I used to laugh at my Chilean father’s paranoia about life in the US – not any more

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Reflections on Authoritarianism: A Daughter's Perspective on Her Father's Fears and Modern Threats"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 5.7
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

The author reflects on the warnings of her Chilean father, who instilled a deep-seated distrust of authority and strangers during her childhood. His cautionary words resonate more profoundly in the current political climate of the United States, where the effects of Donald Trump's executive orders are perceived as a threat to the freedoms and safety of educators and students alike. The author draws parallels between her father's experience fleeing the dictatorship in Chile and the contemporary atmosphere of fear and repression in American society. She questions the stability of her job and the safety of her students, feeling that the echoes of her father’s fears are no longer irrational but rather prescient in light of recent political events that resemble authoritarian tactics, such as the silencing of dissenting voices and the targeting of activists and academics.

As the narrative unfolds, the author delves into the historical context of Chile’s dictatorship under Augusto Pinochet, emphasizing the brutal suppression of free speech and the targeting of intellectuals, artists, and activists who opposed the regime. She recounts the tragic story of Víctor Jara, a celebrated folk singer who was tortured and murdered for his opposition to the regime, symbolizing the broader attack on democracy and dissent. The author connects the dots between past and present, likening the political polarization and authoritarian tendencies seen in the U.S. today to those that led to the downfall of democracy in Chile. Her father's legacy of caution and fear now informs her understanding of the current political landscape, driving her to speak out and uphold her beliefs despite the risks involved, as she recognizes the importance of maintaining liberty over silence in the face of oppression.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article provides a personal reflection on the growing sense of paranoia experienced by the author, paralleling their father’s fears as a Chilean immigrant. It connects past authoritarianism in Chile to current political dynamics in the United States, particularly under Donald Trump’s administration. The narrative seeks to evoke a sense of urgency and concern regarding the implications of political actions on freedom and academic expression.

Historical Context and Personal Connection

The author recounts their father's warnings about distrust, linking these personal anecdotes to a broader historical narrative of political repression. The mention of the 1973 coup in Chile and its aftermath serves to illustrate how authoritarian regimes suppress dissent and target intellectuals. This historical perspective amplifies the author’s current fears about the political landscape in the U.S., suggesting that similar patterns of oppression may be emerging.

Contemporary Concerns

The piece highlights the current political climate in the U.S., particularly the impact of Trump’s policies on higher education and marginalized groups. The author expresses anxiety about job security and academic freedom, framing these concerns as a reflection of their father's legacy of vigilance against authoritarianism. The use of phrases like “purge” and “erasure” suggests a critical view of the current administration's tactics, creating a sense of alarm among readers about potential threats to freedom of speech and academic integrity.

Manipulation and Rhetoric

The article employs emotive language and vivid imagery to draw parallels between past and present, which may evoke a sense of fear and urgency among readers. While the concerns raised are valid, the framing of the current political situation may also serve to manipulate public perception by drawing stark comparisons to historical events. This could lead to a heightened sense of paranoia among audiences, potentially overshadowing nuanced discussions about political policies and their implications.

Trustworthiness and Reliability

The article presents a subjective viewpoint rooted in personal experience and historical knowledge, which lends it a degree of authenticity. However, the emotional appeal and historical comparisons may skew the reader's perception, raising questions about the objectivity of the analysis. The reliability of the claims hinges on the accuracy of the parallels drawn between past and present situations.

Potential Impact on Society

This narrative may contribute to a sense of division within society, particularly among those who feel threatened by current political actions. It could galvanize support for movements advocating for academic freedom and human rights, while also polarizing opinions on the effectiveness and intentions of the current administration.

Target Audience

The article appears to resonate primarily with individuals who share concerns about authoritarianism, academic freedom, and social justice. It likely appeals to progressive communities, academics, and activists who are wary of the implications of contemporary political actions.

Market Implications

While the article itself may not directly influence stock markets or economic sectors, the underlying themes of fear and uncertainty could impact industries related to education, technology, and civil rights advocacy. Companies involved in these sectors may see fluctuations based on public sentiment around political stability and freedom of expression.

Global Context

The themes discussed have relevance beyond the U.S., as they reflect a global trend of rising authoritarianism and attacks on intellectual freedom. This aligns with current global discussions about democracy, freedom of speech, and human rights, linking local concerns to broader international issues.

Use of AI in Composition

There is no clear indication that artificial intelligence was used in the writing of this article, but if it were, models focused on natural language processing could have influenced the tone and style. Such AI could shape the narrative by emphasizing emotional language and framing historical parallels to enhance the impact of the message.

The article's emotional resonance and historical context create a compelling narrative, but the potential for manipulation through rhetoric raises questions about its objectivity. It serves to alert readers to perceived threats to freedom, echoing the author's father's warnings, and aims to foster a sense of vigilance among its audience.

Unanalyzed Article Content

“Don’t open the door to nobody,” my father warned throughout my childhood – right up until the day he died. He trusted no politicians, no organized religion and definitely no strangers knocking unannounced.

Lately, his words echo louder than ever.

In California, where I teach at university, the year began with wildfires. They’re out now, but there is no containment for the political blaze sweeping through higher education. One after another,Donald Trump’s executive orders have scorched the landscape: slashing funding, silencing communication, terminating grants, capping research.

Each one feeds the fire. As Trump remarked in his address to Congress, he’s “just getting started”.

So between grading papers and making dinner, the real questions linger: will I still have a job next year? Will my department survive? Will my students be safe? Will my work be banned for using words likedisabilityorinequality?

These questions aren’t paranoid. They’re familiar.

They’re the same kinds of questions my father asked himself in 1975 before fleeingChilefor the US, trading a brutal dictatorship for freedom.

The speed and ease with which words like “purge”, “erasure” and “forced removal” have flooded our lexicon, crammed into news updates about attacks on minority groups and immigrants, brings to mind 11 September 1973.

Though I wasn’t born yet, that day lives beneath my skin as one of Chile’s daughters. On that day, the military overthrew the democratically elected president, Salvador Allende, and ushered in a 17-year dictatorship under Gen Augusto Pinochet.

The new regime tortured and murdered thousands of Allende supporters. And because Pinochet feared free speech and a free press, public debate and intellectual freedoms, he specifically targeted writers, academics, students and artists.

Authoritarian regimes always do.

Now consider what’s happening today to thoseon Trump’s growing enemy list. This includes the recently detained Palestinian activist and legal permanent residentMahmoud Khalilat Columbia University, my alma mater. Trump hasn’t even tried to hide his desire for retribution; instead, he vowed that Khalil’s arrest would be the first of “many to come”.

Since then, the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, hasrevoked 300 scholars’ visasand federal agents have detained at least a dozen students and professors, often without clarity on charges or alleged crimes other than protesting and speaking out.

The case of the Tufts doctoral student Rümeysa Öztürk– arrested in broad daylight by plainclothes Ice agents – stands out for me. Her only known offense was co-authoring an op-ed in the campus newspaper that criticized the university’s response to students’ demands to divest from companies with ties to Israel over the Gaza conflict.

Some ideas are now deemed so dangerous they must be erased, free speech be damned.

With the thought police now in full force inmycountry –ourcountry – I can’t help but think of the killing of Víctor Jara, the Chilean singer-songwriter oftendubbedthe Bob Dylan of Chile. His curly hair, olive skin and Mapuche features so resemble my father’s that I tear up watching black-and-white performances ofEl Derecho de Vivir en Paz(The Right to Live in Peace).

Born into an impoverished peasant family and a fierce supporter of working-class and Indigenous people, he threaded their stories into song. “We’ve had enough of that music that doesn’t speak to us, that entertains us only for a moment, but leaves us empty,” he said. “We began to create a new kind of song. It was music that was born out of total necessity.”

Jara was closely aligned with Allende’s leftistPopular Unitycoalition, even rewriting the lyrics to its anthem,Venceremos(We Shall Prevail), which made him a prime target for the opposition.

Like many workers, Jara responded to Allende’s call on the morning of 11 September to occupy their workplaces in defiance of the unfolding coup. As a professor at the State Technical University, he went to campus. Despite a strict curfew – anyone found on the streets risked being shot – hundreds of students and faculty sought refuge in university buildings, which were later shelled by tanks and raked with machine gun fire.

A survivor, Osiel Núñez Quevado, recalled in adocumentary: “Without absolutely no warning, they began machine-gunning the university’s central building. They got everybody out, putting professors and students on the floor with hands on their heads. There among them, was Víctor.”

Pinochet’s forces found Jara’s message so threatening that when he was identified among the prisoners brought to Estadio Chile – the stadium later turned into a detention center and renamed to honor the singer’s memory – he was singled out for torture in an especially cruel way.

Soldiers broke his hands and wrists, thentaunted himto play his guitar and sing. Badly beaten and bloodied, in the two hours before his death he secured a pen and paper from a friend and gathered the strength to write his final song,Estadio Chile.

He defiantly performed Venceremos before his captors killed him with a gunshot to the head, further riddling his body with44 bullet woundsbefore dumping his corpse in the street.

Such brutality, forever seared into the consciousness of Chileans like my father, has shaped generations across national borders, thousands of miles, and decades. The ghosts of a decimated democracy haunted Dad’s nightmares, and they continue to haunt me.

When I turned 18, my father actively discouraged me from voting, fearing that my name could end up on a list used against me one day, that I could be killed like one oflos desaparecidos –the thousands of Chileans who wereabducted by state forcesduring Pinochet’s rule, never to be seen again.

The deeper I dig into history, the more parallels I uncover between then and now.

I recently learned about Chile’sfailed coupin June 1973, which eerily resembles the January 6 assault on the US Capitol. Riding on growing discontent within the military, Lt Col Roberto Souper launched an unsuccessful attempt against Allende. Though poorly coordinated, it served as a kind of dress rehearsal, helping the military understand the conditions necessary for success in a future attempt.

The commander-in-chief of the Chilean army, Gen Carlos Prats, helped squelch the rebellion. But by August, having lost the military’s support, Prats resigned and personally recommended his replacement: his second-in-command, Pinochet. (The following year, while in exile, Prats and his wife Sofía were killed in a car bombing in Buenos Aires, carried out by Chile’s secret police.)

Pinochet swiftly pardoned those arrested during the failed coup attempt – mostly men from various branches of the military – and assigned them to guard the Estadio Nacional, where so many were tortured and killed.

The similarities are impossible to ignore: a failed insurrection, full pardons for the perpetrators, and ensuing vengeance.

As the attorney Almudena Bernabéuobserves, “Dictatorial regimes are fueled by arrogance and by the ability to deny that their power will ever end.”

Emboldened and once again in power, Trump’s ire threatens most of the American public, save for a small segment of wealthy oligarchs.

And just as in Chile, wherepoverty soaredin the dictatorship years, the most vulnerable Trump voters will suffer most from rising prices and cuts to crucial social safety net programs.

Allende’s wide-ranging platform had promised to alleviate extreme inequality, at a time when28.5% of Chileans lived in poverty. He had pursued a number of reforms including increasing wages, providing free milk to poor children and nationalizing the copper industry. He won a close race, after having garnered nearly37%of the vote, partly thanks toworker and peasant turnout.

But his victory came at a time of extreme political polarization and foreign interference. TheNational Security Archivecontains a trove of documents exposing the US government’s efforts to eradicate the perceived communist threat by attempting to prevent Allende’s win and then undermining his presidency with anti-leftist propaganda and economic encroachment to destabilize the country.

Severe inflation and scarcity had left people like my father – an intended beneficiary of Allende’s policies – disgruntled. His frustrations help me understand the deep dissatisfaction and distrust felt by the large swathes of midwestern voters who supported Trump.

Dad had never graduated from high school. He had toiled in nitrate mines in the Atacama desert, loaded cargo on ships, hauled trash in buildings – dirty jobs that left his hands calloused and his psyche bruised – eventually securing a union job as an elevator operator and later doorman.

He would often recount his dissatisfaction with Allende, given long food lines and the exorbitant prices for black market goods, andhad been especially stung by the indignity of a waiter at a “nice” restaurant handing him newspaper to wipe his hands instead of napkins.

Between the lack of economic opportunity, especially for those like Dad born into the working class, and the violence and repression during the dictatorship, my father emigrated in 1975. He joked: “I left because I wanted to be rich.”

Chile’s right wing capitalized on growing discontent, organizing the 1971 protestMarch of Empty Pots and Pans, which, according to aCIA memorandum, “drew more support from angry Chilean housewives than had been anticipated even by the sponsors”.

Artists, writers and intellectuals continued to offer Allendestrong support, including Chile’s celebrated poet Pablo Neruda, his friend and adviser. Nerudadied just 12 days after the coup, before he could seek refuge in Mexico, prompting therecently confirmed speculationthat he had been poisoned.

This is Pinochet’s legacy: layers and layers of horrific secrets that are still being unveiled, which might explain why Dad urged me never to vote for fear of being tracked down.

I had the privilege, then, of laughing off such worries. “Don’t be paranoid, Dad. They don’t keep track of who you voted for here,” I said, explaining secret ballots. He wasn’t convinced.

Suddenly, Dad doesn’t seem so paranoid any more.

I’ve never been good at keeping my big mouth shut. My father was a masterly kvetcher and, as a New Yorker, I consider complaining my birthright. While I enjoy commiserating as a way to connect with others, my griping also helps me search for answers, question what we take for granted, and untangle vexing puzzles.

Perhaps naively, I once believed tenure would grant more academic freedom – that our right to dissent would be protected. But as we slide toward authoritarianism, the train’s moving in reverse. Instead of my horizon expanding as I near that milestone, I feel the walls closing in.

Earlier in my career, when I voiced doubts, a mentor wisely cautioned: “You don’t want to twist yourself into a pretzel for a job you don’t want any more.” How far will we twist, bend, compromise, modify, avoid – or hide? One of my personal heroes, the photographer Bill Cunningham, memorably declined food and drink while working events, explaining:“Money is the cheapest thing. Liberty is the most expensive.”What price are we willing to pay for an academic job?

I inherited many things from my father – his hazel eyes, his acid reflux, his politics of fear – and his stubbornness. I’ve come too far to hide now. I spent years ashamed of my socioeconomic background and ethnic surname, but I’ve come to see that what once made me feel like an outsider also sharpened my tools – especially the way I observe the world as a sociologist.

And I’ve gained a deeper respect for my father’s distrust. He never returned to Chile, yet despite the pain bound up in that homeland, he held on to a fierce love for it –he never burned the bridge back. That bridge may one day provide me with an escape route, thanks to my eligibility for Chilean residency through him.

Dad’s lifelong fear kept him metaphorically sleeping with one eye open, always listening for danger in the distance. Now, it’s helping me prepare for a new era of terror. I will still vote. I will still speak my mind – because he often couldn’t. But I’m no longer naive about the repercussions.

Lately, I’ve caught myself practicing the words:“I was once a college professor.”It’s been a meaningful ride, but if it ends, so be it. I’d rather say,“I used to be a college professor”than“I once stood up for my beliefs and values.”Because what good is all this education if I haven’t learned the most important lesson?

In that case, I might as well light the match myself.

Stacy Torresis an assistant professor of sociology at the University of California, San Francisco, and author ofAt Home in the City: Growing Old in Urban America.

Spot illustrations by Angelica Alzona.

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian