ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ก.ย. 2022
- After years of social unrest, Chile voted against the most progressive Constitution in the world. A sloppy drafting process, a powerful disinformation campaign, and a leftist government that did little to rally people in favor led to a crushing disappointment.
Help keep VICE News’ fearless reporting free for millions by making a one-time or ongoing contribution here. - vice.com/contribute
Subscribe to VICE News here: bit.ly/Subscribe-to-VICE-News
Check out VICE News for more: vicenews.com
Follow VICE News here:
TikTok: www.tiktok.com/@vicenews?lang=en
Facebook: / vicenews
Twitter: / vicenews
Instagram: / vicenews
More videos from the VICE network: www. vicevideo
Follow VICE World News here:
TikTok: www.tiktok.com/@viceworldnews...
Facebook: / viceworldnews
Twitter: / viceworldnews
Instagram: / viceworldnews
#VICENews #News
It's very easy to get people to agree that a country needs to change. It's a bit more difficult to get those people to agree on how and what that change should be.
Exactly
*cries in Brexit*
That’s because the people in power are generally out of touch with the population and wealthy to boot. No one wants to be ruled over and told what to believe or how to think.
In my opinion it was super radical, imposible to make everyone agree on it. Especially in a country like chile with such a big part thats right leaning.
@@matiasargonz3543 as a conservative yeah its a bad constitution as a right winger
Chilean here.
I‘m truly disappointed by the lack of impartiality in this report. You showed no real analysis of the proposed constitution and failed to mention that the current constitution has been modified around 60% of its content since the end of the dictatorship. Santiago is huge, and I can even see from the footage that they only moved along one small area (around Baquedano subway station) and showed pretty much only the heavy approval side. There was no mention of the verbal and physical violence/confrontations within chileans who had opposite views. Also the absence of an explanation of the armed conflict currently happening in the Mapuche area in Araucanía.
On top of it, bigger situations than the shower episode (I didn‘t even know about that one) removed the seriousness of the constitutional process ; for example, the approval's closing campaign having a guy spreading his bare ass while someone else pulled a chilean flag out of the first guys rectum, on national TV.
An uninformed view on a sociopolitical conflict. I expected more of Vice.
EDIT: fact checking
Well you shouldn't its vice
They also didnt quite traslate well the interview, the guy litterally did not say the word taht are writen in the video
Fellow latinoamerican here (mexican). Im surprised that you expect much from vice in the first place.
@@renetorres2560Funny, I'm mexican as well and I was about to say exactly the same thing, VICE sucks, just a bunch of globalist hipsters sponsored by the usual ones passing propaganda for journalism. Cheers!
This is vice, dude. They make this with every topic. Only when it's about our country that usually we can spot how much bullshit they say
The problem is they tried to legislate through the new constitution and you can't take a wide and varied population of political issues and slam every progressive political idea into it. It needed to be a political framework to then debate and legislate particular issues than a "fix all"
Extremely well said. It boils down to this.
Thouse progressive political ideas could have saved Chile, but the people did not want it
The problem is that chilean population educate themselves with tiktok's and fake news. Now no reforms are going to happend. Greetings from Chile.
@@MsXenyy1 Even centrist and conservative political ideas could save Chile but many people do not want them
lol the problem when its clear what majorities want but the count ends differently is typically someone fudging numbers over massive shut ins voehhting different. They prolly had some chuyuhhhnieeese software like we have been using to voeeehte in the usa. It always chooses demonnkrattts/chuyuhnieeese approved assets for the win, lol imagine that.
"The only fake news come from those people who accuse us of promoting fake news" its a full circle 😂
If every woman has the right that to interrupt the pregnancy, technically it goes as long she's pregnant. Second part states the regulations, but within the margin of the first part. So yeah, I'm sure a judge would rule in favor of interrupt the pregnancy at any time and the state must ensure the procedure.
@@SmartTimesMX Uhh, how about no? We saw the US experiment and its very grim. It turned basically into an contraceptive with millions of abortions every year, especially of the minorities. In 2021 in NY more black children were killed by abortions than those born.
It created an atmosphere of complete disregard for the dignity of the human person. So twisted it became that people started to spout that babies are parasites or cancers. Truly an death cult not unlike the cathars of almost 1000 years ago
Chilean lawyer here: it is innacurate to claim that fake news are the main reason this proposal was rejected. According to most polls, the majority of chileans did not agree with the introduction of the concept "people of many nations", and the rights it granted indigenous people. Also, you didn't even cover multiple problems the proposal had from a technical standpoint, like creating regional governments without defining their atributions. Other people have also said in the comments things that are accurate: it ecompassed a number of issues more apropriate for laws, it ignored the views of a significant part of the population, the current constitution is not the one imposed by Pinochet anymore, and a lengthy etc.
What groups were ignored?
The reporter’s bias was very visible. He just forgot to wear the Che t-shirt
It's Vice, bro. If they walked out their front door and looked to their hard right they couldn't see the 'moderate centrists' due to the curvature of the earth. Everything Vice does has extreme left-wing bias. It's disgusting. They think all the have to do is use the word 'progressive' 100 times and people will fall for it. NOPE! God bless Chile!
@@On_The_Piss You are correct. Considering that only 12% of the population is, it was an easy bet. And your point is?
@@Virjunior01 it has been said many times in the comments: the left-leaning portion of the constitutional assembly chose to ignore around 1/3 of the right leaning representatives. In adition to that, they included things like gender equality, which are not generally agreed upon.
You failed to mention so much. The draft was so bad that even with 80% approving to create a draft, at the end 62% voted against it
As a chilean person who has sufficient legal knowledge, I feel in the need to tell you guys a few words. From a legal and pragmatic perspective, a rational analysis of the legal text of the proposal would tell you that it was technically a disaster. I feel like most people came to know it soon enough.
Edit: If you have any questions feel free to ask
Hola Andrés, que tal ?? Si me salen dudas sobre cómo se pretendía que funcionara la cámara de las regiones ?
Saludos desde Colombia.
Era postmodernidad pura con derecho a la autodeterminación
What was it’s major problem (in your opinion?)
Mapuche people really want an independent state?
Most of people didn't even read the text so they didn´t "come to know it" as you said. They just repeated what the massive (and conveniently well funded) reject campaign maliciously told them about the new constitution proposal. An absurd example of their propaganda would be the 9 month abortion, the state owning and expropiating their houses and pension funds, the elimination of private health and education, the creation of a separate state and nation for mapuche people, sexual education in schools aimed to transform children into homosexual, among others. Peoples' choice was purely based on right wing populism and lies, not because of the technicality of the text.
The whole process was flawed. It was on the one hand, far too detailed for a constitution and bound the state in pretty extreme ways. On the other hand, it did not try to include a broad majority of Chileans, but choose a rather limited scope of ideas and regulations, which were disliked by many Chileans.
And also, while being inclusive (which was very good!) it was also a rather isolated and self-centered assembly which often lost sight of the real goals and problems of Chileans, which led to its defeat.
The problem is that chilean population educate themselves with tiktok's and fake news. Now no reforms are going to happend. Greetings from Chile.
good analysis
Thank you!!! Arguments at last
And what are those real problems?
The very purpose of a constitution is to limit the scope of authority of the state. It exist to tell the state what it may not do and it does this to protect the people from the state. This lesson was learned after WWII and I strongly suggest you do not forget it.
What do we want!?
We don't know!
When do we want it!?
Right now!
Except they did know
@@charlesmiv3842 Clearly not, if the new constitution was crushed by popular vote.
@@charlesmiv3842 The demise of those with European heritage.
Yeah whatever
@@papaofthejohns5882 Popular vote was manipulated by fake news and disinformation.
A constitution should limit itself to preserving democracy and civil rights. Everything else can be legislated as needed.
No?
Tell me that you understand nothing of political theory except 1700-1800 liberalism
Environmental protection and civil rights are just as important as democracy and something that shouldn't be held at the hands of voters.
@@hamborger8546 is anything you slightly disagree with a "trump supporter"
@Prasanth Thomas who in the world think nothing change in a hundred years,
The report is very biased (ok, it’s Vice, so we knew that). But a general comment: it’s very easy to include all sorts of rights and beautiful ideas in a Constitution, the most difficult part is how to ensure these rights are going to be warranted, enabled and financed. Constitutions should be short and with limited scope, governments and lawmakers should go about the details.
is funny, because a lot of politicians of the right, thought there should have been more “limits” to certain things, meaning, it should have been more detailed…and when they were told “that part is going to be left for the lawmakers”, they said “no…it leaves space for incertainty an the worst can happen, so it needs to be on the constitution”.
So yeah…people against the constitution attacked it because it was too short and because it was too long….it looks like they were just teying to find an excuse to look on the negative side
@@12Dave12 Believe it or not, both points aren't mutually exclusive. It is clear from the draft that whatever was changed/removed from the current constitution was done on purpose. If you don't want any ambiguousness, then why would you purposefully remove the "private ownership" quality of "subsidized housing"? Remember, it's not only about what is written, but about what was left out. You have to find a balance between stuff like "the right to life" and "the right to abortion" and not make it just a wishlist of everything that a utopic society should have.
@@kylesiwi4093 “its not about what is written, its about what was left out”
as far as I know, a lot of things were left out because it wasnt meant for the constitution draft to “limit” or deal with those things, it was for the lawmakers and laws that were going to be made after that constitution was in place (it was even established in written that was the way to continue polishing the draft). Damn!…even the draft is called “draft”, which means everything in there wasnt going to stay like that for the next 50 years….all those ambiguities were going to be “fixed” or at least discussed eventually (and discussed by the same politicians screaming that those “ambiguities” would create caos). We all know that the constitution and all the changes it would bring, were going to be made gradually…not all at once…that there was going to be an adjustment period to implement the new constitution, it was said a bunch of times. So in the end to me, that “its not about what is written, its about what was left out” sound smore like “lets make people think this is a black and white situation and lets find excuses to reject even if these excuses contradict each other”…”lets complaint because is too long and lets complaint because it doesnt say enough”
@@kylesiwi4093 that's so false you should be ashamed.
Yeah, the same problem happened after the french revolution. Ridiculous constitutions that promised a lot but never indicated who and how such things would happen. Therefore making useless
The whole idea of having a "50%-to-pass" vote on your constitution is a terrible idea, youll just end up changing the constitution every election cycle (which kind of means you don't have a constitution). It should always take a super majority (2/3).
Yes, you'll end up with only the bare essentials that everyone agrees upon, but that's the point. You need to leave space for government policy
you need 2/3 in both chambers of the Congress to call for a Constitutional referendum.
My bad, that solves the problem
bald assertion
That's why an amendment in America is so hard to implement because it requires 2/3 of congress and the states in the Union.
But only a majority of each State legislator needs to approve it in order to pass. 2/3 total, but only a majority vote in each Statehouse. But yes; to change a Constitution, you should have an overwhelming majority. People just don't like Change unless it's forced upon them...
Vice always forgets to show the other side. The other problem that needs to be address rather than the vote itself.
VICE only sees out of its left eye.
They don’t forget. They do this with every political issue in every country
@@briansanchez6699 Yeah, they don't forget. They deliberately skip it.
@@zrevival3818for real, I have never seen them let a trump supporter speak without them interfering. As well as supporters from Marcos, they always think they’re right and we’re wrong but they fail to realize that there are lies to some people which are true and truth to some people which are lies. Don’t give me examples like “OHH WHAT ABOUT THE MOON LANDING” use common sense, its already true.
*loses*
*immediately riots and causes chaos*
“Why didn’t we win?”
This is mega cope from vice here. I’m shocked that at no point they made the obvious point that it’s easy to form a effective movement when rallying against something but that appetite for change will always take a huge hit when people see the actual alternative which gets torn to shreds rightly so
These people..their skin have something wrong!!! What Is that?!
That isn't it though. The new constitution was too long and complicated. It was like 200 pages. No one wants a constitution that long. They will do it again and it will be better.
@@thealternative9580 that may be true but it doesn’t change the fact when it’s no longer a hypothetical new constitution and everyone sees all the problems (which ever problems they see it to have) with the proposed new constitution that its inevitable that support would dwindle. That’s true in any circumstance not just chiles.
@@thealternative9580 Because it probably adds rights and takes away freedom.
@@paolobogli458 have you never seen Brown people?
What this documentary glosses over is that the people who voted for a new constitution all had different ideas as to what it would look like. Exit polling showed that many on the right and center also wanted a new constitution that would finally rid Chile of its Pass connections to authoritarianism. When drafting the new constitution, however, those voices, as well as those of business interests and prominent constitutional scholar were excluded or suppressed. As a result, the new constitution read like a grab bag of left wing priorities, as opposed to a coherent governing document. I no longer think voters would support a new constitution; those on the right and center are too disenchanted with the whole process and those on the left now have unrealistic expectations as to what a new constitution could achieve. This has done nothing but further divide an already divided Chilean citizenry.
How do people on the left have an "unrealistic expectation"?
The right and business interests are why the Pinochet constitution exists in the first place.
@@Praisethesunson Oh those right-wingers and business interests of today are the reason why Allende fucked the country and allowed Pinochet to rise to power?
@yourmanwatson are you saying that every person not currently part of the ruling left wing government in Chile is authoritarian? Really? Smh
@@Praisethesunson the Pinochet constitution has been substantially revised since its inception, often with the support of many conservatives and business leaders. When you intentionally ignore the views of large swaths of the population, you set yourself up for failure. A constitution sets broad mandates and should not be tailored narrowly to suit the political interests solely of those in power. Perhaps the ruling party would have understood this if they allowed constitutional scholars to be a part of the drafting process as opposed to a convention made up solely of left-wing activists and party apparatchik.
Unfortunately, this reporting was far from balanced. Looks like the reporter set out to talk only with people in favour of the new Constitution and then seeked only one opposer (the one accused of fake news) to discredit him. The fundamental problems of the new Chilean Constitution were far worse than "a couple of assembly members misbehaving" or "fake news". The key issues were:
1) It imported a Bolivian concept of "plurinationality" and gave an absurd amount of power to a very reduced group of indigenous people (indigneous people account for less than 10% of the population, most of which live in urban areas completely integrated into society, so they vote along with regular Chileans and would not take part of indigenous special elections, further reducing their true representativity).
2) Created an extremely complex political system that did away with all the basic check and balances that prevent the collapse of democracy.
Here is an incomplete list of serious flaws of the text:
- It divided the nation turning it "plurinational" and gave indigenous people total political and territorial autonomy, though their lands overlap with those of regular Chileans.
- It created a "asymetric bicameral" parliament with a "reduced presidentialism" that no one could understand.
- The house of representatives could, by itself, and with only 50%+1 votes, at any time, change ANY fundamental law of the nation and the workings of institutions as important as: the central bank, the treasury, the electoral system, etc. meaning that any fleeting majority could reshape the country to their liking.
- It created a ton of overlapping local governments that had redundant or unclear jobs.
- It changed the judiciary from a "power" to a "system" downgrading it to be below politics rather than keeping it independent.
- It allowed political forces to take control of the judicial system through a "Council" composed of 17 members, of which only 8 were actual judges, all the rest were appointed by politicians or could easily be coopted by them. This council could fire, give rises, retire, punish judges and decide their wages, so they could easily take over the system.
- It demanded that any change or policy that affected indigenous people had to be approved by them.
- It created independent judicial systems for each ethnic group, essentialy destroying the concept of law being equal for everyone. They refused to set any limits to these systems. This, in the context of very serious terrorist activity being exercised by extremist indigenous groups. They could potentially "judge themselves".
- It created the obligation for the State to "give back" to indigenous people all the land they ever used, without setting any limits (for context, over 60% of Chilean territory at some point was theirs...) and the ones that were going to decide what those territories were, were the indigenous leaders themselves.
And the list goes on and on.
It was a walking disaster, EVERYONE voted it down: the rich, the poor, the urban areas, the countryside, the progressives, the conservatives, even an overwhelming majority of the indigenous people voted against it. It was THAT absurd.
that does sound bad! almost as bad as what was imposed on bosnia in 1995, Dayton!
Well said
Most of ur list its a lie or a serious misinterpretation
Looks like a greedy grab for power by the politicians who supported the proposal
It's very detailed. Most of us ain't going to do the research ourselves, so unless you have any content to give as far as I see it the most of Chile saw through the extremism of the leftists constitution.
I trust the Chileans honestly, with such a high intellectual base they gotta know what’s up. Progressive or not it’s a vote that was decided by the people and if the people said it wasn’t pragmatic so be it. Draft a better amendment, make it better and come back stronger
USA imposed a dictatorship in Chile and now you Americans ask for change? your level of hypocrisy is simply insufferable.
@@Metratch Exactly, Progressism is what the Truman's doctrine was in the last century agaisnt those who didn't follow USA's Agenda
@@Metratch I’m not American 💀
Just because it's the "people's choice" doesn't make it anymore virtuous
@@verivihattu1400 In a democracy it inherently does. The People's will is what matters. If you have the "perfect progressive document" to be voted on and you can't convince the people, then its content is practically moot. If the people don't vote for it, it means they weren't made to understand it or if they were, they simply didn't agree with it.
The video forgot to mention that Chile has been far ahead of other South American countries in pretty much all metrics for a while and currently we see some neighboring countries in deep economic distress. The economic model they adopted a while back has influence in this.
True i see Chile as the best country of Latin America. if it ain't broke don't fix it
Meh. The moment Chile went full neoliberal it became degenerate.
Well, except football
@@noskpain2792 It broke itself in 2018
@@noskpain2792 It was broken, those metric say little about how people lived and felt during all these years. The dictatorship was gone, but the economic program did not change
Chile say NOT COMUNISM....OVER
Extreme bias in the reporter. But it was good to show that the interpretation he was told could be legitimately challenged by another. That's democracy, its not "fake news.
The Mapuche voted against the new constitution too, he doesn't say that in the video, but in the Araucanía, the indigenous region 77% voted RECHAZO / against, the new constitution, because they didn't want to have special rights and be ruled by a powerful minority in their own region that doesn't care about them
Also the current "dictator" constitution has been modified in 70% of its content already, the real goal is to take down the economic clauses which guarantee a free market.
I hope the indigenous people get the rights and respect they derserve. There lands were taken by foreigners or non indigenous people.
The same happens in my country, leftist get angry when the indigenous population and “the most in need” don’t agree with them 😂😂
USA imposed a dictatorship in Chile and now you Americans ask for change? your level of hypocrisy is simply insufferable.
@@Metratch Chile was literally saved from communism, and the US supported whoever was willing to get the job done.
Should they have cared, at the time, who was in charge? yes, like in Europe, after WW2, they cared, they invested, etc.
It wasn't perfect, but Chile became the richest country in Latam, so its not like it didn't work.
@@celdur4635 Pinochet committed genocide. None saved chile from nothing. People still starved to death and were mass murdered under the regime that USA supported. and its today one of the most violents countries in latin america and female homicides are among the highest rates within Chile
I like that the reaction is "the vote is against us... Chile has not woken up... the people voted for the wrong thing"
and not simply "The vote is rigged"
thats good
before the election people on the Rechazo side were saying: "if Apruebo wins the vote is rigged"
Better than burning public and private property
@@nataliaretamal4057 And seeing the final certified percentages, they were right.
😆 Progress.
@@nataliaretamal4057
Clearly they had a point considering they won by 60%+ lol
The result of the vote is absolutely not surprising.
It almost gives the impression that the govenrment, which doesn't like democracy, is setting up a huge system where they can say "see, democracy doesn't work".
They tried to introduce too many new things at once. Common failure when your introducing anything.
In effect that is what a Constitution is though, unless you reduce it to just a few simple precepts like the U.S. Constitution which is then mutilated by the courts and Congress in the back pocket of usurpers such as George Soros and Klaus Schwab.
This was a left constitution. A constitution needs to be for all ppl. Well done Chile.
There is no right or centrist constitution for all people. With this, there is no constitution.
yes, completely agreeing with you in this.
I think hopes were very high because the entry referendum in 2019 and the presidential elections from 2021 had voluntary vote, which the exit referendum for the constitution hadn't, amongst other more specific reasons.
The compulsory vote effectively killed any chance for the Chilean hard left in any upcoming national elections. I read they are already trying to take it down.
The hopes aof a minority of extreme-leftists radicals, good riddance, viva Chile !!
USA imposed a dictatorship in Chile and now you Americans ask for change? your level of hypocrisy is simply insufferable.
@@Metratch jajaja no fuking woke. pinochet liberate us from allende marxist dictatorship
@@marcelobravo3074 what is the difference? people still starves to death to this day in chile, womans are still violently killed in chile to this day, people cant even acess education and millions were still murdered and the power was overtaken by a military hit and imposed by the armed forces and killed anynone that opposed. Is that not a dictator ship?
So they finally got rid of the dictator's constitution and decided to have a bunch of random Joes draft the new one? That is like straight out of The Simpsons or Family Guy.
not everything is like in the us, get over your self-centered ass
Exactly
You prefer licking the boots of others
No, read again the actual constitution. It's not the Pinochet or Guzman constitution is the president Lagos, a socialist, constitution. At least you didn't read it at all
Just like what happened in my country,the philippines, when they toppled a brutal kleptocratic dictator in 1987. Some of the members of the constitutional assembly were from movie industries. Today, they want another constitutional assembly and one of its proponent is a washed-up actor.
No matter how progressive the constitution is, meaningless unless it creates society in which people feel that way. We cannot blame people for wanting security over liberty.
thiiiis
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Progressive values neglect liberty
It's the opposite actually, socialism promises security but takes away your liberty, but in the end, It takes both away.
In fact chileans want liberty , whoever thinks that progresive is a good thing have never ever lived under a socialista country, de had the first worlds democratic election of a socialist party in the 70' and we lived socialism , north americans does not know what they have ....
When you choose to vilify and disregard those who have different beliefs rather than try to understand them you will never cease to be surprised by political defeat.
Lol the existing Pinochet constitution is only around because the capitalist overlords felt vilified and disregarded enough to have the U.S overthrow the nation via violent invasion.
There's nothing to understand about right wingers. They want to uphold the status quo and are primarily motived by fear of change and ignorance.
Nice 👍
@@yayayayya4731 Not really
@@charlesmiv3842 Unhappy leftist detected
Glad to see Chile is still based
Bruh
Round of applause for the guy voting in the shower
It was a clean vote, at least
Noice
Surprised that Vice did not mention anything about the awful left wing performance of "Los Indetectables" in Valparaíso, so bad that it turned around all the votes. Literally one of the performing girls put the Chilean flag in her ass and then got it out with some shite on it. A flag that represents everyone in the country treated like that proves that they don't really care about the country or its history, they tried to replace the flag and anthem previously so its not that surprising.
based
Chilean here, this translation is pretty inaccurate and there is lack of too much info, also, the polarization shows, Vice should do better (;♡
I would love to visit Chile
Yup same. Hopefully in less tumultuous times.
Don't visit santiago
@@asagecaptain why?
welcome but do not visit Santiago. 🙂
Santiago has been terribly neglected in the past 12 years. Too much informality and leftist riots.
its really funny when the opposing side loses in a democratic vote, they begin to act violently.
That is democracy, power to the majority, if you are not in it (be it politically religously or culturally) you are nothing
While that is 'sort of' true, you kind of miss the point that the state uses violence ALL the time. So whenever people, particularly indiginous people, come up against the violence of the state, they often get chastized for resorting to violence, when the ruling state uses violence ALL the time, and usually uses it to kill any kind of progress except what violence can actually accomplish.
Ireland never would have become an independant country had it simply kept butting up legislatively and peacefully against the british colonial system. Not that I want to SEE violence, and in most cases its counter productive, but when the state uses violence so effectively and completely then its nonsense to condemn others for using hell. Hell, in the US you saw people resorting to violence just because an election didn't turn out how they liked. In Chile when govenrment goes south it doesn't just 'elect a democrat'. They start coming in the night for you and your loved ones.
Chilean here, the constitution was hard left leaning, (a bit like Vice) it split the country into 11 nations, following Ecuador and Bolivia, with close to 50% indigenous population.. not the case here 12%....and created a parallel legal system undermining equality under law. this constitution was downvoated by 80% of that 12% of indigenous population, that speaks for itself.
The goberment was not neutral, so as the goverment failed, people who were displeased with them, took aim at the constitution. Big mistake by Boric.
And creates a unicameral system with unlimited power, aiming at seting the ground for a goverment withot checks and balances, a system Nicolás Maduro , Cuba and Bolivia like very much, because it undermines democracy.
All in all it was a very bad proposal, and that's why it got rejected. It's a pitty that the positive parts it had got lost because of it.
I always feel that Vice takes a side (mostly the progressive one) when dealing with hot and polarized political matters.
Analyzing this particular case, the degree of surrealism and ideology that radiated from the constitutional assembly was to grotesque and pronounced to be omitted.
All the delegates in charged of writing the constitution (2/3 left oriented) jeopardized and ended to suffocate all the pursuits of elaborating a reasonable and robust constitution for all Chileans, only for the utopian pursuits of perpetuating their radical ideas.
All their fanaticism and detrimental ideas crystallized in the constitutional draft, which finally was the best driving force to enhance the momentum for its final rejection.
They wanted to impose their vision of society by any means on the basis of a self proclaimed moral superiority, undermining all the decedent points of view in the process (no article written by the right fraction of the constitutional assembly ended up in the final draft).
For me, the dynamics and situations that were seen in the constitutional assembly were a disrespect to the chilean citizens and a waste of resources and time.
I hope the chilean people have being able to see to which extents the south american far left is willing to go to impose their status quo.
In the end this election surpassed individual opinions and political colors , because the whole integrity of the country was finally at stake whit the final draft.
A constitution is not a political tool or trampoline to cement a certain political view, and should ultimately unit and search for meeting points in a society, all which the rejected constitutional draft deeply lacked.
There are few cases were one opinion or point of view is quantitatively better that the other, but exceptions often justify the norm and this fact was profoundly emphasized in the elections of the 4. of September.
Viva Chile
Vice is borderline NPR!! They like to think of themselves as "investigative journalists" but they are just agenda pushers with a decent size platform to spew opinions. That Johnny Harris dude did a great job of covering both sides but I think they pushed him out because he was too real for their left leaning agenda.
vice also forgot to talk about the i and e voting systems used. "those who vote decide nothing. those who count the votes decide everything."
They are funded and viewed in America by the far left political structure nearly exclusively now. So all this woke journalism is just them pandering to the money. Before it was sold Vice was operated by people interested in interesting stories. After the sale it became a tool of progressives. Then as viewership fell off the only content that got traction for them in America was crazy gender stuff and Donald Trump. So as American companies do they leaned all the way into the small view they still had. The results are this where Vice sends a reporter to complain about a vote that nearly every citizen has showed up for. The people have spoken so Vice can send this human Ken doll back to Williamsburg. The Chilean people don’t need Vice’s help to figure out that they didn’t want this constitution. No matter how hard they push the majority does not believe this. Which is how you have the current state of affairs. Where now in America there’s a major pushback against all this woke ideology because most people don’t buy the bs.
@yourmanwatson U say that as if leftists aren’t the same
All right wing politics are a joke and hardly factual. It's just your fear of the unknown making decisions for you. That's why they take sides with the progressive.
This is better than the documentary that for some reason decided to release before the results were given
I'm Chilean and here is my take on this:
While most of us supported the beginning of a constitutional process, not many of us got involved in electing the right people for taking up this take. Moreover, a significant part of the elected people was part of an "independent list", where people who voted for them did not really know how they would behave during the process. Many of the most far-left conventionals were organized by Marcos Barraza to form a hard-left block that holds about 1/3 of the votes inside the convention. This group was very powerful inside the convention because they were very organized and they were aiming to push the right-wing conventionals (who were not more than 1/3) out of the debate. Barraza's group only needed the support of the most moderate left and center conventionals to agree upon things, and they were pushing hard to block the contributions of the side of the convention that did not think like them... They were drunk with the power they felt people gave them, and they thought any text they produce was going to be approved by the exit referendum. But Chileans started to realize that despite all the positive things the new constitution would bring, there were many aspects of the constitution that were highly divisive and only favored one side of the political spectrum. Perhaps this will be the greatest missed opportunity to change the foundations of Chile... I think we will still have a new constitution, but it would be one that is far more "basic" and less pretentious, one that will let any kind of democratically elected government rule, no matter if they are left or right, this is how healthy democracies works. Finally, I think that the changes Chile needs will not be instated by a new constitution, but rather by common laws. If politicians do their job, we can get important changes done in Chile, just by creating new laws or modifying existing ones, but there is no need to try to write things in stone by writing a constitution that is filled with an ideology that is not shared by most of the Chilean people.
How specifically would the conduction have only benefited one side of the political ile? Why is no one here mentioning specifics of why.
Healthy and functioning democracies(not corporate captured) genuinely don't exist in most far right nations, and are often setup to not allow descent or the political left
Yes, I would also like more specifics on what parts favored one side/were problematic. I am becoming increasingly concerned by the number of countries in the world that seem to be falling to disinformation campaigns, distrust in the government, and platforms that protect the wealthy status quo while excluding minority groups and the poor.
Thanks so much!
You have really helped me to better understand the situation.
@@Big1nz this dude definitely isn't far right, hence why he wants change, the leading figures in the end had no respect for anyone on the right
How was this constitution "pretentions"?
Authoritarian is the new progressive now, huh.
What a terrible report, blaming “fake news” for the lack of clarity in the text of the rejected constitution is absurd. The Apruebo camp participated in daily television programs (which were also widely shared on social media) where they presented their interpretation of what was in the document that they had helped create, thus they had ample time to clarify their positions. The result was that, time after time on every contentious issue, they either a) Provided no clarification, proving the incoherence of the document or b) Cemented perceptions by trying to justify unpopular aspects of the document. The last ditch effort of the Apruebo camp just before the vote was to admit that the proposed constitution was flawed but that it would be fixed after it was approved, which Vice makes no mention of. Vice may count on their viewers to be naive and I’ll-informed, Chilean voters certainly were not.
I am Chilean, I voted yes in the first plebiscite and I do not regret it, I voted for Professor Carlos Calvo as a constituent, who was teaching at my university and I would do it again because he did a good job in the convention. I want changes and I want a constitution that allows to channel such changes without so much bureaucratic hindrance and forced interpretations of unconstitutionality. However, although I will never know if the rejected option in the exit plebiscite was the right decision, at least I know it was a prudent decision, the elected CC was not up to the challenge they took on, many of them showed themselves as independent and professional people but ended up being accountable to the radical left, when a scandal occurred they were not careful in communicating their version of the facts, instead they were disrespectful and with a kind of overbearing moral supremacism. Not all of them were bad, those like Cristina Dorador, probably the most outstanding scientist in my country, will always have my admiration for the impeccable work they did, but that does not mean I will look away from nefarious characters who devalued the convention to the minimum expression, like Rodrigo Rojas Vade who deceived the whole country by saying he had cancer before the first plebiscite, only for that to turn out to be a lie and still continue paying his salary for another 8 months without him going to work, because the left was trying to have someone else (not elected by the citizens) to replace his place so as not to lose his vote in the approval of the articles of the new Constitution, 8 months with a parasitic drone who deceived the whole country is something that destroyed the reputation of the convention (among other things) but it seemed not to matter to the radical conventions, they believed they could do anything and the approval in the exit plebiscite was assured because of the 78% victory on the first plebiscite, and until the last moment they believed that the polls were manipulated and that they would win. Zero self-criticism.
We were not used to being so involved in our politics, I hope we learn from our mistakes and try again with a formulation of lists of constituents that allows us to know from the beginning what are the ideas and political connections of those for whom we vote.
It does not matter that it will take longer, but at least there is some relief in knowing that Chileans were careful with our future, which makes me feel proud and still have the hope that we will go far with the participation of citizens truly involved in deciding what we want for our country.
Wow Chile really dodged a bullet there.
I think it would be better to put individual amendments up for adoption.
I agree. The people should vote for each amendment. That’ll never happen though.
Can someone from Chile please explain to me what were the major reforms proposed and why so many people rejected it?
@Bastian Marchant Acevedo that makes sense. Do you think the country will eventually move towards those left ideologies with better written proposals or will it continue to be rejected for central/right policies?
@@anthony7960 Hi, I was heavily involved in the campaign for Apruebo, I'm also a socialist. From my point of view, making campaign in the poorest sites of Santiago, made me understand that most people won't read the new proposal, not because they weren't interested, but because they can't read it - the language was heavily academical and with legislative concepts that most people untrust, as it was with the expropiation reform, where it reads as "fair price" given to the private owner, or the indigenous tribunal (some people were like "now they have their own judgment system?"). Not only difficult to read, but also very long, with more than 300 articles, in a country where people have to work a lot to earn their bread. Some people say that it was a "disaster" from legal points of view, but that, if you ask me, is false - the proposal was written by the brightest constitutional lawyers, like Bassa or Atria, or even, if you don't like leftitsts, take Agustin Squella, lawyers recognized the most at what they do in Chile and in international universities. But not only that, the new constitution was also recognized by constitutional lawyers, economists, and other international authorities as "the best option for Chile". If anything, we also contributed to its rejection: a constitution for the majority must be understood and in sync with its people's needs, and the revolt in 2019 was mostly about unequality and economic struggle, the new constitution, on the other hand, talked about unequality and economic struggle, BUT ALSO wanted lgbt rights, indigenous rights, mother nature's rights - which most people won't understand.
@@pablobaesler3447 damn right
@@pablobaesler3447 great explanation and not biased. Thank you! I am a former socialist, moving a little bit to the right of socialism, and I think our communicators on the left need to be self critical and take into account everyone else’s opinions. I think left policies should only be enacted if the public agrees on it. We can’t force people to believe in the same things we do. I am strongly anti-communist in that sense.
Easy they were awful, bad and it only represented an small radical minority that just wanted to destroy our country
Their carriage turned into a pumpkin
I love hearing this correspondent speak Spanish lol
Its very to the point
I like it
@@usienwkdau2jfb28u4b it’s just like when he speaks it I can absolutely hear why it’s a Romance language. It’s a beautiful language.
@@n00dles79 i can't exactly place his accent on a map tho but it's very similar to mine...i doubt we're from the same place
@@n00dles79 Colombia
because the final proposal was very lefty and maximalist
yes, it had even racial segregation
It's not a hard loss. Democracy is still strong, in my opinion. People understand this is a matter of opinion from the citizens. They don't question the system like they do in the US and Brazil. There is still hope. Maybe an even better and more representative constitution will come from this. My admiration for my Chilean brothers and sisters, and best wishes from Colombia.
Democracy here is weak because is not a democracy, its a republic and both things while they are similar are not the same, only suiza has a proper democracy.
Is not a hard loss because getting rid of this awful constitution proposal was actually a win
@Prasanth Thomas well in first place i didn't talk about the republican party i talked about the system, the Republic its a system and Democracy another one, and yes they share many things but are not exactly the same, its like comparing a lion with a tiger both have their differences despite the basic similarity, the same with republic and democracy, the first is representative type where you choose someone who "represents" your interests and the second is direct one where the people actively decide, the true democracy is the direct one not that representative bullshit.
@@zrevival3818 actually it didn't change what the chileans (unconsciously) wants and is direct or semi direct democracy
@Prasanth Thomas you seem that you didn't read enough about this topic something that i have done, both Republic and democracy have elected government and not hereditary, the Republic was influenced by the early Athenian democracy thats why i say that they share similarities, the main similarity is that they use public elections but the difference is that in the republic the government elected made all the decisions and rule the country with no further involvement of the citizens, while in the democracy this is made by public referendums so the government in a democracy has less autonomy and power because it depends on the results and true will of their citizens, so Republic is representative and democracy is direct (direct citizen envolvement), the problem is that the media do not separate both systems and they called wrongly democracy to the republic mainly because the republic use the democratic tool to elect government, is time to call both systems for their respective names, because they are cousins but not the same thing, they have key differences.
The answer..... Because they were smart.
reason it's the most livable country in latin america, we are the least idiotic society down here at least
It’s very interesting what is going on in Chile. If you watch all the way to the end, it becomes apparent to me at least that Chile is trying to find a reasonable balance between government and a center left coalition, rejecting radical leftist precepts. The problem is how to distribute the balance-of-power through a representative government. There is no way to please everyone. And the government is never trusted anyway.
What is so interesting to me is that they are ripe for a direct democracy on a block chain. It will be interesting to observe what transpires. South America is dynamic and on the move, unlike SE Asia which is still stuck in their cultural respect for authority. I prefer to be in a dynamic situation no matter the outcome. I felt so intellectually dead in the Philippines.
What do you mean by a blockchain direct democracy?
@@rosbel7425 Fake ass web 3.0 vapor ware bullshit.
Trust me, you do not want a dynamic situation or whatever that means. My country neighbors Chile and I am glad they did not vote for that POS of a constitution. If I was a bad person, I would have loved to see them voting for that in order for they to collapse as Venezuela or Argentina. Latin america faces many problems but they all have in common their own people. People here are overall corrupt and despises following any damn rule. Also, they do not like to be held accountable of their own actions, they always have to blame someone else, like the spanish.
@@rosbel7425 where law is made with proposals (propositions) on the blockchain and every citizen has an account so they can vote. No cheating. No representatives making law or policy without 67% consent of the public. No more the slim majority enslaving the major minority. This divide-and-conquer crap where the elite fool us over issues has to end. You can not have a civilization where 51% can enslave the 49%. That is civil war and what is exactly is happening right now in my country the U.S.A. (EE.UU). Civilization needs to adopt technology and common sense pronto. I can assist.
What makes you think making democracy more direct is the solution? If anything it will only make it worse and lead to populism and reckless decisions with politicians supporting whatever the majority wants.
Instead making voting tier based of in which tax slab you fall into would make citizens accountable and politicians won't have to just appeal to majority.
Heavy Gratitude for sharing.
the proposed new constitution was a complete mess. First, in writing, if someone reads it, it looks like it was written for someone with no knowledge of Spanish. Second, it increases the size of government, reducing private property, that was enough for me to reject it. Regarding the privileges of indigenous people, their vote is worth more than mine... why is that? The text is so ambiguous that when someone asked an "expert" for approval, the answer was always "it means what you're saying." In conclusion, a complete disaster.
12:17 what the hell happened here? They are singing the national anthem, not saying "Chile won!"
(I just realized saying that in chilean rather than english is hilarious)
Should have included fewer controversial things, like the U.S. did, then worked on the other stuff later. But the left had to have every single thing now and it all had to be basic law, immutable forever. Sure, people spread falsehoods, but if stuff like abortion hadn't been in there and had been left to policy makers, there wouldn't have an issue to polarize people over.
As a Chilean, I'm happy this sad attempt failed.
When the Americans did the Constitutional Congress, they gathered the most educated and elites of the colonies to debate it. Does not sound like Chile followed the same model.
For those people thinking that Chile was so poorliny get more info prior to 2019 and you will be surprised to see what's there, Chile was the leading economy in Latin America and and unemployment was way down and most were getting by but alot were in debt due to poor banking laws especially rotating credit programs (credit cards)
Revolving credit is legal robbery of the poor and should be outlawed everywhere.
The Big Banks bought most of those lending "financing" businesses. Now the Banks are encouraged to deny your loan applications to drive you towards their sky high interest loans of revolving credit.
Mexico is been the most powerful economy in Latin America for many years
The problem is that chilean population educate themselves with tiktok's and fake news. Now no reforms are going to happend. Greetings from Chile.
@@CHIKIS748 ,look it up, Chile has had the strongest economy in Latin America for some time, look it up. My friend has lived in Mexico for decades and my son has married and lived in Chile for a couple of years so we talk about it quite often.
@@CHIKIS748 Not by income per capita though
Progressive is subjective matters, what works on one doesn't necessarily works on other
Progress isn't subjective, it's only the perception that is. Like when a parent tells a child to eat their vegetables - an objectively good idea.
@@BicycleFunk it is. Progressive is an adjective. It's always about the perception and which side you stood on. Whether you're the one who proposed the progress work or you're the obstacles in the path of progress. The feel and impact is different.
And your comparison is not apple-to-apple. Parents should know which veggies, fresh or processed, is good for the child, not just ram anything you called veggies on child's mouth.
"Progressive" has lost its meaning ever since it was coopted by the left. Doesn't help that the right also associates it with communism, even though conservatism was the most successful when it was implemented alongside progressive economic policies.
@@BicycleFunk if you progress into the worst decision of your life it isn't a positive thing
It is subjective, just alike conservtism is subjective, a urss conservator official of the 80 wouldn't be at all the same as 80 conservator from east germany or from south africa
@@BicycleFunk It depends. For you it might look like progress. To Chileans it looked like regress
It seems you can explain everything with fake news 🤣
Perhaps Boric could have waited a year or two after stabilizing the economy and been more inclusive of his political opponents to create a centrist constitution. Such radical change after 50 years of ultra conservative rule was always gonna be tough.
Now he's expended much needed political capital and had the wind taken out of his sails
"50 years of ultra conservative rule was always gonna be tough." Since pinochet left power in 1989 Chile's been ruled by a centrist and left centrist coallition called coalition of parties for democracy during Patricio Aylwin, Eduardo Frei, Ricardo Lagos & Michelle Bachellet administrations. Thing is Boric is not a centrist and never will be. Actually, he despises them and in his view to negotiate with centrists is a treacherous act (because they sometimes have to deal with the right like a proper adult). During his whole carreer his bets were placed on a leftitst democratic revolution with a new constitution for a new country always trying to scrape everything that happenened before this generation of "enlighted" activists. So he really never had pollitical capital to begin with.
“Ultra conservative” 😂 how?
Chao Merluzo ....trash !
There will be no stabilizing of any economy in the world for the next several years. We are entering WW3.
@@el_naif Oh Idk, how about the subsidiary principle for the state, for starters.
Imagine getting mad at facts...homie hit him with thats fake news 😆 🤣
“The only fake news are from the other side” Pity, that blonde guy sounded so reasonable at first until he got so defensive about his side not ever doing fake news and wanting to call an expert on constitutional law
The question is, why is this a debate of Left vs Right? What happened to compromise and working together to create a representative and fair constitution? It appears the drafted constitution was all liberal ideas that got pushed onto the rest of the country, neither the left or right have the correct ideas, but together combined the ideas are greater than the sum of its parts.
Because those liberal ideas would've helped the vast majority of the country. Anyone who wasn't a big business owner and voted to scrap this just voted against their own interests.
You're wrong the term "Liberal" doesn't mean that it means in English, in Spanish liberal means "Libertarian" or "classic liberalism", what u don't know is that the progressive movement in Latin America are against liberals ideas in fact people see Liberalism as a "far right" movement, the progressive left is always against Economic policies of Free market Capitalism which the liberales support.
@@charlesmiv3842 You don't define other people's self-interest, a lot of those ideas were absolute dogshit you have to learn to compromise with others different from yourself.
Because the left clearly isn't the right option. They say progressive, but they mean socialist. Take a look at usa stock index ever since a liberal president took over after a conservative, biden has tanked the US economy. Even liberal views. Supporting lgbtq, grooming children etc. Truly sickening anyone who supports the left.
@@psyconauta_libre3272 liberal and libertarian are two total different things ! This is a joke right ?
Although not Chilean I followed their politics closely during this process as it was a remarkable on the world scale. Also I'm a long term follower of Vice. This report is shocking and fails both the fascinating story of this referendum and the lagacy of this channel. The young leftist government is chosen "in the spirit of change" and the movement is a "beacon of hope" but the vote fails because of "right wing pulling attention to political stunts" really? That's like something from a first year poli-sci student's paper that's is cruising for a strong C-. And the discussion with Kast? Was that a joke? "The provision allows for abortion" -"But not always" -"But it does"? What even was that? How do you come this unprepared for an interview? And I'm saying that while holding a strong view that Kast is a screwup. I'm honestly terribly sad that this is what a channel that brought us Ostrovsky's Dispatches has come to.
Which constitution did chile accept
2:53 "...a system that created enormous wealth for a few, but left most people behind."
The Chilean poverty rate in the 1980s was near 50%. It's now 10%
Additionally, after the monetary revolution in the 1980s, Chile hasn't suffered crippling inflation like other South American countries Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Venezuela. High inflation devastates the lives of common people. On a relative basis, Chileans have done far better than most of their South American counterparts.
50% of workers earn less than 400.000 clp, 448 USD, 400.000 clp is an amount under the line of poverty for a family. On average a chilean worker (70% of workers) earns less than 680.000 clp , 760 USD. Those figures were taken from El Mercurio a famous right wing media. Nowadays we have a tremendous inflation. First world prices and african poor country salaries. They have been telling you lies about this country. Most people was left behind.
Poverty rate definitions vary. Resulting in numerous people still left out. Even seeing fewer people in poverty isn’t enough as it is still unfair.
@@vChilem 760 USD is not bad. Brazilian minimum wage is 250 USD
The bar is even lower in other south american countries
Fuerza chile 🇨🇱 💪
Chile jamás será marxista
Like from my favorite Broadway show… “winning is easy, governing’s harder”
Chile is in DEEP trouble.
The sad part I noticed about right and left wing debates the Left wing plans usually oversteps boundaries and the right wing never has an alternative outside of anti left wing policies and nothing unique outside of it.
It’s like they only exist as related to each other. They don’t have good things of their own as much as they have stances against the other side. And then what little issues they work out is what ends up happening
It's not progressive if the majority reject it. Giving the President more powers ( not spoken of here) is always a recipe for rejection. And take the process seriously. Revise and do it better.
Not completely true. There are arguments for an executive vs parliamentarian president. In America presidents are more powerful then in Europe. The power of your head of state all just depends on how does it fit your society. Democracy has been a nightmare (Libya) for certain regions of the world while its blossomed in other parts.
@@tao3878 I was also thinking that, having more or less power is not the point, but how much people trust on the system
@@W.Gaster A parliamentarian system wouldnt work in the Americas with how the party systems in our countries work
2019 demonstrations weren't asking for a new constitution so that's the main reason this project failed.
The silent and sensible majority have spoken.
Sometimes the media lies. And people learn on their own. But they might want change but not the change they put forth
Not in this scenario. Nobody wants more rights for companies than for people. Thats a fact. There are a lot of going on in Chile, the chilean big companies owners, including the ex president, have interests and watch over them governmentally. They control everything, including media. It is not convenient for them to lose that power since in no other country they’ll have the conditions that they have here to become more millionaires. It is not a free market, it is a libertarian market.
This report is kind of inaccurate in a lot of statements. Just to put an example: that the president was to blame for the lost because he didn’t do enough. Actually a main critique was that for months he was only campaigning for the “Approve” and lost sight from the day to day of the country. Like this fact, there a lots of facts here that seems more like an opinion from the reporter.
Is funny like a very complicated politic situation has been reduce to a right-left theme. The majorities who ask for a new constitution and vote to reject this one, have gone beyond partisan arguments. Not even internally someone has came with an answer for what happened, is very brave from vice to conclude one.
Chile is the wealthiest country in South America. Don't try to fix what has never been broken.
so unstable to form anything close to a legit constitution. Like playing jenga on a washing machine
Probably for the best, now the movement can grow and reevaluate without the US overthrowing Chile
LOL.
Progressive meaning 💩 of course, that's why.
We rejected because it was full of the crap
Cause we ain't dumb.
The world according to Disneys millennial targeted propaganda arm lol
Chileans know what Chile needs. Stay vigilant friends
Not really, education is needed to combat 500 years of colonial and capitalistic ideas
@@brandons.5433 God, isn’t that the truth. Uneducated people are very dangerous. Hence, January 6th.
By that coin the USSR communists rebellions where on the money. Self interest can be misinformed. (Still a good thing they get to vote on it, it be worse if they where forced because “I know better”)
@@brandons.5433 You can always move somewhere you can live "free," buddy.
@@brandons.5433 so they really do know, considerin Chile's educational level for a Latinamerican country
Unpopular opinion: Not everyone can write a constituion. I have a MSc. degree in a STEM field and I wouldn't even dare to pretend to write the legislation that would eventually affect me. If anything, I would like a leader of any group representing my interests with a certain knowledge of the game to write it for me. This idea that democracy means that everyone knows the same and has the same capacity is bs.
In Chile If it's bad, It's bad. In Australia if you don't know vote know. Seems like all you need is a couple slogans and a heap of money to convince people how to stop change.
Ummm, I’m pretty sure the South African constitution has been this progressive since the 90s. First constitution to protect gay rights.
And look at that rainbow hole, it's worse than hell
It's possible that they actually read it and realized it was not a good constitution, no matter how good the intentions
Unlikely, given the amount of fake news surrounding the campaign to begin with.
@@cormano64 like vice news
But they didn’t tho more than 60% didn’t read the constitutional draft
dude people were expecting change if they rejected it xD the fake news were awful
@@felipesandoval9832 the change the constitution promised went too far- it was not the change that Chilean voters asked for in the first referendum.
To build is more complicated than to bring down. It's a pity. Social peace should be over personal interests.
Social peace is built of a bunch of little personal interests. Even the communists knew to not make the peasants too angry
@@yucol5661 but without social peace none of the personnal interest could be pursued
For example without social peace no electricity and water in your home, no shop because they could be stealen amytime and crime is rife when no social peace so can't even buy water, a electricity generator or food, no weapon, even momey is pretty much useless in that case
How can you say that the constitution only benefit the rich? , Chile was the country with less poverty in south America before 2019
I do not regret having voted twice to reject a new constitution and to vote against the current far-left president. Still, it is sad to see from the outside how your country is being destroyed. Chile will never be what it was before 2019.
And the Mapuches have always had many more opportunities than any Chilean. Including free education even over people who deserved it.
To the contrary. The radical left has been completely wiped out. The radical left squandered all the political capital that it built since the pinochet dictatorship. All in one election.
They will never recover.
A major issue was that Boric’s government stated that in order for them to carry on their agenda, the propossal had to be aproved, basically saying it’s either this or we can’t govern, and that guy has neglected a lot of pressing matters in regards to security, employement, economy and immigration, i mean we have had more murders, kidnappings and assaults this year than in any other time in our history, and he never said or did anything about it, so you can tell why him being associated with the propossal made the aproval look like a poor choice.
Climate change, abortion and those things are important, but making a country work takes a lot more than just that, and that’s what the convention and Boric never understood.
Boric se puso la bandera de la nueva constitución como si fuera algo de gobierno. Siento de mi parte, su participación fue muy inconstitucional, ya que impuso muchísimo la opción del apruebo. Claro que para él era importante, pero no debió involucrarse como lo hizo.
He can't see these problems from the height of his apartment penthouse in an luxuxy neighborhood, or from his limo with armed bodyguards protecting him.
The proposed constitution tried to cram in many issues that are usually, and reasonably, left to elections and legislators. Many of the these proposals were good, others mediocre, and others bad, but there was no reason to make them permanent- that's what elections are for.
It also led to an unworkable political system. There was no mention of the electoral system, so congress could have easily designed one that suited them. It also diminshed judicial independence.
I'm going to comment on a point that I didn't see mentioned in the first couple of comments I read:
The reason the government didn't do much to extoll the virtues of the proposal was multifactorial, but probably the most important was the Contraloría General de la República, an institution that regulates Government expenditure and probity. It's their general opinion that Executive Branch officials should have no part in political campaigns outside of those where they're chosen. And the opposition takes advantage of that qualifying anything remotely resembling an opinion as interventionism (the current government did that with Piñera and the right is now doing it with Boric). That's why Vallejo gave that noncommittal answer to the reporter's question.
In my opinion, also, Boric made the mistake of taking his most famous legislators for ministers and left his representation in Congress pretty much devoid of well-known faces who could play a bigger part for the "Apruebo" option. They probably thought this was an easy win after they won the election.
Again, a miniscule minority of teenagers and marginalized people can't dictate what the hardworking integrated majority should think and vote on. That's how the real world works.
My two cence is that it was a wish list also vice news didn't talk about the enlargement of power of the presidency doesn't matter if the president is left wing power corrupts absolutely.
um that deputy minister at 13:03 is the most beautiful politician i have ever seen
A popular democratic vote isn’t a crushing.
Not honoring the vote would be crushing.
The vote wasn't well advertised
"Yet Indigenous peoples have always been below the Chilean people"
First of all, they are Constitutionally "Chilean" too, have the same rights as us
And last and more importantly, I grew up seeing all Mapuche named people have Scholarships on all levels and other legal and economical benefits OVER the non-indigenous chilean people.
Leftist usually use the argument of discrimination against race when the only discrimination is location, if you live far from the capital you will not have access to the same... everything as the rest of the country, it's undeveloped, and have been on the government for over 20 years.
Chilean friend, the very same thing happens in Colombia. Here the indigenous people have more rights than any other colombian, however they always say they're being discriminated and that they're victims of everything.
They have priorities to get into universities, economic helps from the government, land distribution, they have their own laws, etc
When indigenous college students get their financial help from the government, they spend it all on alcohol on weekends, then they claim 24/7 that they're poor and bring up the colonization issue 🙄🙄 it's always the same here
all I see a strong dictatorship is going to come back soon, how can you run a country with a bunch of emo kids ?..
Respect 🔥🔥💪🏾