Gen. Pinochet's achievements, leftist spasmoplexy, and a look into the future.

The out-to-lunch left continue to gnash their teeth over the late Augusto Pinochet of Chile.

In the "let no sparrow fall" school of Realpolitik people actually died as a result of what he did, you see. Ergo, dark forces were at work and the General initiated pedal-to-the-metal High Andes fascism in direct partnership with the Antichrist his own self.

However, our source, Mr. Larkin, accurately decries the disproportionate leftist outrage over the (far milder) authoritarianism of the so-called "right." Stalin and Mao just never get even honorable mention in the panoply of successful killers of the 20th century. The real devils of that blood-soaked century were Generalissimo Franco in Spain, Pinochet, and Nixon.

In fact, Gen. Pinochet saved Chile from a violent fate far worse than anything he inflicted:

. . . [A]t the time of his election in 1970, Allende was supported by barely a third of the population: nearly 63 percent had voted against him. And so far from seeking national reconciliation, Allende pledged to "destroy the bourgeois state" and impose "total, scientific Marxist socialism" on the country.

Neither end was achievable without authoritarian methods and Allende proved all too willing to employ them. Foreign companies and domestic farms alike were seized by the government while gangs of leftist marauders, armed by the authorities, stalked the countryside. Even as he alienated the international community and kindled social unrest, Allende embarked on a political courtship of Fidel Castro, who used the occasion of one official visit to announce that Chile and Cuba were heading in the same direction.

To believe that the Marxist state the Allende had in mind would become some kind of nice hot-tub-and-chardonnay version of every other kind of Marxist hell hole in creation is to be so out of touch with reality as . . . well, as to be a leftist.

Not to mention the fact that Chile went on to enjoy a kind of economic miracle that has set it decisively apart from the rest of Latin America:

Pinochet’s greatest crime may be that, as John O’Sullivan has put it, he "first defeated Marxism and then disproved it."

We are probably at a juncture in Western history much like the one that Augusto Pinochet perceived in Chile in 1973.

Which raises these questions:

• Do we now have the foresight and determination to do what is necessary to forestall what our enemies have in store for us?
• Or, are we going to elect the "Fluffy Kitty" policy option on all fronts?

By all appearances, sadly, the American and European peoples are mostly supine when it comes to defense of the realm. Why else would America's elite, at any rate, rend their garments so over minuscule combat casualties? The American War Between the States resulted in losses of 618,000 on both sides. Considering that fighting began on April 12, 1861 and ended on April 9, 1865, we see that losses on both sides totalled roughly 423 per day.

Current casualty rate in Iraq = 1.5 per day.

Who wants casualties? Natch, natch, natch and natch.

But . . . will we roll over like dogs because Jim Lehrer disingenuously broadcasts his list of current casualties and thus brings home to us that war means, like, uh, killing?

The silliness of the hysterics over Pinochet now and then suggests that large numbers of us want to.

Desperately.

"The Dictator and Double-Standards." By Jacob Laksin, FrontPageMagazine.com, 12/15/06.