During the rule of Pinochet the people of Chile we oppressed horrendously. Fascism is no excuse to justify economic growth. That is not the point. The point is to look at different economic systems and compare the results; not compare how they were implemented. Fortunately Pinochet’s power was not indefinite and Chileans became much freer economically and politically after he left.
> The point is to look at different economic systems and compare the results; not compare how they were implemented.
We never got to look at Allende's economic system and how it compares.
Politically Allende was freedom minded to a fault in the sense that the coup would have been a lot harder if he'd accepted violence. Economic freedom doesn't mean anything.
True, though I was referring socialism in general as the system. Yes we don't know how it could have turned out, but we can estimate the results by looking at the failure of the other socialist systems that were tried in the 20th century.
By economic freedom I mean the measure of freedom from coercion to spend your money. All governments must collect taxes, but the more you are forced to pay in taxes the less economic freedom you have. If you can spend your money how you like, and if you want to save it to fund your own or other's political activity, you are more able to campaign for your political freedoms. This seems to be how Pinochet was removed from power.
