After a crushing defeat of its proposed
constitution, Chile’s Left must regroup
around universal material reforms.C
HILE’S CAPTIVATING PROCESS OF
systemic change has derailed. A
mass rebellion forced politicians to
concede a constituent process,
after elections gave insurgent forces control
of the constituent assembly. Then a new
Left won the presidential run-offs last
December. But Chileans voted decisively
against the assembly’s proposal. The
crushing referendum came 52 years to the
day after Chileans voted for Salvador
Allende’s road to socialism.
Until recently, hope remained high
that Chileans had embarked on a new
road to radical reform. In the October
2020 plebiscite, held one year after the
2019 rebellion, Chileans overwhelmingly
demanded a constitutional rewrite by an
entirely new set of representatives. Defiant
optimism still pervaded months later, when
the president’s newly minted coalition
received nearly 20% of convention election
votes. A loosely assorted slate of radical
autonomists took another 15%.
Since then, the heady public fervor
has faded. Although Gabriel Boric
triumphed handily in the runoff elections
for president, he placed second, with
just 25 percent of votes, in the election’s
first round. A new hard right gained
significantly, and turnout remained stuck
below 50 percent. Boric’s approval rating
tumbled almost immediately following
his March inauguration. So, adopting
the proposed charter was crucial for the
continuity of the reform process underway.
Instead, in a sharp reversal from
the opening plebiscite, more than 60% of
voters rejected a constitution deemed the
most progressive in the world.Why is Chile’s political
revolution in jeopardy?
Many pundits and politicians are blaming
the radical excesses of the convention,
the charter draft and Apruebo Dignidad,
the Left coalition in power. Establishment
voices claim the rebuke at the polls proves
Chileans are a moderate populace. They
are unequivocally calling for a restoration
of progressive neoliberalism that reigned
from 1990.
New Left militants, by contrast,
insist that a biased campaign prevented
them from fairly and accurately conveying
to voters the new charter’s manifold
advantages. Millionaire meddling,
fearmongering, and fake news muddled
Chileans’ ability to vote according to their
interests.
Both views ultimately hold ordinary
Chileans responsible for the crushing
defeat. The former praises while the latter
condemns. Both views are wrong.
Crucially, they miss the underlying
causes of the defeat. Millions of politically
inactive, and organisationally unmoored
voters were obligated to cast their ballots.
Voting, for the first time in this process,
was mandatory. And the Left prioritised
myriad identity politics, social-justice
concerns over class-wide material rights
and protections. Decades of neoliberalism
pummeled working sectors, fragmenting
them and intensifying insecurity and
resentment. Rather than addressing
these concerns, the constituent process
exacerbated the mistrust of swathes of
ordinary Chileans.
The constitution was not too
far Left. Rather, it exalted a set of
particularist outlooks and causes that
today masquerades as radical politics.
This “radicalism” undermines a moreeffective, class-oriented politics founded in
universal reforms with broad appeal among
all working and poor layers. In eclipsing a
democratic socialist program, it facilitates
corporate and media manipulation.
Neither are Chileans inherently
conservative or incapable of discerning
their interests. They were presented
with a bevy of special rights for the most
marginalised. These rights buried the
universal social provisions included in the
proposed charter. Faced with this, ordinary
voters reasonably suspected the draft would
fail to adequately advance their interests.
Workers have spent more than a
decade building the social power required
to win systemic reforms, so this amounts
to the squandering of an extraordinary
opportunity. It goes without saying that
powerful forces arrayed against Chile’s
reform process. But when toiling masses
have a unique shot at change, the Left
cannot waste it. The resulting damage is
incalculable.We gave them 80, they
returned less than 40
The reversal in vote shares for and against
a new constitution, relative to the 2020
plebiscite, was dramatic. In the opening
plebiscite, 78 percent affirmed the desire
for a constitutional overhaul. In the vote on
the constitution, 62 percent declared that
the draft on offer was not the new charter
they wanted. A closer look, however,
reveals that precipitous drops in apruebo
votes did not drive the crushing reversal.
In fact, although no comunas in Greater
Santiago increased votes in favor, pro-
apruebo turnout largely held, declining only
modestly throughout.
What changed was that there was a
massive enlargement in the electorate,
because registration was automatic andCelebrations for the results of the national plebiscite in- Chileans overwhelmingly demanded a constitutional
rewrite by an entirely new set of representatives. 78 percent
affirmed the desire for a constitutional overhaul.
By René Rojas
Perspectives for the left