March 14, 2015

Friendly Observer
By Arthur Keefe

South America

I have just returned to the UK from  Chile and (briefly) Argentina. Readers may be interested in my observations on these two middle developed countries. 
Both were colonised by Spain in the 17th century, and obtained their independence in the mid 19th century. This was long before the Philippines, and unlike the Philippines, independence was gained through local resistance, with no external country involved.

Both countries are Catholic, although this is much less evident than in the Philippines. Church going is much less, and the church has much less political influence. Both countries are wealthier than here, and are modernised with good infrastructure. They had railway networks, but these have fallen in to disuse as wide good roads now cover much of both countries. It’s an interesting aside that whereas British colonisers always built railways, most of which survive, the Spanish hardly did, and invested a lot less in developing the infrastructure of their colonies.
This was my 12th trip of a month to Chile, so I feel I know it well. Only my fourth trip to Argentina, each of only a week, and only to 2 cities, so I know it much less.
First impressions of Chile are of a modern prosperous country, and to some extent this is true. It managed to avoid the worst of the financial crisis of 2008, and there are a host of cranes and building sites, a good indicator of a growing economy. Plenty of new cars on the excellent roads, and busy shopping malls selling expensive branded goods. However, if you travel away from the City centres to the northern suburbs of Santiago you see a different picture. Poor quality housing, litter strewn streets, vandalism on a wide scale, high crime levels, potholed side roads, are all evidence of a poor disaffected community. 
Surveys show that while Chile is developing fast, with high rates of economic growth, it is one of the most unequal countries in the world. 
This is partly the legacy of the military dictator Pinochet, who successfully imported American capitalism. He was a Marcos figure, but whereas Marcos had concern for the masses, Pinochet entrenched the wealth and power of the elite. However, the election of 3 left of centre Presidents has done little to change this. The southern suburbs of the capital, Santiago, are full of good quality apartment blocks in gated communities, expensive cars, expensive shops, and an absence of graffiti and potholes! This is where the elite, and of course the politicians live.
The cost of living is about 70% of that in Europe (with housing much cheaper), but wages for the working class are about 20% or less than in Europe. The result is a large working class struggling to get by. This is made worse by the absence of good welfare support. Schools cost money, free health care is in poorly equipped hospitals with long queues, and welfare payments are only for small numbers. On the other hand, the professional and managerial elite have European levels of income, and benefit from the lower cost of living. 
One lawyer told me of apartments for sale at the huge price of $150,000 (US), the most expensive in Santiago. He expected me to be shocked at this, but similar apartments in London would cost $600,000! 
I have travelled widely in Chile, and the disparities in lifestyle are not so huge outside of the Capital. However, 60% of Chile’s population live in Santiago. (It’s as if 60M people were living in Manila.) Most of the country is empty. There is a large fertile central valley, producing excellent Chilean wines, and capital intensive fruit farming much of which ends up in Europe and the USA. Large areas are desert, in the high Andes, and in the Icy wastes of Patagonia and the land bordering Antartica.
The concentration of people may explain another Chilean characteristic often commented on by visitors. That is the rudeness of people on buses, in the Metro, on the roads, and in the shops. Pushing, using your elbows to get past others, and never saying por favor or gracias. By contrast, when meeting people socially, they are friendly and generous. Probably the public rudeness is a consequence of so many people in a small space, especially on the overcrowded transport system. By contrast, the Philippines is a haven of politeness and consideration!
As a retiree with a good pension, I could live well in Chile. I do like the country and I like the people when in their private space. The language is Spanish, and the religion Catholic, but the culture is not Spanish. It is a mix of North European (The English and Germans were economic settlers in the 19th and 20th centuries), and American, as the present day investors. 
Argentina has a similar background, but feels very different. It is more Latin than Chile, and its early settlers included many Italians as well as Spaniards. Public behaviour is more considerate, and people love dance and fiestas unlike in Chile. Argentina is currently having its second major economic crisis in 20 years, but a visitor sees little evidence of this, except in the informal currency market, where you will be offered 50% more than the official exchange rate. At this rate, it’s a bargain place to visit!
I have not travelled far in the country, and read very little about it, so I will not offer more opinions beyond saying that the 2 cities I stayed in, mendoza and Buenos Aires are attractive and interesting. The 2 countries share a long border of the Andes, but further south, as the land flattens, they do argue about who owns what, so much so that they nearly went to war over a southern shipping lane (the Beagle Strait) a few years ago. 
Had my son not moved to Chile to marry a Chilean, I would not have thought of visiting these 2 countries, but I am glad I have done so.

No comments:

Post a Comment