The Democratic Legacy of Sebastian Piñera in Chile?
By Andres Kogan Valderrama
HAVANA TIMES – The tragic death of Sebastian Piñera, drowned after the helicopter he was flying crashed into Lake Ranco on February 6, opened up the discussion about the democratic nature of the former president throughout his political career, which was marked by not going unnoticed until the end.
As a result, various voices and sectors have emerged, either defending or questioning his legacy, mentioning his strengths and weaknesses, all of which are united by the immense prominence Piñera had politically and economically in Chile over the past 30 years, serving as president twice and being one of the richest individuals in the country.
That being said, Piñera’s figure is quite peculiar when compared to other political and business figures, as he took pragmatism and opportunism to the extreme to achieve his goals. This without falling into major ideological fanaticisms or fixed positions, yet also lacking clear principles and a consistent ethical framework, which ultimately led him to be involved in many actions bordering on illegality.
Hence, his entire life was that of a player and speculator, not only to expand his fortune but also to relate to others, reflected in a biography characterized by instrumental and individualistic involvement in politics and certain causes, without strong convictions, just to try to appear as a protagonist in society.
Consequently, we should not be surprised by his inconsistencies, as despite always presenting himself as a center-right person who was always against the dictatorship, when Augusto Pinochet was arrested in London, he was among the first to come to his defense, acting like the worst of the Pinochet supporters, just to please his political sector and benefit from it by gaining prominence.
Similarly, while portraying himself as a great public servant, despite having a real record of irregularities and conflicts of interest with the business world, including the financial scandal at Banco de Talca, the Pandora Papers, his insider trading in LAN Airlines, the creation of zombie companies to evade taxes, the Chispas case, and the Exalmar case.
It is not a coincidence, therefore, that he was unable to understand the significance of the student mobilizations in 2011 and 2012. He used the expression that education was a consumer good in the midst of the protests, displaying complete indifference and disconnection what the society was experiencing then, as if Chile were not a country with immense discontent over feeling abused and indebted within a brutally unequal and segregated system.
His neoliberal and technocratic worldview, albeit always on his own terms, led him to sell himself as a promoter of economic growth, entrepreneurship, and an expert in management. That served to conceal his boundless ambition and obsession with standing out and gaining recognition at all costs, often resulting in blunders in various activities.
This is not to say that he did not have certain successes during his presidency, such as the reconstruction after the 2010 earthquake, the rescue of the miners that same year, or the handling of the pandemic in sanitary terms. However, being president also requires knowing how to listen, collaborating with those who think differently, and connecting with society, not just reacting quickly to catastrophes.
It could also be said that he was never a conservative fanatic since during his governments he did not oppose important laws for the LGBTIQ+ movement, such as the civil union agreement law, the gender identity law, and the equal marriage law. However, that openness went awry when he opposed the constitution written by the Constitutional Convention in 2022, which precisely incorporated historically excluded sectors. Instead, he quickly joined the chorus of the country’s most reactionary groups.
But the most serious aspect, which marks a before and after in his political life in a negative way, was his criminal reaction to the social uprising in 2019, where instead of listening to the demands of the citizens, he declared war on a mobilized people and was the main person responsible for widespread human rights violations, resulting in deaths, massive eye mutilations, and thousands of detainees, as various organizations have well documented.
His defenders will say that he was the president who supported the Peace and New Constitution Agreement, after November 15, 2019, when congress initiated an unprecedented institutional constituent process. However, the damage and terror caused by the state’s forces had already been unleashed by Piñera, so supporting the agreement was a lifeline for Piñera. He used this constitutional exit opportunistically to try to clean up his image, which was in the gutter, and increase citizen support that was plummeting against him, reaching 6% approval.
Similarly, some of us naively believed in the possibility that Piñera would lead a liberal and democratic right-wing, after he closed the Cordillera Penitentiary in 2013, where human rights violators were enjoying privileges, and also when he mentioned the idea of passive accomplices regarding civilians who were complicit in the dictatorship.
However, on the 50th anniversary of the coup d’état, in 2023, despite having signed a letter called “Commitment: For Democracy, Always,” he refused to attend the commemorative event at La Moneda Palace, citing a confrontational climate at that time, not living up to the historical moment of the country, which needed all former presidents to be present on that day, beyond their differences.
Given all of the above, Sebastián Piñera has no way of having a democratic legacy, as some claim, but rather a political behavior centered on himself, which until the last minute of his life, he believed he could control everything his way, regardless of the circumstances, consequences, and messages his environment gave him, which, true to his style, he never considered.