CHILEAN DICTATORSHIP - Marxist thinker talks about the Chilean coup in his new book, "Red September"

 CHILEAN DICTATORSHIP
Michael Löwy: death of armed guerrilla leader in Chile buried the hope of resistance to Pinochet's dictatorship

 
In an interview with Brasil de Fato, Marxist thinker talks about the Chilean coup in his new book, "Red September"
Leandro Melito

Brasil de fato | São Paulo (SP) |
September 28, 2023 at 06:14

 https://www.brasildefato.com.br/2023/09/28/michael-lowy-morte-de-lider-da-guerrilha-armada-no-chile-sepultou-a-esperanca-de-resistencia-a-ditadura-de-pinochet

 

 

 Michael Löwy works as director of research at the Center National de la Recherche Scientifique in Paris, France - Vanessa Nicolav / Autonomia Literária

 

 

After September 11, 1973 in Chile, there was still hope on the global left regarding the process of armed resistance in the country through actions organized by the Revolutionary Left Movement (MIR), which was willing to defend the legacy of Salvador Allende. (1908-1973). With the coup underway , the Chilean president reportedly conveyed a message to Miguel Enriquez, leader of the MIR, through his daughter and political advisor in the government, Beatriz Allende: “Tell Miguel that now it is his turn.”

“Allende himself thought so, because the last message he sent to Miguel Enriquez was the following: my peaceful path didn't work, now it's yours”, points out Michel Löwy, co-author with Olivier Besancenot of September red: the coup d'état in Chile in 1973, from the conspiracy to the first resistance (Autonomia Literária, 2023), launched on September 21, the same month that marked the 50th anniversary of the military coup in the Latin American country.

A Brazilian Marxist thinker based in France, where he works as research director at the Center National de la Recherche Scientifique, Löwy gave an interview to Brasil de Fato in São Paulo.


“I really had this illusion that the MIR was a huge resistance movement that would perhaps even be able to overthrow the dictatorship, perhaps it would be a big fight. It was not. And we realized this when Miguel Enriquez died. I mean, for us it was such a hard blow, maybe even more so than the one in September. In other words, I already had this hope, this illusion that the MIR would be able to perhaps reproduce what the Cuban Revolution was, something like that. So it was really a disappointment."

In the book, the authors portray the episode of September 11, 1973 from the perspective of resistance, in a narrative that they classify as a historical-fictional document, to honor “those who are not simply victims for us, but are fighters against the coup, against the dictatorship, against Pinochet and his gang”, says Lowÿ.

The authors were in Chile on September 11, 2023, where they launched the book in Spanish and followed the activities surrounding the 1973 Coup. Despite the actions of Gabriel Boric's government around the memory of the victims of the military regime and following the announcement that he will continue the search for the missing, Lowÿ considers that it is essential for the left to rescue the memory of the socialist project of Popular Unity, Salvador Allende's party.

“The official discourse, what is seen most at the level of institutions, is the defense of the memory of the victims. Which is important, I'm not criticizing that. But only the most radical left takes up the theme of what the socialist project was.” Michael Löwy's position at the time of the events, as a militant of the Fourth International in France, was one of critical support in relation to Salvador Allende's government. Today, with the historical distance from that period, he considers that the Popular Unity government was a revolutionary process.

“It was a revolutionary process different from others, of course, with problems, limits, contradictions, like any process. But it was an authentic revolutionary process that was interrupted by the coup.” When reflecting on the events of September 11, Löwy highlights that the main lesson of this experience for the class struggle is that the dominant classes only tolerate democracy as long as their privileges are not threatened.

“That’s why we are anti-capitalists, because we believe that capitalism is a deeply undemocratic system, which does not hesitate to resort to military coups and fascism if its interests are threatened.”

Read the interview:

Brasil de Fato: Thinking about September 11, 73, you are launching through Autonomia Literária, together with Olivier Besancenot, the book Red September, in which you approach this episode from a resistance perspective. How did the project for this book come about?

Michael Löwy: Well, I'm going to start from our subjectivity, mine and Oliver Besancenot's. For both of us, this story of Popular Unity, of resistance, the story of Salvador Allende's MIR [Revolutionary Left Movement], this is part of our political identity, let's say. We have Chile in our hearts, so to speak. I was 50 years old and he was younger, more recent, but also very strong.

Due to the 50th anniversary of the coup, we wanted to do something to mark the event. We didn't want to do a scientific history book because there are already several very good books. So we decided to do something a little different, a kind of mix between history, semi-fiction, comic books, theater scenery, film scenery... A bit of a mix of it all, especially in the form of dialogues, precisely to also give the dimension subjective view of events. On the part of the criminals, coup plotters, and on the part of Allende and his companions. So this is the spirit in which we wrote this book. Nor is it a political theory text seeking to draw lessons from history.

We think that the lessons of this experience belong to the Chilean left, to Chilean revolutionaries. Our spirit was to tell what happened, a kind of direct report, accessible to a wide audience and in a lively form of dialogue, without the intention of giving lessons: “Allende should have done this, the left should have done that”. We don't have that arrogance. We simply want to tell what happened and everyone draws their own conclusions.

Of course, we can say that there is a general lesson from this story, from this experience, but it is valid for the class struggle in general. And this lesson is that for the dominant oligarchies, for imperialism, democracy is only tolerable as long as it does not interfere with the privileges upstairs. If something goes against your privileges, that's it, democracy closes. So, this is a lesson from history that we see many times throughout the 20th century to this day.

Well, then our spirit was a tribute. In other words, it was a denunciation of the imperialist conspiracy, the Chilean oligarchy, the military. And a tribute to those who fought against the coup, including Salvador Allende, who appears in that famous photograph with the rifle on his shoulder. And, of course, everyone who fought at La Moneda Palace [Chilean government headquarters] and who tried to organize the resistance, the industrial cordons. We also report this first resistance.

Our intention is to pay tribute to those who are not simply victims for us, but are fighters against the coup, against the dictatorship, against Pinochet and his ilk. And that. This is the spirit with which we created this modest book. Modest both for its proportions and for its human character, a contribution to this 50th anniversary.

You focused heavily on this subjective dimension, on building dialogues, and also created a chronological narrative, especially in relation to September 11th, based on research and interviews. What was the documentary research like for this book?

Once again, it is not a scientific book, based on a large amount of document research, but we consulted some books, especially one that tells the story of the first resistance. We interviewed two or three people we knew, starting with Carmen Castilho, Miguel Enríquez's companion, who is a first-hand witness. And she is one of the characters in the story too. And we also interviewed a companion, Helena Pina [Maria Pina Valenzuela, aka Helena], who was a member of our Revolutionary Communist League in France for many years, was also responsible for our bookstore in Paris [La Brèche] and was a great friend our. And she had been a member of a Trotskyist group in Chile at that time, that is, at the time of Popular Unity, although she also had sympathies for the MIR and she also told us about her experiences, on the day of the coup and so on. So, she is also one of the characters in the story, but the main characters are obviously President Allende, his advisors, his personal guard, etc.

In relation to your personal perspective, as a militant of the Fourth International. How did you follow this process that developed in Chile during the Allende government and what did this 1973 coup represent for you at the time?

We follow Popular Unity in France with great interest and hope, but we have a certain critical distance. I, for example, wrote a little article at the time, in 1972, criticizing the Popular Unity's economic policy, which I had even forgotten, and a Chilean friend sent it to me recently, and I reread it. I came to the conclusion that I hadn't understood anything [laughs]. Why? Well, the article was a criticism and even had a certain legitimacy, but it was a bit in the spirit of "but what are they waiting for to move towards socialism faster?", "Why don't they expropriate the capitalists more and so on?", as if it were so simple.

And, above all, I say nothing about the real problem, which is how to protect this process from an attempted coup that imperialism was preparing. I mean, the only real question, I don't ask. So it was really out of focus. I do my self-criticism. Well, that said, we followed the MIR line a lot at the time, it was a bit of our reference. So, it was a little critical support, sometimes more critical, sometimes more supportive. When the coup came, it was partly a surprise. Partly no either, because many of us, at least, already considered this hypothesis. But it was a blow. It was a hard impact for the entire left, not just for us. The entire left in Europe had identified very much with Popular Unity, with the process in Chile and some comrades, on Wednesday, drew a conclusion that I think is superficial, saying no,

Nowadays I think this talk is really boring. I mean, the truth is that I am increasingly convinced, as are my companions in the Fourth, in general, that what happened with the Popular Unit, with Allende, was a true revolutionary process. It was a revolutionary process different from others, of course, with problems, limits, contradictions, like any process.

But it was an authentic revolutionary process that was interrupted by the coup. So this is the analysis we do today. After the coup, my conviction, and that of other comrades too, was that “now it is the turn of armed resistance, now it is the turn of the MIR”.

And Allende himself thought this because the last message he sent to Miguel Enríquez was the following: “my path, the peaceful path, didn't work out, now it's yours”. So I really had this illusion that the MIR was a huge resistance movement that would maybe even be able to overthrow the dictatorship, maybe it would be a big fight. It wasn't, it wasn't. And we realized this when Miguel Enríquez died. I mean, for us it was such a hard blow, maybe even more so than the one in September. In other words, I already had this hope, this illusion that the MIR would be able to perhaps reproduce what the Cuban revolution was, something like that. Anything. So it was really a disappointment.

The book presents this attempt at resistance after the September coup. The industrial cordons, the MIR attempts, you give this dimension. Was there also an expectation of Cuban support?

This Cuban support was as follows: Cuba had sent weapons, I don't know exactly how many, a small stock of weapons. And Allende said no, if I distribute this, there will be a military coup, so I can't. They stayed there. On the day of the coup, Allende released it and part of it was handed over to the industrial cordon staff. There is a scene where a truck arrives with the embassy's rifles. Good, but it was late. Anyway, I think that even if there had been more weapons, this wouldn't have changed, because those people weren't organized as troops, they didn't have the military conditions to face the army.

So, there was this attempt. There was the first major resistance attempt at La Moneda Palace, which lasted for hours. Five, six hours of combat. They resisted heroically, many died. Anyway, it was a first battle and then there was the continuation and the industrial cordons too. An attempt, but there were no conditions. So, we prefer to honor these combat comrades who fought, did not stand idly by and tried to resist.

Bringing it to the present day, this 50th anniversary of the coup, looking specifically at Chile, which has a left-wing government, went through a very intense process of popular mobilization and even built a new Constituent Assembly, which ended up not being approved , but there is this conflict in Chilean society. What do you evaluate in this process? How do you think the experiences of the left, of Popular Unity, reverberate at this moment?

We were in Chile now, Olivier Besancenot and I, to present the Chilean edition of our book. We had conversations with comrades on the Chilean left and the situation is complicated. I would say, comparing with Brazil, that Boric's left-wing Chilean government is on the defensive and those who I call neofascists are on the offensive.

In Brazil, in comparison, I would say it is a little bit the opposite. On the left in the government, Lula is a little on the offensive, the Bolsonarists are on the defensive. I'm simplifying, but I think that's the difference. Boric is in a difficult situation, he does not control Parliament. There was that wonderful popular uprising led by women, something truly extraordinary. First time in history that we have a true popular semi-insurrection led by women. I think that from now on it will be more and more like this, it also happened in Iran, it was also women. It was an extraordinary thing, which still continues.

When we were there Santiago, on the eve of the 11th, there was a demonstration of women around the La Moneda Palace, all dressed in black, with a candle. Impressive, tens of thousands of women, of all classes, of all ages. Really impressive. So there is this potential for mobilizing women, which is extraordinary. Now the outburst, as I said, this semi-insurrection, the victory of the left in the Constituent Assembly, the drafting of a very advanced Constituent Assembly, ended up being rejected. So there was a defeat made worse by the fact that the newly elected Constituent Assembly is controlled by neo-fascists, by Pinochetists, this is a disaster. So the left-wing government was no longer very radical, it was very much on the defensive.

Boric, on September 11th, made some modest statements, saying “we have to reclaim the heritage of Allende, who was a democrat and a man who fought for social justice”, he did not talk about socialism, and “we cannot remain neutral in the face of of what the Pinochet coup was.” Then the right winged it: “this is a partisan speech, you are dividing the nation”. A truly terrible thing. So the left is on the defensive and the fascists are on the offensive. The situation is complicated and the most radical left is outside the government and criticizes it, partly rightly, but sometimes in a slightly sectarian way. It is very divided, fragmented. The MIR supporters, for example, of the MIR heritage, are ten or 15 very friendly groups, but they have no weight. It is very fragmented, unlike Brazil. So it's a complicated situation, but it has great potential, which is that of the women's movement, the pobladores, the Mapuche, a part of the working class, the unions. There is potential, but for now the fascists are the ones on the offensive.

In the book you bring up the issue of memory in relation to this period, from this subjective perspective. Chile worked on the memory of this period in a different way than we did here in Brazil. I would like you to talk a little about the importance of remembering this period, what other ways can we look at it so that it is not lost, so that we can really learn from these episodes?

See, we think, Olivier and I, that memory is a very important thing for the labor movement, for socialism and for the revolution. Without memory of the past, there will be no fight for the future. So, it is very important for us, let's say, to safeguard the memory of our fighters. They were defeated, we need to safeguard their memory. One of the ways that Chile does this is [from] the victims, which is legitimate. That is, starting with Allende and everyone who was tortured, murdered and disappeared. So, there is a lot of memory work on this in Chile, which is very important.

For example, we visited a former torture center, Villa Grimaldi, now a kind of museum of the crimes of the dictatorship. It's very impactful and very emotional. There are also drawings made by survivors. It's the place where the women stayed. It is very impressive to what extent these scammers were savage, criminal, torturers, a terrible thing, worse than in Brazil. So, this part of the memory is very present, including in Boric's official speech. You see that Boric has now launched a program to search for the missing, which is something that appears a lot in demonstrations, it's the poster with a photograph saying "where are you?". Where are our missing people? Which is understandable, although not very concrete, because many were thrown into the sea and disappeared.

However it is this battle: where are the missing? And Boric responds to this, saying “let's look, let's create an investigation commission, there are mass graves”. So this part is very present, the victims, denouncing the crimes of the dictatorship.

What's missing a little is the memory of the socialist project of Popular Unity, because Allende really wanted socialism, he didn't want a more democratic capitalism. He really wanted to achieve socialism, but through a peaceful route, without the cold war. Unfortunately, it wasn't possible.

So, what rescues the most is the most radical left. The official discourse, what is seen most at the level of institutions, is defense, the memory of the victims. Which is important, I'm not criticizing that. But only the most radical left takes up the theme of what the socialist project was. So, my friends, the people who published our book, along with our book they published another little book called Allende revolutionary. So they analyze the Allende and Popular Unity process from the point of view of the socialist project, which was a revolutionary project. So, I think this is very important, and a part of the more radical left is doing this.

Brazil had a connection with Chile. After the coup happened here, many went to Chile, there was cooperation. Do you see that nowadays or do you think that has been lost a little?

In fact, there were thousands of Brazilians exiled in Chile at the time of Popular Unity. Then the coup came, they had to flee, taking refuge in the embassies. Some were murdered. There are five or six Brazilians who were murdered by the [Chilean] dictatorship. Two of them were linked to the Fourth International. There was now a meeting of Brazilians in Chile, those who had been there at the time.

I participated, even though I hadn't been there, I met with them, we talked. There is this strong, historical relationship, let's say, between the Brazilian left, for example, all the people who founded Dependency Theory in Brazil, Theotonio dos Santos, Vânia Bambirra, Ruy Mauro Marini and all of them were exiled in Chile. They all lived the experience of Popular Unity, this relationship was really very, very strong.

Nowadays this has been somewhat lost. Of course, here you can learn about the Chilean experience. If you have an idea, more or less, follow what is happening in Chile. But I don't see as direct a connection as there was in the 70s, because the situation is different. They are two left-wing governments, but they don't understand each other very much either, because they have different positions on some problems, anyway, I won't go into details.

But there is a different speech from Boric and Lula. And the radical left in Chile does not know what is happening in Brazil and vice versa. Nowadays, unfortunately, there is less relationship and I think it would be good to try to reactivate, let's say, in the Latin American framework, reestablish links between the Brazilian left and the more advanced left in other countries. In the countryside, in the case of the peasant movement, this exists through La Via Campesina. But in the context of political movements itself, it is much less.

Brazil dealt differently than Chile in relation to the memory of the authoritarian period. We had the Truth Commission, a historic demand that had been fulfilled by the victims' families. But this was met with a lot of resistance, generated dissatisfaction in the military and perhaps even contributed to this process of Bolsonaro's most recent fascism. How do you see this issue of memory in Brazil in relation to this period?

Well, Brazil has a characteristic that is a little negative, which is that it is one of the few countries where there was a military dictatorship that when it ended, there was total impunity. There was no punishment for criminals during the dictatorship, while in Chile, there was something, not much. Pinochet, for example, escaped. But the head of the political police is in jail and won't be getting out anytime soon. Well, nothing here. So that's a problem. There was the Truth Commission, which was important. It was very fair, an advance, one of the good things that the PT did in government. Now, effectively, the military has not bought this, they are not willing to recognize that the coup was not legitimate and that the crimes they committed are truly sinister. This is a serious problem.

Bolsonaro stirred this up, raised the tattered flag of the dictatorship, justified everything, the torture, all the crimes of the dictatorship. One of the sad things is that despite this, he was elected. I don't think he was elected because of that. But his voters didn't care. They thought this was an unimportant detail. Anything he said, they didn't care. We need to kill 30,000 communists, "ah, he exaggerated a little." It's complicated, neofascism in Brazil is complicated. But the Truth Commission did a very good job. I don't know if the Armed Forces will be able to free themselves from this heavy legacy. I don't know. I don't know if it's just the old guard that maintains this or if it's the entire army, we'll see in the future.

But anyway, here's a lesson from Chile, Brazil, the entire history of Latin America: in capitalism there will constantly be new coups, new fascisms, it won't stop. Now neofascism has reached the center, also in the United States. That's why we are anti-capitalists, because we believe that capitalism is a deeply undemocratic system, which does not hesitate to resort to military coups and fascism if its interests are threatened.

Editing: Patrícia de Matos