This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Talk about irrelevance, but something is up. I found the link for Chile in the Totally Spies article (about three teen girls are undercover spies), one of the characters, Alex is Chilean or her parents from there. Was it already revealed or on a future episode I don't know. Is it the first time on international TV of someone, though fictious, is Chilean or from the country? I tell you she's no Borat (some of you seen the movie or the Ali G. Show recognize his name), an embarrassment to Kazakhstan and that's a real country Borat doesn't actually represent. Alex is more a child-friendly foreigner (but the cartoon is set in Beverly Hills, California, a real place) where some affluent Chileans fled to after the Allende regime collapsed (by coincidence). The globally popular cartoon's main audience is teenagers, but has adult fans. Animated in South Korea under a French/Canadian media firm, I wonder why the writers included Chile to explain Alex's ethnic (Hispanic-mestizo) features, but to mention the land will get people more interested (same happened to Kazakhstan to develop a tourist advertisement campaign to battle negative images by Borat hailed from that country). 63.3.14.2 12:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Chilean Navy
There isn't a mention of Chilean Navy in Military part of the article, i'd like to add it, but i have no time...
Anyway, if someone could fix that, would be great
Regards
Rkr2!
Demographics
This is just a nit-picky thing, but in the Demographics section, I was briefly confused by the use of XIX and XX to denote centuries. Not that there is anything incorrect about it, but using a phrase such as "19th century" seems to be simpler and clearer. Just a suggestion. 65.242.105.194 19:04, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Picky Journalist
Historians prefer the Roman numerals to that of numeric ones for the simple fact that they are more accustomed to that. Andy f 90 20:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
That usually is not a problem (except for people who are not familiar with Roman numerals in general). It could be one here, however. Chile uses Roman numerals to designate its regións. The regións currently run from I through XII (along with RM for Región Metropolitana de Santiago. At least two new regións are being considered (XIII and XIV), but if the legislature approves the addition of those additional regións, it may start a trend. Even if the región numbers do not climb as high as XIX or XX, it does seem confusing to those of us familiar with the way Chile's regións are numbered. If being "accustomed" to a particular style of numbering is the determination, it might be best to keep the Roman numerals exclusively for the regións, to which the entire country under discussion is accustomed. I wonder what historians from Chile do in this situation? (I am from the USA, though I have studied a lot about Chile.)
Willscrlt 14:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Carabineros
After the military coup in September 1973, the Chilean national police (Carabineros) were incorporated into the Defense Ministry. With the return of democratic government, the police were placed under the operational control of the Interior Ministry but remained under the nominal control of the Defense Ministry. Gen. Alberto Cienfuegos is the head of the national police force of 30,000 men and women who are responsible for law enforcement, traffic management, narcotics suppression, border control, and counter-terrorism throughout Chile.
"It`s worth nothing the high prestige of Carabineros in the chilean society, getting a highest levels of reputation in the last years. (For his low level of corruption, high trustworthiness and effectiveness). "
Is this a joke?? anonymus
No, I don't think its a joke, but the wrong direct translation from spanish into english, because in spanish there is a saying: "No es por nada..." which mean like "not without any reason..." = "There is a reason", I think. Its a translation mistake. --RapaNui 14:06, 13 Jan 2006 (CET)
But if you refer to the corrpution, it's also not a joke. There is an international report each year made, done by Transparency International. Chile is a doing very well in regards to fight corruption. within the last 5 years, its ranked between 15th and 20th place of "cleanest" countries worldwide, mostly lead by scandinavian and west european countries, and Chile is the first in the rank not to be an industrialized nation. Last years it even ranked better than France, Spain and Belgium for example. This report includes up to about 150 countries , done with different methods and sources. Chile has the best ranking in Latinamerica, followed by uruguay on rank 35, I think. --RapaNui 14:12, 13 Jan 2006 (CET)
I think the "It`s worth nothing the high prestige of Carabineros..." was meant to say "It's worth noting..." but that is almost circumstantial. What I want to note is that if well Chile is one of the "cleanest" countries in Latin America, the reports on corruption and delinquency might be a little distorted since they are based on official figures and reports, which are always biased to make the running government look as good as possible. However (and being Chilean I am ashamed to mention it, but truth is honor and helps us improve) lately this year great scandals of corruption in all levels of government and within the political parties that have been ruling the country for the last 17 years have been unable to remain under cover and have caused a great damage both to the ruling politicians and to the credibility and trust in the government, that I hope yet don't trust can be fixed soon...
Origin of the name
The origin of the word Chile is not from indigenaus languages, it´s impossible, therefore they were called of another form to if same and to their territory.
I'm confused by this statement: "the indigenous Muppets word chilli"... Muppets? Is that correct? ~~Just Passing by
"Chile" it could be an Aymara word meaning "cold". Lin linao 04:41, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Chilean Military
Does anyone have any information on the military of Chile? James Trainor 07:22, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)
---
Checking the resourse page where some of the military info was taken, I saw an error. The article says:
"The Chilean Army is one of the most professional armies in the world and has one of the most technologically advanced armies in Latin America."
where the U.S Department of state page says:
"The Chilean Army is one of the most professional and technologically advanced armies in Latin America."
I'm Chilean, and I know that our army ain't the most professional in the world [even from L.A], so I'm going to change that. [to anyone, if we were *that* professional, the tragedy of Antuco would have never happened. Check for more at http://www.emol.com/especiales/pagina_antuco/]
Darius 18:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I am also Chilean and also doubt about "most professional in the world", there we have other examples like Israel, Great Britain, Russia etc which are by far more professional, if there is a way to evaluate professionalism... eventhough the comandos have a quite good reputation, as they regularily rank in the first places in international comparisons at competitions, but thats not really something you can judge in real live.
But it's no doubt that within the region, chilean army is by far the technically most professional and sophisticated Army in the region, by the exception of Brasil. Just research for the Leopard II 5 tanks, there is no tank in the region coming near to the potential of this tank... next one would be the very old T-55 model of Peru, and there are about 40 years of difference in technology between these vehicles.
The Airforce is being renewed with 10 brand new 0-mile F-16 D50 Block Fighting Falcons, the most advanced fighter the US sells to foreign countries (JSF they only keep for themselves). Another 28 well maintained F-16 are being bought additionally from the Dutch Air Force. Not to count the more than 50 Mirages already being used by the FACH and other older but well maintained Phantom models.
Then we have the navy, which is also being renewed with UK Fregates type-23 and some other heavy Fregates from the Royal Dutch Konijklike Marine. 2 brand new French Scorpene Submarines bought joining the rest of 2 old but robust type 209 submarines, the scorpenes in area of the convential non-atomic submarines are being considered the most sophisticated ones. The method to renew the military equipment is being critized by neighbours, because cChile choses the periodic exchange of material, instead of continous renewal like other armies do. --RapaNui 20:37, 16 Jan 2006 (CET)
I'm adding the U.S. Department of State as the source of that statement. Otherwise, it sounds like a phrase with weasel words. --_N_e_g_r_u_l_i_o 06:14, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
The Chilean armed forces is able to acquire technologies from developed countries (the U.S., Britain or France are examples) and came up with internal defense methods, but no risk of a foreign invasion. Whenever Chile is economically healthy, the government has an easy time to purchase weapons. The statement of Chile has the most advanced army in South America has little merit to back their claims. I've heard the Chilean economy is among the most stable in Latin America and once boosted the longest period of democratic rule in the Americas until the 1970's. Appearedly, Chile has been able to achieve a fine degree of economic stability, except the nation's poverty gap and shared some of South America's political crises throughout its history. --Mike D 26 05:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm Chilean and here the army still engages in mandatory conscription. Is that the mark of a "professional army"? Erisie 14:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
doesn't matter, germany still engages mandatory conscription, this does not make the army "less professional". --194.203.213.20 16:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
By the way, 2006 was the first year, where the amount of voluntaries met the target of admissions, and no mandatory conscription was necessary. --194.203.213.20 16:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Chile in democracy
Chile has become a bastion of democratic political stability and successful trade policies.
The percentage of Chileans living in poverty fell from 45 to 21 percent between 1987 and 2000. Literacy and life expectancy have risen steadily, while infant mortality has declined.
Chile's gross domestic product has more than doubled since 1994. GDP growth in 2001 was 3 percent despite the international economic slump, and many expect it to rise to 5 or 6 percent in future years.
Inflation was slashed from 27 percent in 1990 to 3 percent in 2001.
The United Nations puts Chile in the top tier of nations best prepared to compete in the global economy.
But the country's confidence has been impaired by the continuing controversy that rages over the 17-year rule of Gen. Augusto Pinochet.
Also, relations with the United States are somewhat tainted by lingering resentment over the US involvement in the 1973 coup and Washington's support for the Pinochet regime.
On that last point there; shouldn't the article include some details of how the U.S. was involved? TomJord 23:32, 3 May 2006 (UTC)TomJord
Agreed, the US is always involved in the political affairs of the world; especially Latin America. So there should be something to that effect added. Andy f 90 20:36, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
The country has been fortunate in many cases to decrease poverty rates and combat government corruption, yet Chileans are divided over the issue on the legacy of Augusto Pinochet's military regime. One side said Pinochet saved the country from financial ruin and restored an amount of democratic rule esp. when he withdrew from power in 1990. The other side said Pinochet was a dictator and turned Chile to a police state with thousands of opponents dead or missing.
Chile was afraid of becoming communist under the Allende regime, an error in part by Chilean voters in 1970 to make Allende the first elected Marxist president in the Americas. The Soviets failed to back Allende in most situations, because his stance was comparedly liberal and he tolerated public criticism who struggled with unemployment, food riots and hyper-inflation.
But the purpose of U.S. support of Pinochet and how the CIA placed him into power is simply part of the cold war era, a battle between democracy and communism. One thing is certain in Chile was the introduction of economic reforms under Pinochet in the 1980's, based on American capitalist programs and a laissez-fare approach to the country's business climate. Pinochet was backed by the elites and upper-classes headed the country's economic system.
After Pinochet retired from power, democracy returned when the national economic miracle took place and free trade agreements with the U.S. Today, Chile is a rare example of developing nations able to made a transition to not only restore democracy, but the recent booms enriched the country. --Mike D 26 05:24, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
The Chileans are renowned for their European socialism, but struggle with Latin American problems of massive poverty, corruption and dictators like gen. Pinochet. However, Chile held records of the longest government without dictators out of 20 Latin American republics, before the title went to Costa Rica (60 years), Uruguay( 75 years) and Mexico (85 years). Democratic innovative countries Brazil and Venezuela kept returning to dictatorship or extreme political leaders.
The reason to explain the nature of Chilean politics may be economic, cultural and progressive development to handle it's problems in a less radical matter, but only one in 1970-73 did the system was driven downward and the U.S. CIA admittedly interfered in Chile to dispose Salvador Allende, an elected Marxist president.
What was meant to restore democracy and free enterprise, Pinochet became president by force and his crackdown on political dissidents in 1973-76 brought on one of the bloodiest campaigns in the late 20th century. The death toll was over 10,000, but exact statistics remain unknown as some prisoners disappeared without a trace.
Without wanting to defend atrocities Pinochet did under his 17 year rule, it is quite exagerated to name his rulership one of the bloodiest in the 20th century. This simply shows some kind of ignorance of our world history of the last hundred years by previous author, or is rather politically motivated. During 17 years of Chilean dictatorship, 3000 people have died/dissapeared. This is not even leading on regional basis, whereas in Argentina in 7 years of dictatorship, more than 10000 where killed/dissapeared (nobody talks about this? strange...) or paraguays also 3000 dead out of a far much smaller country. not to count the 30.000 dead under Fidel Castro. Still then, this cannot be compared with genoicides commited by Turkey (500.000 Armenians), the Khmer (4 million), Hitler (5 million) or Stalin (7 million). These are to be considered the bloodiest campaigns of the 20th century. --194.203.213.20 16:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Today, Chileans are divided over Allende and Pinochet, and who's fault is it: the U.S. capitalists or Soviet communists for bringing Chile to near ruin. Bachelet isn't pro-soviet like in the past, then if she choose sides with America, the majority of leftist leaders oppose her and Hugo Chavez may personally insult Bachelet. Fidel Castro was known to called Mikhail Gorbachev, Hu Jintao of China and all reformed communists "traitors" and "yankee sympathizers". + 207.200.116.197 redirected by 207.200.116.138 14:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Nazis in Chile
Most chileans have no knowledge about their own history! To many years under Pinochets dictatorship?
To connect "Nueva Braunau" with nazism is pure ignorance. The german immigrants to the south of Chile arrived in the end of the 1800 century, decades before Hitler was born.
Most of the immigrants in Valdivia were democrats escaping from the Kajser persecusions in Germany. The ones that founded "Nueva Braunau" were poor german farmers recruted by the chilean government to "colonize" the territories the Chilean governement stole from the "araucano" indians.
( Instead of "araucano indians" should be "Mapuches" - Alex Hernandez. )
Many nazis fled to south america, including chile. Colonia Dignidad is said to have been a nazi refuge used by pinochet to torture people.
That is true, if you head to the south youll even found in the X Region (the 10th) a small farming city named "Nueva Braunau", for those of you who cant remember, Braunau is were hitler was born. In santiago, the immigration of perubians, the lack of better education in the poorest sectors and the deep gap between rich and poor has led to an increase of at least 1500 nazi sympathizers in the city of Santiago. Of course, we in Chile are all "mongrels", even though i look very white, several of my last names are of Mapuche origins, yet, most of the nazis here actually refer to themselves as aryans (wich is odd, considering that none of them actually is). They are violent gangs mostly, skinheads. Needless is to say that they wont be reviving the reich any time soon.
Chilean Nueva Braunau was founded in 1872 (!!!) so even before Hitler was born, neither nazism was invented! So this combination to Nazism is rather coincidence. Think that is maliciously intended to combine nazism with Chile, but maybe also rather ignorance. The german imigrants in south Chile came from "Schwabenland" midth of the 19th century, most of them were atracted by the chilean government to settle in the south, as their working force in the inhabited area was very welcome. They had fame for fertilizing the land. So even if you visit south Chile you will not be able to oversee their cultural influence,. Of course there are also fleed nazi's after the second world war, like for example Paul Schäfer and his followers, that's everywere like that in the world, also in the USA, but they are really only few agains the about 100000 german originated people living in the 10th region, their ancestors came to Chile before 1900. Maybe there is also generalizing, due to that neighbour countries like Argentina and Paraguay had a quite narrow relation to the nazi Reich, especially under the Argentinian President Peron, they atracted and offered refugee to many nazis after the second world war. During the 2nd World War, Chile was a nation belonging to the allied. Last but not least, Nueva Braunau is founded by inhabitants of the today chech city Broumov (Krinice) ,not to confuse with the more southern natal city of Adolf Hitler, Braunau an der Inn --RapaNui 11:57, 13 Jan 2004 (CET)
The fellow above doesn't know what he's talking about. Broumov is Braunau; the other Broumov is on the Sudety border with Poland to the north. Nueva Braunau, as anyone can find out here in Chile very easily, was founded by Austrians - as were other towns in this region. I should add that Braunau was the original name, of which the Slavic "Broumov" is a variant. There is no history of Czechish immigration to this country nor to Argentina. Thus: Nueva Braunau, like it or not, received it's name from the town of Hitler's birth. If it's any consolation to the sensitive souls, it was founded before his birth. -- Marshall Lentini
The south-chilean Nueva Braunau was not named after the austrian Braunau where Hitler was born, but after the town of Braunau in Bohemia (or "Böhmen" in german), actual Czech Republic, having today the name of "Broumov" where a lot of german immigrants came from. By the time of the settlement of Nueva Braunau that was german territory, there the explanation of the actual czech location. The statement that Nueva Braunau "was founded by Austrians" is doublely false: they were a majority of "bohemian" germans and they did not found the town, they just settled there. In fact it is not a independent town, but administratively dependant of Puerto Varas. The name is just a unfortunate coincidence with Hitler's place of birth. -- Joaquín Brintrup
Not even. Chile has a long history of immigration. If some Nazi sympathizers found refuge here wouldn't be surprising. Andy f 90 21:59, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
The image of Chile as a more Europeanized country, despite the majority of Chileans have AmerIndian blood, would attract a few post-war Nazis to settle in Chile. Immigration levels to Chile is small than of Argentina and Uruguay, due to the geographic location of Chile faced the Pacific. But for a large German community in the south-central part of the country reminds us Chile was a land where many people migrated to restart their lives.
The low level of settlement in the early days of Chile, once considered the least developed colony caused the authorities to consider a policy to promote immigration of people willing to work and develop. Chile has a peasant class but not enough field workers when there wasn't enough indigenous groups after they were pushed out or decimated. African slaves were reportedly scarce (less than 1 percent of the population) and not been very practiced.
In the late 1800's and early 1900's, the Chilean government advertised to European migrants on bargain land deals, and job opportunities in nitrate mines, lumber mills and industrial growth. A mass hiring program to produce their acclaimed wines and pleantiful fisheries required immigrant workers.
Trans-oceanic ships had provided transportation of immigrants, when ships used to stop by Chile in large numbers before the opening of the Panama Canal (1914). Railroads from Argentina brought a large number of more immigrants and the government hired rail workers from Japan and throughout Europe to perform needed labor.
Chile brought on a level of envy to its' poorer neighbors: Peru and Bolivia with the 1879 war of the pacific, when Chile acquired copper-and-nitrate rich lands of the Atacama desert. Bolivians insist Chile to return a portion of the Pacific coast to the land-locked mountainous country.
To this day, reports of border tensions and diplomatic issues with Peru and Bolivia frequently occurs, and in the 1990's a news rumor spoke of Peru wants to acquire scud missiles to solve their problems with neighboring lands based on boundary conflicts (Ecuador, but this was settled in a 2001 treaty).
I disagree on the idea of Chile is a Nazi refuge or a white racist haven, probably to insist a southern hemisphere country with a caucasian majority or an European culture was hard to native peoples. This is ironic when Chile is allied with the U.S. during world war II but didn't fight in battle.
All I know is Chileans are proud to be culturally homogenous, but a diverse ancestry of various races came together through intermarriage and cultural assimilation. Included are the 5 percent are American Indians, the Mapuches belonged to groups never been conquered under the Spanish...only the Chileans defeated them in the 1850's. --Mike D 26 05:44, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Translation of motto
Por la razón o la fuerza
I'm not exactly fluent in Spanish, but I'm fairly certain that "By reason or strength" is a better translation than "By reason or enforcement". Enforcement doesn't mean the same as force or strength. Am I right? —Bkell 06:15, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
and I am not fluent in english but I think enforcement is the better translation, although "fuerza" is force , "Por la fuerza" means to obligate somebody to do something.. enforcment.
Definitively this should be considered, but i'm not 100% if the spirit of the motto is to call for enforcement.--Guillermog 02:04, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The current translation (By reason or by force) is OK. It is in the spirit of the -sometimes criticized- Spanish original. --Cantus 02:27, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
I am a chilean and fluent in english. I believe "Por la Razon o la Fuerza" is best translated as " By Reason or by Force"
I'm also Chilean and fluent in both languages and my opinion is that "By Reason or by Force" captures the meaning and the spirit of the motto (Though "Enforcement" in the meaning of making someone do something by using force is the literal translation). Something curious is that the original motto was "Por la razón, o la fuerza" with the period character making it less "aggresive" when read.--PlutoM
It should be noted that the motto is actually an indirect translation of the motto of the Old Country (before the Spanish Reconquista), "Aut Consilio Aut Ense" which roughly translates to "By council or by sword".
Changed it from "By right or might" to "By reason or strength", because it carries less ambiguity ("right" does not translate to "razón"). 213.54.225.2 18:44, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
There is no ambiguity to English speakers. —Cantus…☎ 21:33, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
Well, I read the phrase as an ellipsis that states the means and leaves open the aims, in analogy to the older phrase menioned above. You could say that "right" is a means also, but I guess it´s much less clear what is meant. 213.54.214.193 00:53, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
For me, estetically speaking, I prefer "By Force or Reason" as a translation to "By Reason or Force" because it just sounds a lot more catchy. However, I wouldn't use this as a translation because i think it goes against the original phrase which suggests that "I will convince you with REASON first and if that doesnt work, I'll kick your ass!
Sincerely speaking, thats exactly the originally meaning. Due to modern interpretation, this has led to many controversities in Chile, that it should be changed to a more moderate sounding motto, like "by the force of reason". But traditionalists insist, that this old motto does not have any negativ aspect, as it just means the defending of reason: By reason... and if this doesnt work or is not respected, THEN by force... RapaNui 01:22, 09 Jan 2006 (CET)
I agree. I'm also a chilean fluent in both languages and I agree that by "reason or by force" sounds the best on this case EduardoGonzales 4:57, June 12, 2006
By right or might is a phrase more related to Martin Luther than to the actual meaning (textual or not) of the chilean motto. It doesnt represent at all the true meaning of it, and should be changed ASAP.
My two suggestions are the following:
By Reason or Force - most accurate translation.
or
If not by Reason, by Force - not textual, but more representative of the meaning.
My regards.
I think that the "meaning" of the motto is clear. But it must be used as "Por la razón o la fuerza" without any translation..... "¿En dios confiamos?"
Look in the infobox. —Cantus…☎ 05:07, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
Economic stability in Chile
To compare Chile on economic stability with Latin American countries may find whom may be in a better position. South American nations tend to show more patriotism and may not like to hear other countries' achievements, but a massive pan-Latin American consciousness is under way for more unity feeling of Chile and other lands of the continent. Anyway, there's a debate on whether Latin American countries are under "third world" socialist programs or under an old world elitism dates back to colonial times.
Mexico, for example, had a revolution to dispose elite authoritarianism and historic records spoke of peasants rose against the abuses of landowners, and after the revolution, a new republic was created and the 1917 constitution modeled on the U.S. called for democracy and land privatization. Today, the Mexican economy and previous governments are full of corruption and a one-party system (before 2000), mismanagement by state/ national officials, and widespread poverty in rural towns or villages.
I don't know who's fault is it made Latin America a society of haves and have-nots, but far-left partisans like former Mexico City mayor Andrés Manuel López Obrador is a presidential candidate and he's just as leftist like Castro, Chavez and to a lesser extent, Bachelet. The U.S. never supports a candidate with hostile and opposing views of our country, but nothing to worry from Chile. + 207.200.116.197 redirected by 207.200.116.138 14:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
The Chilean economy in the 1990s was one of the world's fastest growing, and a few under-developed nations poised to move forward (i.e. China, India, Iran, Turkey, South Africa, Malaysia, Mexico, Brazil, and with Russia and Eastern Europe). Copper remains a major byproduct of Chile, but economic planning in the Pinochet regime expanded byproducts and natural resources: Fish, wines, winter fruits, offshore petroleum and industrial manufacturing. NAFTA attempted to include Chile in the 1990's, but a free trade agreement in 2001 increased economic growth with the U.S. and Canada.
The Chileans heavily trade with Europe, Japan, China, South Korea, Australia and oil-rich Kuwait, since it's believed Pinochet has petroleum stocks. In the gulf war, Chilean arms dealer billionaire Carlos Cardoen was accused of profiteering from Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein by his arms supply. The economy must did well, then when you hear of ITT, Ford, Kennecott, Wal-Mart, the Home Depot and Microsoft brokered deals in Chile, this is like we got a new "Asian Tiger" but in South America.
I hope Michele Bachelet will bring forth new prosperity like predecessors Alywin and Lagos did in the 1990s, except for a mild recession in 2000-01. General Pinochet's globally publicized trial for his role in having Spanish agents killed, and human rights accusations brought Chile on the map. But, let's see if Mrs. Bachelet brings Chile back as an innovator, not only to have a woman elected as president, she's the 45th female leader in the world (historically). + 207.200.116.197 - redirected by 207.200.116.138 15:09, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
¿Explain this?
Though Chile's political history since then has been erratic, the country has enjoyed constitutional rule and a republican form of government throughout much of its history.
That whole section has been refactored. —Cantus…☎ 05:08, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
Does Chile have Statutory rape laws
According to ageofconsent.com, Chile's age of consent is 12. This doesn't sound right, this page points out that the pedophilia laws in Chile made the Pedophilia threshold age 12, which can very well be the laws that ageofconsent.com link to. Since this threshold has been increased to 14, I have marked Chile's age of consent as being 14, but that still doesn't sound right. Can anyone from Chile confirm or deny the existance of statutory rape laws; their absence is odd considering how developed Chile is economically. Samboy 09:11, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Age of consent now 18. Statutes have recently change. 200.72.31.50 00:00, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
There is not such thing as age of consent in Chilean law or literature, with that name, but in fact that threshold is the age of consent. Above 14 if a person has sex without consent, the sexual partner commits other crime wich is not rape, but something named "estrupo" in Chile, wich is a crime too, but the sentence will be shorter.
(And, as civil law system, Chile does not have common law crimes or anything, everything is statutory).
Regards.
AION.
"Estupro" is not sex "without consent", that is rape. Sex with a girl 14 or older but younger than 18 is a crime if there is "deceit". --AstroNomer 01:09, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
According to Chilean law, a man and a woman can get married without parents written authorization by the age of 18, and the 12 year old age mark for women refers to the age they can get married, under written permission of her parents.--jotaigna
The law changed after some abuse cases (abusing a minor under 18 but over 12 wasn't the same as paedofilia). Before a woman would marry at 12 and a man at 14. Now a woman can marry at 14 and a man at 16.
Note that due to some recent high-profile paedofilia cases, these laws may have changed or may change soon. Gerardo199 02:16, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
Chilean lawyer:
In Chilean laws, any sexual intercourse with a 12 year old kid or below, is rape, even if the kid agree.
Between 12 and 18, if the kid agrees about having sex, but cheated by an adult, coud be a felony called estupro
Anachronism?
The conquest of Chile was carried out in 1550 by Pedro de Valdivia,
Did Chile exist then as an entity? A-giau 04:33, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Well, it was called Chile by the natives. —Cantus…☎ 05:11, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
it existed as multiple colonies of natives, but not in the sense of how the inca empire was, so it's safe to say that chile didn't exist prior to the spanish conquista
just like the river plate, the indians tricked the spaniards into conquering territories with little economical importance. The indians tricked the spaniards saying that Chile was rich in gold. Even though there were only multiple colonies, the Mapuche united in wartime to counterattack the spaniards, sadly, they only united in war time, wich was the only time they ever had 1 leader (one of the great mapuche leaders was Lautaro)
Per Capita GDP correction
It is true that Chile's "Gross domestic product based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) per capita GDP" is US $10981.35 for 2005; however, the figures we use here on Wikipedia (for ranking, etc.) are the IMF's "Gross domestic product per capita, current prices" figure, which is $5741.61 for 2005. Speaking of which, the IMF figures here on Wiki are two years out of date. Samboy 11:45, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hello Samboy. Here on Wikipedia, we use as reference for all infoboxes, the list List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita. The source for that list is the World Bank's 2003 data. For the World Bank compiling this kind of data for all countries isn't easy, so data for 2005 will not be ready maybe until late 2006, so it is advisable to use data for 2003 which is much more solid. Also, we use PPP data and not Exchange rate data because PPP data is comparable among countries, and since we put a ranking number beside the data this seems more justified. If you want to change the source data, I suggest you take this conversation to the aforementioned page, because the data from that page will continue to be used to mantain consistency among Wikipedia. Thanks for listening. —Cantus…☎ 12:06, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
It looks like we have been using the nominal figures--until this change to the Country Infobox template to use the PPP per capita figures. Note that this change is still new, and, indeed, last night the wiki cache still linked me to the old nominal figures version of the country infobox. Also, as of last night, Mexico still used the nominal GDP figures. I just corrected Mexico; if this results in an edit war, we will need to implement the Iceland compromise. Samboy 22:03, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Yes, I made that change, always in the spirit of improving the encyclopedia, of course. The "parametrisized" template now being used in some 30 countries (Template:Infobox Country) is using PPP figures, and nobody has been opposed to this until now. If you would like to change which figures should be used in infoboxes, you should raise this issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries. I'd be happy to discuss why I think PPP is better there. —Cantus…☎ 04:23, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)
I have no problem with the change. My only concern is the fact that not all countries are using GDP PPP figures right now; I would like to see Wikipedia be 100% consistant in this regard instead of having some pages using the nominal GDP figures and other pages use the PPP figures. My concern is this: If this is a change you want, I feel you have a responsibility to go through all of the countries with GDP figures. this page may have countries in it that still use the nominal GDP figures (such as Mexico until I changed that page). Samboy 07:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
All of those countries have both PPP and Nominal figures, so I don't see that as a problem right now. Yes it is inconsistent to have PPP only in some and PPP and Nominal is others; but it would be far worse if some countries had only Nominal and others only PPP. All of the countries will begin using the new parametrisized template once people begin making the changes. —Cantus…☎ 10:28, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)
People, white man? Really, just go to [[1] if you want this change yourself. Should only take a couple of hours. Samboy 06:11, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Geographical Facts
It is currently claimed Chile is the world's longest country, at over 4,000 kms. But Russia is at least 6,000 km from west to east, and that does not take into account offshore islands such as the Kuriles. What is the basis for the claim for Chile? Cheers JackofOz 02:49, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Chile is the longest (N-S) country in the world (over 4,200km), and also claims a large section of Antarctica as part of its territory. (emphasis mine)
Thanks for the clarification. Since the N-S is highly relevant to the claim, I suggest the brackets be removed.
But why is the longest N-S country of any particular interest? Is this fundamentally different from the longest E-W country - or is E-W distance a measure of wideness, as distinct from longness? Surely it's all about distance within the country, not whether it's oriented N-S, E-W or diagonally. Cheers JackofOz 07:49, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Well, it seems there are rankings for all :-D. Baloo rch 02:11, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
I would say it's a source of national pride, much like Russia's E-W length and 11 time zones. And, as Baloo rch pointed out, there are statistics and records kept for nearly everything. Many people find such rankings interesting. Willscrlt 15:23, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
For a E-W there is no significant climate change as there is N-S. The longest E-W is nice but irrelevant
What is the distance E-W, keeping in count Easter Island?
Using very, rough estimations from MapPoint, if one includes Easter Island, Chile is only 28-40% the width of Russia, depending exactly where you measure from and to. The westernmost point of Easter Island is roughly at 109.45W. The easternmost point in mainland Chile at the same latitude is in Atacama at 68.56W (40.89 degrees of separation). Trying to stretch the distance as far as possible, measuring to the tip of Antarctica is 55.04W (54.41 degrees of separation). Repeating this with Russia results in Kaliningrad (which is slightly separated from the rest of Russia) at 19.96E, Leningradskaya (westernmost contiguous place I could find) at 27.88E, and the Russian/US border at 168.98W (or 191.02E to keep the calculations simple). That means that Russia has 134.14 degrees of separation in comparison to Chile's 40.89 (30.48%), or 171.06 degrees of separation compared to Chile's 54.41 degrees (31.8%) (again, depending on if you are being conservative or expansive in your measurements). All things considered, including Easter Island or the disputed Antarctic territories in these calculations is pretty silly. But it was still fun to figure out. Now if only I knew how many miles/kilometers were in a degree... :-) Willscrlt 15:23, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Mapudungun (Mapuche)
Please check at http://www.mapudungun.cl/ this language is spoken by more than 200 000 people in Chile!! Not official because most chilean have the erroneous believe that they are all europeans even if the looks show something else.
I've looked briefly, and I can't find any sources which say that Mapudungun (the language of the Mapuche) is an official language of Chile. In fact, the Wikipedia page on it says it's the official language of, and I quote, "none." I'm wary of the claim an anon user (4.239.114.37) just added to this article that it's one of the official languages of the country. --Whimemsz 00:49, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
As far i know (as Chilean) the only official language is Spanish. (i've never see any official document in mapadungun). In fact, i would be not surprised at all if German language is more widely speaken in Chile as mapadungun language : southern Chile's german immigrants preserved it language and it is not rare to hear it in Osorno or Puerto Montt. On their side most urban mapuche didn't traspassed the language to their children in order to avoid social discrimination and only in the last years emerged a movement in order to re-value mapuche traditions among the urban descendants.
Baloo rch 02:19, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
All right. Thanks for the info! --Whimemsz 03:06, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
i should point out that mapudungun is just an indegenous language and it doesn't even have writing, only phonetic aproximations.
tis a diying language, my grafather can speak it and most people who indetify themselves as descendants of mapuches. I dont know anyone (besides my grandfather) who actually speaks it.
YES IT DOES HAVE A WRITING SYSTEM, IN FACT MAPUDUNGUN HAS ITS OWN TEST WIKIPEDIA WHICH ALLREADY HAS MANY ARTICLES! heres an article written in Mapudungun accoridng to ethnologue there are 200,000 mapudungun speakers compared to 35,000 german speakers thats more thats nearly 6 to 1.[2]Qrc2006 01:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
In fact, there are 4 major writing systems, mapudungun phonology explains it. --Lin linao 05:47, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to note that we Chileans are taught in school (and as far as I can remember, it's in the Polytical Constitution of the Republic), the official language of Chile is "Castellano" (Castillian, from Castilla, a province of Spain which was the political center of that country during the conquering of Chile). Regarding the Mapudungun language, as far I've been told be relatives that have close contact with Mapuche people (both humble peasants as well as professionals proud of their origins), the language itself doesn't have a written form, but along the years even from the Colony there have been a number of recopilations of words of this language both in Chile and Argentina, with several published dictionaries (especially in Argentina); yet, these dictionaries are phonetical approximations to the words.
I think that your previous statement is a contradiction. Obviously almost nobody claims a milenary Mapuche written system, but there are 4 different main stablished alphabets ("Traditional", Unificado, Raguileo and Azümchefe). All they argue to be a good approach, but they are so "phonetical" as is Spanish or German. Bye. --Lin linao 00:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
About the recent incidents of vandalism in this article. I just don't understand why they or he do this changes. Some of them are so meaningless, like changing the proportion of mestizos or the origin of the name. I just don't understand.
what happend during 1960 when the bigest valcano eroupted?????
It was the biggest Earthquake with some volcanos involved, but it was not the main factor. The biggest change was in the Lake Llanquihue, which was emptied by the quake and the waters flooded into nearby areas taking many lives.
The quake was in what now is the 10th Region of Chile, affecting the cities of Valdivia and Puerto Montt.
It was very close to the 150th anniversary of the first government of Chile and the celebrations where scaled down after the events. Albert 13:19, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
I disagree with this statement: "The biggest change was in the Lake Llanquihue, which was emptied by the quake and the waters flooded into nearby areas taking many lives." The biggest harm was made by the subsequent tsunami, that reached Hawai and even Japan, killing ca. 7000 persons and sumerged (¿?) coastal lands almost 2 meters.
Earthquakes are common in a small thin country build from seismic and volcanic activity. The very tall Andes mountain range and the very deep Peru-Chile trench off the coast is where two tectonic plates regularly clash and the 1960 tremor registered 9.5 on the richter scale indicates how much stress lies under Chile. Also the coastline at high risk for tsunamis or tidal waves following earthquakes in the seafloor. The country's younger and modern structures are built to withstand major earthquakes alike those in Japan and California, U.S. However, the Chilean government needs more money and disaster planning to reduce death tolls and injuries. Not only quakes and tidal waves, Chile has many long droughts and winter rains caused floods by the el Nino effect. Interesting enough is Chile has a climate similar to the west coast, U.S. and the Central valleys are generally a "mediterranean" climatic zone, while the southernmost areas have a climate like the pacific northwest U.S. and southern Alaska. Chile has extremes in nature and climate, but the country manage to grow and develop to what it is. Economic profiles in seismic-active countries: Japan and California speak of great agricultural production and high population growth. Same goes for Chile, but economically small and volatile like the earth as Chile, like Japan and California lies in the "ring of fire". Farmlands and cities were enriched by the kind of fertile terrain and mountain runoff. Chile is thankful for the topography as a result by earthquakes, but its' people should learn how to prepare and be safe. --Mike D 26 05:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Great History Article
Im amazed on how acurate it is regarding the events before and after september 11, 1973.
On the events of the Chilean revolt of 1810, it could use a little work. Regarding Bernardo O'Higgins, he was part of an obscure brothehood called "The Lautarian Lodge", from wich San Martin was also a member (along with Bolivar, Pueyrredon and many more who were in power). Although the Lautarian Lodge is responsable for the independence of most of latin america, is also responsable for the murder of several other revolutioneers who also wanted the independence of Chile, such as Jose Miguel Carrera and Manuel Rodriguez, both of them national heros, but assasinated by the Lodge once the lodge was in power(something that rarely shows up in history books). The Lodge lost all its power once the anarchy was over (around 1933). To this very day, Carrerinos and O'higginistas still debate over who was the real father of the country (to a lesser degree from what it was back in 1813). Some say Carrera, mainly because he revolted and created the first goverment with the help of his brothers Juan Jose & Luis and his friend Manuel Rodriguez, some say O'Higgins because he defeated the spaniards with the help of general San Martin (that is, the Lautarian Lodge). To the communists in Chile, Manuel Rodriguez is a figure of respect, as he was a true revolutionary. But what i can say, is that there are 3 fathers of the country: the brave Brigadier O'Higgins, the magnificent General Carrera and the audacious Commander Rodriguez.
I on the contrary am amazed at how biased this article is. Allende is painted as a saint and nothing is said about the famine and chaos that his destruction of property rights brought the country.
Zaldívar picture
I forgot to put it in the summary, but there is no reason to have a picture of Andrés Zaldívar. He even isn't mentioned on the article. There is a lot of more important and relevants politicians in the history. And if you want to put a picture of a senator it must be Gabriel valdes with the legend "Gabriel Valdes. He was the first parlament president after the Pinochet' regime".
Addition: Zaldívar is not even a senator anymore, he was defeated on the recent elections and will be removed from his charge next year. Never forget that he was one of the worst adversaries to Allende helping the USA to create the caos that make it possible for Pinochet to initiate the military coup in 1973.
Zaldivar was later exiled by Pinochet, btw
President Elect
The "President Elect" is usually not a leader of any kind (and is indeed an ordinary citizen not subject to immunity, for example) until she assumes power. Please feel free to restore if Chile's constitution states differently but we shouldn't consider somebody a leader until he/she swears in and assumes his/her rightful post. Needless to say, this post is not intended to be neither an endorsment nor criticism of Ms. Bachelet's political ideals or anything of the sort.
Sebastian KesselTalk 22:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Fully agree, we can change it in March. --RapaNui 13:13, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Well I don't know why you keep removing my post. All I did was correct what the page said about Chile to what the CIA world fact book says. (24.60.161.63 15:28, 19 February 2006 (UTC))
Maybe you should leave out a web link to the CIA world fact book. For example, I found it and will place the web link here for the wikipedia editors. CIA - The World Factbook -- Chile : population + 207.200.116.138 08:37, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Somebody continues to rearrange the Demographics section, perhaps to serve his/her personal bias without actual doing any research. There are generally few unmixed indigenous persons in Chile, but the mestizo population was also recounted with a new statistic. Where did the statistic come from and why it was not fully stated? Please trace back your steps for your information and whoever deleted the origins of colonial Chile was unkind to do so. There is a paragraph from the encyclopedia britannica that clearly said the majority of settlers came out of Andalusia, followed by Asturia and Galicia. The Basque provinces supplied more settlers in the 1700's as farmers and herders, and some Portuguese fishermen in the 1800's. The number of German immigrants at 7,000 was deleted for some reason, but it gave a reasonable explanation on why Chile wasn't entirely "Europeanized" or there wouldn't be a cultural mestizo majority. The article didn't tell of a small settlement pattern of Patagonia, where it was developed by immigrants: Croatians, Danes, Greeks and Scots, as examples, arrived in the late 1800's/early 1900s. The majority are Chilean, yet many residents of Patagonia have non-Spanish surnames + 207.200.116.138 09:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Army
La Escuela de Fuerzas Especiales y Paracaidistas del Ejercito Chileno incluye dentro de sus especialidades la de "Salto libre militar avanzado" que incluye saltos a gran altura, sobre 25.000 pies, con apertura inmediata (HAHO) y con apertura baja (HALO), por lo que es un error señalar que las fuerzas especiales chilenas no cuentan con entrenamiento HALO.
Marco.
I'll translate that as good as I can:
The Chilean Army's School of Special Forces and Parachutists includes within of their specialties of the "Advanced military free jump" which includes jumps from great hight, over 25 thousands feet, with immediate opening (HAHO) and with low opening (HALO), for which is an error to signal that the Chilean specialized forces don't count with HALO training.
Eduardo
About the politico-admistrative section in the Chile article
I am delete few minutes ago, the Administrative map of Chile in the Poltico-administrative section in the Chile article because it is too long to fit the picture of administrative map of Chile. Thanks.Joseph Solis(Talk) 09:38 (UTC)
Whoops, you are VERY right. Corrected. José San Martin 11:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Picture of Pinochet?
Pinochet, despite what anyone thinks of him, has played a very important role in contemporary Chilean history which is why I am wondering why his picture is not in the article. Maybe put the one of him with Allende to replace the Allende one thereby hitting two birds with one stone.--Jersey Devil 04:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
I disagree with you that his picture is not shown because of what people think of him. I do think his picture is irrelevant and can be readily found anywhere on the internet. Andy f 90 20:21, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Not many people heard of Pinochet back when he ruled the country, but his name became notorious in the global news scene in his 1998 arrest in London, England for crimes against humanity (I believe he ordered the murder of 2 Spanish agents in Chile during the 1970s). The unelected military regime was first supported when he brought stability, but suspended human rights and up to 10,000 people killed in executions and prison camps, mostly political dissidents or part of a "left-wing" conspiracy. According to Pinochet, any one who opposed him should be punished and communists whom worked for Allende were the first ones. It's possible in the 1973 coup and air bombing of the capital, Allende was a fatality instead of a "suicide" reported by the press. Not only most Chileans began to dislike him, Pinochet was protested in Europe and the Americas as he faces human rights or military tribunals in an old age (in his late '80s) and was declared unfit for trial. I feel he don't deserve a picture in the Chile article, because some people in Chile and worldwide may dislike placing a photo may patronize him. Pinochet is increasingly compared to other infamous dictators (Peron, Castro, Hitler, stalin, saddam, Mussolini, pol pot, idi Amin) and his affiliation with the U.S. government has brought controversy in how influential U.S. foreign policy has effected the "third world". --Mike D 26 06:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I must say I dissagree, and as Jersey Devil said, despite what ever each person thinks or belive about Allende and Pinochet, both were presidents, and both are equally hated by Chile for various reasons.
I completely disagree. Pinochet was a horrible dictator, worse than Allende, ordering the executions of thousands of students, writers, and other people who thought "radical" ideas to overthrow him. He was an "evil" man who had no heart other than for himself. However, most chileans do not know this, as they were not aware of what was going on, so they declare that everything people accuse Pinochet of is wrong,and they try to change history. SO, NO PICTURE of Pinochet should be put on the article, he was a violator of human rights, and hopefully he went to HELL when he died. --]User:MARCOLEONARDO524]
Education in Chile.
The article states:
Although labelled as "public" education system. the public education is not run y the state, but by the Municipalities [...]'
It seems to me that definition a bit confusing. Municipalities are local governments, so they are in fact a manifestation of the state. Thus education run by the Municipalities is public and not private one, even when it is not directly controlled by the central administration. To provide a more comprehensive definition about this topic, i think the article should also differentiate between school's administration (run by the local governments) and educational policies (run by the central level).
I also consider that the following statement is a bit POV and general:
In a country with one of the worst income distribution in Latin America and big cities oftenly divided in several comunas, among socioeconomic lines, poor comunas has to deliver education to poor students, usually with low standards and high number of beneficiaries; rich district are well funded and manage little number of students since many parents choose the private education system.
In Chilean big cities such as Santiago, Concepción and Valparaiso, school of wealthy and big communes recognised by their quality standards (very few I admit) uses to receive students from other communes.
well about the first issue (the public/private calification), well you´re right. Comunas are indeed public-law institutions. What I intented to say was to point at that before 1982, public education was, actually, State-run, and later on transfered to municipal sphere...
On the second topic, you´re right again, rich comunas receive talented students from poor district, the point is the this number is small, and this is a in part because high results in national test make them candidates for further national-level funding. Any way in my opinion the system itself is not affected, this are secundary phenomenona...
One more thing about this topic: the section continous to be vandalized by this cieloestrellado guy, who just erasure the whole topic not giving any reason for...not too encyclopedic to me
Who keeps changing or deleting the education segment? Is the government behind this or a few Chileans possibly offended by the facts? The historical influence of European socialism in Chile has brought progress in public education, as well provides state subsizided health care and social security programs for retired workers are among the world's oldest in effect.
In a socialist system and I don't mean communist or what we have in the U.S., the emphasis on creating a "classless" society through economic reform and to provide a sense of protection or assistance for the poor has been a top priority in Chilean history. If the government really fought hard to ease the pain of poverty, Chile won't have 1 out of 4 citizens in low income levels.
The decrease of people in poverty is indeed an achievement rarely found in Latin America, but Chile admittedly is socioeconomically divided in one half in poverty and the other in a middle class, though many live alike Americans and western Europeans. Only a small elite controls the entire wealth of the country, but unsurprisingly this is true in every country.
The rural or less populated areas has changed little, despite mining towns and villages in the Atacama has a workers beneficary system and mainly are unionized than their neighbors, Bolivia or Peru. But the Chilean economy in urban centers was so stable and impressive growth rates, you find Wal-Marts, Home Depots, Ford auto dealerships and Microsoft computer stores.
The sense of nationalism is strong in Chile as some citizens boost of their land's "great" facts, includes their territories in easter Island and a slice of Antarctica disputed with Argentina and Britain since the early 1900's. These are accomplishments for a small country with access to the sea and considering the country geographically faces the Antarctic peninsula.
Santiago is indeed an enclave of progress and prosperity, home to the upper classes mainly of European racial origin and Chileans have sayings for their largest city: "Santiago no es Chile". Another popular saying for why the Chileans, long isolated from the developed world, manage to created a land with a high development index: "somos Chilenos, somos diferentes".--Mike D 26 06:27, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Request for information on gun laws
Does anyone know about the legal and practical status of gun ownership laws in Chile for both native citizens and foreigners/naturalized citizens? I've searched all over, and I've seen mention of Chile being involved in some south american organization which attempts to restrict gun ownership, but I can't find any details. Thanks. Two-Bit Sprite 13:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Gun ownership in Chile is restricted: Only "normal" types of guns are allowed for private ownership and it is required to be specifically authorized to have an arm. There is a record of firearms, and having a gun outside this record is illegal. It is also illegal to buy munition if you don't have legally registered gun or buy munition that doesn't belong to the registered gun. Of course, to carry a gun in public spaces is forbidden unless you are a police or a member of the armed forces.
Besides that, gun ownership is highly discouraged.
The last three paragraphs has been written twice, thus are duplicates. This is called a "redundant" article, so I recommend to delete the second time they were written. Also to edit that in the 1970's, half the Chilean refugee population lived in Europe and the rest lived in Argentina. The current new population figure as of 2005 that nearly half (68,000 out of 140,000) of Chileans live in the U.S. and Argentina has dropped to a third (35,000). + 207.200.116.138 08:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for rearrangement of the article (directed to the wikipedian who read this above), since it makes no sense. The previous quote of where most overseas Chileans are is outdated, but Argentina is next door for those who went to exile. There are significant communities in Europe (not in order: Spain, France, Italy and Germany), but it appears only Sweden was listed. + 207.200.116.138 09:09, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Category:Spanish Speaking Countries
Hi i saw that there was'nt Chile in the Category:Spanish Speaking Countries. i tried to add it by editig but in the edit page there was nothing but Category:Spanish Speaking Countries.
Felix Portier 19:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Felix PortierFelix Portier 19:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
That's because there is no such category. Instead I changed the link to a similar one.
Miracle of Chile
Wikipedia has another article, Miracle of Chile on the recent development in democracy and the economy in Chile. The sudden shift in the country's living standard in the period of the late 1980's to the early 2000's made global headlines. A mixture of free-enterprise economics and the return of Chile's democratic tradition after 16 years of military rule, provided what the country needs to prosper and improve itself. However, the number of poor Chileans range from 15 to 40 percent and an economically thriving country with a large underclass can be potentially bring on political problems. I hope Chile is able to drive up economic growth while to bring down poverty. --207.200.116.138 01:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi, could any experts on Chile take time to have a look at this article. It needs a lot of work or it will be deleted. Thankyou :) - Jack(talk) 18:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
On the term "American" on here
You could suggest to say "the Western Hemisphere" or the "Americas" North and South. Then it won't be a problem. Many people tend to forget Brazil is Latin American, but not Spanish when it comes to this country's cultural origin is Portuguese. Like Chile, Brazil has a high development index and the issues on preserving democracy, fighting poverty and environmental protection. In most Latin American countries, Americans (from the U.S.) are diplomatically called "NorteAmericanos" as they are "Centro-, Suda- or Latino-Americanos". +207.200.116.138 14:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC.)
---In Chile, America is to refer to the American Continent. US citizents in Chile are called "estadounidenses", disrespectfully "gringos" or "yankees" - "Americanos" is used to refer to "native americans" -Luis
Vandalism and content verifiability
Dear User talk:Khoikhoi, and all other interested parties on this discussion page.
I can't believe what a joke it has become at the article Chile. And by the way, I'd like to "thank you" (laugh) for your unjustafiably blocking me (yes, unjustafied according to wikipedia policy) for 31 hours for my having to revert Antarcticwik's vandalism. I'm still waiting for an apology, or maybe you could redeem that action by this time actually helping out appropriately.
I want to clearly express to you, that the problems at Chile, and Latin America, and Andalusia, and Quechua, and Southern Cone, and all the other articles Antarcticwik or any of his IP's and/or sockppuppets have eddited, are not content disputes, as you have suggested. As for the Chile article, Antarcticwik hasn't engaged in discussion nor is his actions based on a dispute, he merely deletes all sources and text, mainly in the demographics and economics section. And he has reverted yet again. When will it stop!
I just want you to see the vandalism that his edits do to the page:
From:
"
...fell from 46% in 1987 to around 18.8% as procclaimed by the then president Ricardo Lagos in 2005[3] Critics in Chile, however, argue true poverty numbers are considerably higher than officially published figures.[4] In 2006, according to statistics released by Chile's CAS Informática, around 58% of Chileans lived near or below poverty levels; 20.6% in extreme poverty.[5] Despite enjoying a comparatively high GDP compared to most other countries of Latin America, Chile also suffers from one of the most uneven distributions of wealth[6] in the world, ahead only of Brazil in the Latin American region and lagging behind even of most developing sub-Saharan African nations. Chile's top 10 richest percentile possesses 90 percent of the country's wealth. On the national level, 6.2% of the population belonged to "Grupo ABC1" upper economic bracket, 15% belonged to "Grupo C2" middle economic bracket, 21% to "Grupo C3" lower middle economic bracket, 38% to "Grupo D" lower economic braket, and 20% to "Grupo E" extreme poor economic bracket.[7]"
To:
"...fell from 46% in 1987 to around 18.8% as procclaimed by the then president Ricardo Lagos"
From:
Demographics
Population of Chile from 1950, projected up to 2050 (INE)File:Niños Chilenos.JPGChilean children during the annual Fiestas Patrias, or National Celebrations
The Spanish conquest of Chile and the subsequent intermarriages between colonial Spanish immigrants and indigenousAmerindian tribes "began a process of racial and cultural mix which gave birth to the Chilean people."[8] The country's population is thus relatively homogeneous, with most being of mestizo[9][10] — mixed Spanish and Amerindian — descent, although in various degrees of admixture. See Population background below.
About 85% of the country's population lives in urban areas, with 40% living in Greater Santiago. Chile's population growth is among the lowest in Latin America, at around 0.97%, it comes third only to Uruguay and Cuba.
Population background
The ethnic composition of Chileans is marked by a socio-genetic gradient where Amerindian admixture typically correlates to social levels. [11][12] Amerindian contribution tends to be strongest in the lower echelons of society, with the middle majority presenting a more balanced degree of both European and Amerindian ancestry, while the upper echelons of society tend to register the lowest degree of Amerindian contribution. Almost the entirety of the population, however, presents a racially mixed origin, and only a small minority can truly be said to be unmixed European or unmixed Amerindian. The unmixed Amerindian population is in fact said to be now extinct.
Nevertheless, based solely on physical appearance, between 5 and 10% of the current population would be classified as Amerindian, some 30% would be classified as white, and the remaining majority, between 60 and 65%, would be the discernably mestizo population that has a certain tendancy towards a slightly greater input on the European side and averages a racial mixture not much lower than the average ratio for Chile's overall population.[13]
According to the Program of Human Genetics of the University of Chile, the average ratio of racial mixture for Chile's overall population, calculated by the use of nuclear markers, is approximately 60% European contribution and 40% Amerindian, depending on the socioeconomic level. [14][15] According to Rothhammer (1987/2004), that average ratio stands at 57% European contribution and 43% Amerindian. [16]
According to the 1992 Chilean census, a total of 10.5% of the total population declared themselves indigenous, irrespective of whether they currently practiced or spoke a native culture and language; almost one million people (9.7% of the total) declared themselves Mapuche, 0.6% declared to be Aymara, and a 0.2% reported as Rapanui.
At the 2002 census, only indigenous people that still practiced or spoke a native culture and language were surveyed: 4.6% of the population (692,192 people) fit that description; of these, 87.3% declared themselves Mapuche. [17].
Immigration
Relative to its overall population, Chile never experienced any large scale wave of immigrants.[18] Compared to neighbouring Argentina or Uruguay, where European immigration doubled to tripled their existing populations, the total number of immigrants to Chile, both originating from other Latin American countries and all other (mostly European) countries, never surpassed 4% of its total population.[19][20] This is not to say that immigrants were not important to the evolution of Chilean society and the Chilean nation. Small numbers of non-Spanish European immigrants arrived in Chile - mainly to the northern and southern extremities of the country - during the XIX and XX centuries, including English, Irish, Italians, French, and Balkans.[21] In 1848 a small but noteworthy German immigration took place, sponsored by the Chilean government with aims of colonising the southern region. With time, and although undertaken by no more than 7,000 people, that German immigration influenced the cultural composition of the southern provinces of Valdivia, Llanquihue and Osorno. The prevalence of non-Hispanic European surnames among the governing body of modern Chile are a testament to their disproportionate contribution to Chile. Also worth mentioning are the Korean and especially Palestinian communities, the latter being the largest colony of that people outside of the Arab world. The volume of immigrants from neighboring countries to Chile during those same periods was of a similar value.[22]
Currently, immigration from neighboring countries to Chile is greatest, and during the last decade immigration to Chile has doubled to 184,464 people in 2002, originating primarily from Argentina, Bolivia and Peru.
Emigration of Chileans has decreased during the last decade: It is estimated that 857,781 Chileans live abroad, 50.1% of those being in Argentina, 13.3% in the United States, 4.9% in Sweden, and around 2% in Australia, with the rest being scattered in smaller numbers across the globe."
To:
"Demographics
Population of Chile from 1950, projected up to 2050 (INE)
Chile is a relatively homogenous country and most of its population is of predominantly Spanish origin, with varying degrees of native Amerindian admixture, the product of the racial mixture between colonial Spanish immigrants and the native Amerindian tribes. About 85% of its population lives in urban areas, with 40% living in Greater Santiago. Chile's population growth is among the lowest in Latin America, at around 0.97%, it comes third only to Uruguay and Cuba.
Indigenous communities
Those belonging to recognised indigenous communities (2002)
According to the 1992 Chilean census, a total of 10.5% of the total population declared themselves indigenous, irrespective of whether they currently practiced or spoke a native culture and language; almost one million people (9.7% of the total) declared themselves Mapuche, 0.6% declared to be Aymara, and a 0.2% reported as Rapanui.[23]
At the 2002 census, only indigenous people that still practiced or spoke a native culture and language were surveyed: 4.6% of the population (692,192 people) fit that description; of these, 87.3% declared themselves Mapuche.[24]
Non-Spanish European immigrants arrived in Chile - mainly to the northern and southern extremities of the country - during the XIX and XX centuries, including English, Irish, Italians, French, and the Balkans. Smaller waves of Danes, Dutch, Portugese, Romanians, and Greeks arrived as well. In 1848 a small but noteworthy German immigration took place, sponsored by the Chilean government with aims of colonising the southern region. The German/Swiss immigration influenced the cultural composition of the southern provinces of Valdivia, Llanquihue and Osorno. The prevalence of German, French, Italian, English and Yugoslavian surnames among the governing body of modern Chile are a testament to their contribution to Chile. Also worth mentioning are the Korean, Japanese, and especially Palestinian communities, the latter being the largest colony of that people outside of the Arab world. The volume of immigrants from neighboring countries to Chile during those same periods was of a similar value. Chilean ranchers and farmers settled vast expenses of Mexico in the early 1800's, while thousands of miners from Chile and Peru emigrated to California in the 1850's during the gold rush.[citation needed]
Currently, immigration from neighboring countries to Chile is greatest, and during the last decade immigration to Chile has doubled to 184,464 people in 2002, originating primarily from Argentina, Bolivia and Peru.
Emigration of Chileans has decreased during the last decade: It is estimated that 857,781 Chileans live abroad, 50.1% of those being in Argentina, 13.3% in the United States, 4.9% in Sweden, and around 2% in Australia, with the rest being scattered in smaller numbers accross the globe."
Note that every single source and reference, all from Chilean sources, including the Chilean Census, Chilean Embassy, University of Chile, other Chilean university's website, Chilean science genetic magazine, Migration Statistics website, etc. etc. etc. have been deleted with text and all, including a whole subsectio, and whatever text he has kept, he changes the figures to his own unsourced ones. The format of the sections he vandalises are also un-wikified in the process, with all hyperlinks removed. And then he has the audacity to come to you and tell you to block ME again! I'm surprised that you didn't, seeing that you had already misued that admin privalege overme once before in spite of what was obviously going on at Chile and who the vandal was.
CieloEstrellado has countless times resotred the info box whose figures keep being affected by the reverts, including the deletion of the national motto. The entire layout of the article, positioning of pictures (one ontop of another, poking into sections and text, and horrendous paragraphing and punctuation horrors throughout, put simply, the overall structure of the article is destroyed by him. Just compare them; Antarcticwik and normal edit
As I have said before, and will say again, this is blatant vandalism, and NOT a content dispute or edit war. Other users have tried to keep up with his constant reverts to his mutilated unwikified edition. He has refused to engage in dialog, and I have indeed posted to his user page but only to recieve no reply. As you are probably aware, the only pearls (in Spanishin Spanish) I have recieved from him were three personal attacks full of racism to every human ethnic/racial group immaginable other than Europeans, even Spaniards were attacked as filthy african, arab, semites (ie, Jews). He even said whatever "minor" (according to him) Amerindian admixture in Chileans is "compensated" (a word he used) with "real European" German blood (as he himself put it), or so he has made himself believe. Please, lets not even get into the proportion of non-Spanish immigrants that ever made it to Chile (never surpassing 4% of its population, only half of which were Europeans with the other half being other Latin Americans, and which all sources back up including every single Chilean source, and which btw is also text and sources that he deletes) or how "minor" the average Amerindian admixture in Chileans actually is (ie. between 40 and 43%) that is supposedly "compensated" with German blood. He has even tried to encourage others to join in his "MANO DURA" ("Heavy Hand") approach, as he so called it (in Spanish). Will you now do something to resolve the problem with him and the situation he has created? I think more than enough has been purpetrated to justify all his IP's and main account to be permanently blocked. Al-Andalus 23:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
You broke 3RR; yes, AntarcticWik is going about things the wrong way, but the very reason that 3RR is in place is to stop content disputes. His changes were not vandalism; they were a content dispute. Even the administrators agreed on this one. 3RR only applies to obvious vandalism. I realize you don't much care for his changes, but no matter how much this is true, it's not obvious vandalism, whether you say it is or not. He has also been blocked for 3RR; now, I encourage you to work out your differences on the talk page; both of you; he is certainly not the only person disagreeing with you, and you could certainly work it out with the others. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 18:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Several and deep changes in revision 87135392
I had no time to review the changes, but it would be good if someone can please pay attention to this before more changes are made to the article.
The changes made in this revision-by a non-registered user-include deletion of statistics and other important parts of the article. I could also say I saw some weasel words... --_N_e_g_r_u_l_i_o 16:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Language of the Mapuche
Regarding this post about the official language:
I've looked briefly, and I can't find any sources which say that Mapudungun (the language of the Mapuche) is an official language of Chile. In fact, the Wikipedia page on it says it's the official language of, and I quote, "none." I'm wary of the claim an anon user (4.239.114.37) just added to this article that it's one of the official languages of the country. --Whimemsz 00:49, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
As far i know (as Chilean) the only official language is Spanish. (i've never see any official document in mapadungun). In fact, i would be not surprised at all if German language is more widely speaken in Chile as mapadungun language : southern Chile's german immigrants preserved it language and it is not rare to hear it in Osorno or Puerto Montt. On their side most urban mapuche didn't traspassed the language to their children in order to avoid social discrimination and only in the last years emerged a movement in order to re-value mapuche traditions among the urban descendants. Baloo rch 02:19, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
Even if not recognized, it is a semi-official language. In court and legal documents they are required to provide translations in to the Mapuche language for Mapuche people. Also under various international laws, that Chile is a part of, there is some official recognition and it is part of education in various regions of Chile.
That doesnt make it an official language, the united states traslates documents into thousands of langauges from court documents to driving tests to voting materials to the GED, this does not make fijian spanish arabic etc official. Mapudungun is however the official language of the mapuche people and its institutions.Qrc2006 01:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Changes
The revert warring on this page is starting to get to me. People are just reverting back to previous versions of a page, and any intermediate changes are being thrown out. I'm not sure that the page wouldn't be better off full-protected; I'm inclined to request this protection, which will almost certainly be granted, if you guys can't work this out on the talk page. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 19:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you. Jespinos 19:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
It's clear that no one decided to pay attention, so I'm now going to report you both for breaking 3RR. Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 01:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Images of Chile
so that? they eliminated the beautiful images of geography of Chile?
Antarcticwik 05:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
That changes were probably made in rev. 87135392... if someone'd just pay attention to me... --_N_e_g_r_u_l_i_o 10:05, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
The images are important for the understanding of the text
Antarcticwik 19:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Your text cannot be understood, with or without pictures. And most of your pictures are randomy placed, disfiugring the aricle's layout. Al-Andalus 21:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)'
The image MAP OF CHILE shows cities that are not the most important nor the more populated. an example, Copiapó and Talca are by far more important than Huasco.
Unuseful source in references - request removal
The phrase
Chile is a relatively homogenous country and most of its population is of predominantly Spanish origin, with
varying degrees of native Amerindian admixture, the product of the racial mixture between colonial Spanish
immigrants and the native Amerindian tribes.
cites two sources numbered [15] and [16] as of rev. 87447680.
The first of these is a PDF document that studies response to drugs in several ethnic groups and does not mention anything relevant to support the phrase above. I request the removal of this source. --_N_e_g_r_u_l_i_o 10:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
<comment removed, see discussion immediatley below> Antarcticwik 04:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
What does this has to do with the document I talked about? I believe you should put this issue under a separate topic. --_N_e_g_r_u_l_i_o 02:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
He already did. It was a copy-and-paste error. I'll remove the comment; don't think he'll mind. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 02:43, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Negrillo, your input would be appreciated in this discussion, as we are having it above. Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 04:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Assessment comment
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Chile/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Rather nice article, but needs more refs some cleanup. Thanks Jarandawat's sup 20:26, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Last edited at 20:26, 25 June 2006 (UTC).
Substituted at 20:18, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
