John Paul Montallana International Relation

AB-Political Science 3A Prof. Ivan Engalesta

Why Chile Is Facing a Crisis

The explosive unrest in the streets of Chile is the backlash against decades of the most
extreme neoliberal policies. [1] The political regime inherited from the military dictatorship is in
deep crisis. Chile’s protest movement, which killed about 23 people, according to the
attorney general’s office, began on Oct. 18, 2019 with mass fare evasions on the Santiago
Metro after an increase of 30 Chilean pesos – about US$0.04 – on the price of rush hour
tickets .On that day, which ended with 20 subway stations and more than 15 buses set
aflame[2]

Across the capital, President Sebastián Piñera made his first crisis-time speech to the
Chilean people: He decreed a state of emergency in Santiago. Stuck between a rock and a hard
place, Piñera – perhaps fearing that social pressure would force him to resign – changed his tune
by agreeing to negotiate, and the result is a lengthy and gradual constitutional replacement
process, beginning with a referendum in April 2020 and potentially ending with a new
constitution by late 2021.

The current constitution, drafted by the Pinochet dictatorship, was originally designed
to prevent democracy from flourishing. Yet, since a plebiscite in 1988 and the restoration of
democracy in 1990, the document has been amended several times, allowing Chile to build a
consolidated democracy even if it has come on the foundation of an originally authoritarian
constitution .[1]coalition of parties from across the political spectrum says it will support
a constitutional referendum next year to decide whether and how Chile’s 1980 Constitution
should be changed in response to protester demands.[3]

Manny of people are died, arrested, and abused because of wide tolerance of the
military. Some of them are on the street to protest against the government how the state are
being controlled by the Sebastián Piñera administration, people are being anarchic because
of extreme inequality in the state they want economic and political change, the ignition of
the fare hike that set the people on fire and riot are everywhere . In his Oct. 20 speech,
however,

when Chile’s president declared, “We are at war,” the head state announced the
state of emergency to back the public order. Added him this is a democratic tool to back the
public order. People are felt dictatorship and they want to wake up. In the first place Chile is
a democratic state so they fallowed the structure of the democratic and United nation
policies and laws. The president wants to restore its public order. The fare hike is just
strategy that the state would benefits for long run to Sustained his needs as a state that
would benefits its people.

People of the state didn’t feel the presence of the current administration so they
want a reform that will change their lives, correct the inequality , ease the poverty , all of the
state want to survive to secured their future . the egoism is their but for me that a natural
sense of a human, is to survive
John Paul Montallana International Relation
AB-Political Science 3A Prof. Ivan Engalesta

The people going out to their homes, joined the protest to convene and make
a loud voice that will hear about what is the need of the people of the state .they
believe the dictatorship , so this is the time to end this administration , and welcome
the new state .

https://www.leftvoice.org/the-riots-in-chile-
explained?fbclid=IwAR0Pw_KzB0kGAH3KciEC0qb_iT8Us_TjtVqXO8ldgH2OeFQBLRR0UWV0uzU
https://www.americasquarterly.org/content/did-chile-ust-find-way-out-its-crisis`
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/state-emergency-why-chile-facing-crisis-98467
John Paul Montallana International Relation
AB-Political Science 3A Prof. Ivan Engalesta

Theoretical Discourse
International Theory
Realist view
Hobbes’ contribution: need for states – individual’s life in the state of nature is “solitary, poor,
nasty, brutish, and short”; constituted states can protect individuals from domestic anarchy;
international state of nature is a constant state of war; no moral considerations

Offensive realism is a structural theory belonging to the neorealist school of thought put
forward by John Mearsheimer[1] in response to defensive realism. Offensive realism holds that
the anarchic nature of the international system is responsible for the promotion of aggressive
state behavior in international politics. It fundamentally differs from defensive realism by
depicting great powers as power-maximizing revisionists privileging buck-passing and self-
promotion over balancing strategies in their consistent aim to dominate the international
system. The theory brings important alternative contributions for the study and understanding
of international relations but remains nonetheless the subject of criticism

Liberalism view
Deutsch and Singer (1964)
*Multipolar systems are more stable
*In any given bilateral relationship, a limited range of possible interactions obtains, each if the
relationship is highly symbiotic; as additional actors are brought into the system, the range of
possible interactions open to each – and hence the total system – increases (ex: economic
system going from barter to market; ex: bipolar system produces one dyad, a tripolar produces
three, four actors produce six pairs, etc. – increasing the number of actors dramatically
increases the number of interaction opportunities)
Every nation’s needs and supplies differ, so the more nations there are, the greater will be the
number and diversity of trade-offs available to the total system  increases possibility for
stabilizing

Constructivism
Grotian (internationalist) – international politics take place within international society; states
key, but not engaged in simple struggle – limited by common rules and institutions;
international politics is a game that is partly distributive but also partly productive; most
common activity is trade (economic and social intercourse between one country and another);
states also bound by imperatives of morality and law, but these simply require acceptance of
coexistence and cooperation in the society of states

The assumption of realism is the self-egoism they believe of human anarchic system because
they want to survive in their own capabilities and to be on top. Realism tend to resolve a
problem to anarchic actions and result.
John Paul Montallana International Relation
AB-Political Science 3A Prof. Ivan Engalesta

The assumption of liberalism is the code of peace they tend to resolve a problem through
debate, negotiation, liberalism deny the idea of war . this is opposite from what’s realist view to
the world the state may succeed through the cooperation other state . involving into a trade
agreement , negotiate through economic purposes that will helps the state to up their economic
status.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offensive_realism