Advertising to save the country? In a wealthy life, will people risk saying no to dictatorship for idealistic things such as democracy and freedom? I have to admit that I was attracted by these gimmicks at the beginning, and I was patient after watching the documentary style.
then suddenly discovered that the film was co-produced by Mifazhi and the three countries, so I realized that this was just a victory for the United States to show off a peaceful evolution at its doorstep. Because although it is not emphasized, the film also mentions that it is international public opinion and “foreigners” who force the Pi regime to carry out this vote that will eventually lead to its own resignation, and support the “No” camp to win the final victory. The Americas are the Americas of Americans. Who is this foreign force? Not to mention the Americanization of "No" camp advertising from content to form. Advertising can only stimulate the desires that already exist in people's hearts, but cannot create desires. The commercials of the "No" camp have nothing substantive apart from sings and dances, cheap humor, and agitation of people's rebellious psychology. At best, they are just the last straw that crushes the camel. The occurrence of such an absurd farce just shows that the Pi regime at that time was at the end of the war. The United States must have done enough homework before that, and Pi himself probably only wanted to take this opportunity to find a step when he announced this decision. , And retired completely (later he was also granted judicial immunity through the post of senator, and he did not have to be responsible for the previous crimes).
I don’t know much about Chile except for reading a few novels by Isabella Allende, but as far as the message of the film is concerned, the Pi regime relied on the free market system to do a good job of its economy (obviously not good enough). Then having to rely on dictatorship to maintain the rule is itself a paradox. Because the economic foundation determines the superstructure, a free economic system will inevitably support Western-style democracy in the end. The adoption of such a system itself is to quench one’s thirst and dig one’s own grave, not to mention the problem of domestic polarization between the rich and the poor, so that 40% of the people Living below the poverty line (this data is also provided by the film), coupled with the extraordinary means of autocratic rule, people already have signs of "no" in their hearts. If external forces act a little bit, it would be weird. Of course, the polarization between the rich and the poor itself is also an inevitable consequence of the market economy, because there are differences between people's aptitudes and human nature is selfish. Indulging freedom will inevitably feed on the weak. At the end of the film, people celebrate the victory of democracy, but they don't know that democracy and dictatorship (or centralization) have always been two inseparable problems. After looking at it, I can't help but wonder, whose masterpiece was the power outage that reversed the situation in the end? The Pi dictatorship has been overthrown, but what about higher-level dictatorships? Is it true that everyone is happy with democracy?
View more about
No reviews
