca" reflects the coup d'etat from the eyes of a child. The Indian poor at that time were the supporters of the Allende regime. "No" reflects the referendum from the perspective of a TV person. It was the rise of the middle class that drove Pinochet out of power. The two key points of "Machuca" and "No", one before and one after the other, are like the conclusion of Pinochet's life.
Since independence in 1818, Chile has been implementing a democratic system. It is a relatively stable country. Because of its rich mineral deposits, it is considered a wealthy country in Latin America. Except for the impact of the global economic depression in 1930 and the impact of the Chilean earthquake in 1960, Chile's economic development is quite balanced. However, it is an indisputable fact that the gap between the rich and the poor is large, especially the large number of indigenous people who have been living below the poverty line. In 1970, Allende, who was inclined to socialism, passed the general election and was elected president. After he took office, he quickly implemented the nationalization policy and began the development of Chile's socialization. The Indian poor enjoyed the benefits of the change, but the country’s political situation began to appear turbulent. This is the background of the story of these two films.
Pinochet also played at this time, when he was the commander-in-chief of the Chilean army. He launched a coup in 1973, Allende was shot to death, and Pinochet took control of power. "Machuca" expresses this period of history. What appears in the lens is blood, the melancholy of the passing of that era, and the despair of the future. After Pinochet came to power, he naturally carried out a dictatorship and brutally suppressed what he considered the dissidents of the Communist Party. On the other hand, it attaches great importance to economic development. He invited a number of economists to reshape Chile's economy. They all came from the University of Chicago, an important economic center, and they were subscribed to Friedman's theory of free economics. They reprivatized Allende's state-owned enterprises. Chile's economy is developing rapidly, and the domestic situation is quite good. Pinochet held a general election in 1980 and won. Of course, there are many controversies regarding this election. Therefore, Pinochet announced the eight-year term before re-referendum.
The story of "No" begins here. The referendum was divided into two opposing camps, "yes" and "no". They respectively represented the two major groups of whether to maintain Pinochet's rule or return to the tradition of democratic elections in Chile. Pinochet was complacent at the time, his economy was developing rapidly, and his national strength was gradually increasing. He was his biggest bargaining chip. In fact, for the “no” camp, they did not have full confidence in winning the referendum. The initial plan was to use the referendum to express their opinions and show their existence. In the movie, when the protagonist asked the babysitter at home how she would vote, she replied that her son is in college and her daughter is already working, and she is satisfied with the current situation. As for democracy, I will talk about it later. This was actually the thinking of many people at the time, and it was why Pinochet dared to announce a referendum.
However, history proved Pinochet was wrong. He thought that the people only need to feed their stomachs and everything else is just luxury enjoyment. Of course, this is also the thinking of all dictators. From the TV commercials in the "Yes" camp shown in the movie, it can be seen that they have firmly grasped the people’s fear of chaos, fear of going back to the past, and returning to Allende’s socialist era. As a result, a campaign strategy that maintains the status quo can maintain the existing prosperity. The strategy is not wrong, it's just that the times have changed. Although Pinochet came to power by a coup, there are many who support him. The upper-middle class in Chilean society has almost the same values as Pinochet. Although they do not approve of dictatorship in their hearts, they would rather sacrifice democracy than the danger of Cubanization. They also benefited from Chile's subsequent economic development.
In the rapid economic development, the middle class is gradually expanding, and at the same time, the differences between the middle and upper classes are also expanding. We can also see from the movie that the campaign ads for the two camps are all from the same TV station. It is the original supervisor who serves the “yes”, while the talents who have returned from studying abroad work for the “no”. The growing middle class is no longer satisfied with just eating. They have more demands, they demand more freedom, and they demand votes to be able to elect people they trust to come to power. Their slogan is "Chile Happiness is Coming". The happiness in their eyes is not just about economic development, social stability, and prosperity in life, but the freedom to say no, the freedom to reckon with the past, and the freedom to express their rights. This is what Pinochet took away from them, and he still can't give them.
The middle class who supported Pinochet's rise to power are now standing on the opposite side of him, and they now have enough power. Pinochet underestimated this power and overestimated the impact of economic development on society, so his failure is inevitable. In the movie, we saw that even the army he relied on had abandoned him and forced him to accept the result of the referendum. The "No" camp won, Pinochet stepped down, and Chile completed the process of democratization.
How to evaluate Pinochet is probably a lot of thought. Undoubtedly, he was a notorious dictator, and all countries shunned him at the time. Significantly, only China has a good relationship with it. He relied on the army to suppress democracy and brutally eliminate dissidents. Politically, he caused Chile's democracy to regress drastically. But economically, he embraced the free economic system, allowing Chile to quickly catch up with the pace of world development. Many of his opponents were born in the economic development he advocated. He has always believed that he has dedicated his life to this country and has worked hard for the development of this country, and this is true. Although he is corrupt, he can still be regarded as a promising leader. To a certain extent, Pinochet is the starter of the restoration of Chile's democratic system. When he died in 2006, it caused a great commotion in Chile, and tens of thousands of people were buried for him.
Pinochet withdrew from the stage of history, but also left a huge figure.
View more about No reviews
