Pinochet’s junta permitted human rights groups while exterminating the left

Evidence

Viewed from another angle, Moyn’s comment raises the question of why, in the period of neoliberal ascendancy, international human rights organisations flourished, largely escaping the repression that was pursued so furiously against leftists, trade unionists, rural organisers and indigenous people in countries such as Chile. As Pinochet’s regime engaged in a systematic campaign to eradicate the Chilean left, it allowed overseas human rights organisations such as Amnesty International, the International Commission of Jurists, and Americas Watch (a precursor to Human Rights Watch) to enter the country, and gave them extensive freedom of movement. While the CIA-trained National Intelligence Directorate had instructions to carry out the ‘total extermination of Marxism’, the junta, anxious to present Chile as a modern, Western, Catholic and ‘civilised’ nation, did not disavow the language of human rights, even at the height of the repression. Moreover, despite Hayek’s displeasure at Amnesty’s anti-Pinochet activism, the neoliberals did not eschew the language of human rights; on the contrary, they argued that their own proposals were necessary in order to secure freedom, human dignity and human rights. — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 307

Categorization

• XREF: Directly relevant to the reader’s project on human rights discourse and market ethics — the junta’s selective tolerance of human rights NGOs while exterminating the left. — connects to: Pinochet’s regime co-opted depoliticized human rights language into its own constitution — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 371; Human rights groups competed with the left to denounce dictatorships in Chile — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 306; Pinochet’s 1980 constitution embedded human-rights language to legitimize a repressive market order — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 366 (+4 more)
• QUESTION: Why would a regime exterminating Marxism tolerate Amnesty? The reputational logic (presenting Chile as civilised) suggests human rights language functioned as legitimacy theater rather than constraint.

Broader Connections

• Pinochet’s 1980 constitution embedded human-rights language to legitimize a repressive market order #expands (0.85) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 366
• Pinochet’s regime co-opted depoliticized human rights language into its own constitution #expands (0.82) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 371
• Authoritarians tolerate governmental abuse and reject human rights protections #complicates (0.80) — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 292
• Constitutional social rights in Pinochet’s Chile empowered private enterprise over state provision. #expands (0.78) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 369
• Human rights groups competed with the left to denounce dictatorships in Chile #expands (0.75) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 306
• Human rights NGOs absorbed the neoliberal civil-society-versus-coercive-state dichotomy #expands (0.74) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 60