Against all odds, on December 17, Chile was once again saved from having a new Constitution that would have been covered with “progressive” footprints and soaked with DNA from the UN’s “Agenda 2030”, which included a chapter on climate change. The 1980 Constitution thus remains in force.
The likelihood that the new text would be rejected had seemed to vanish, since the most right-wing party (Republican), together with woke companies and unions, called for approval of the new proposal before even knowing what was in the draft. The “In Favor” option thus had everything it needed to win: the right, the left and the money. Factions favoring the other option had nothing except courage and determination to expose the huge threat that the new text posed.
Fortune favored the scenario envisioned by those who promoted the “Climate Constitution” (Republicans and the center-right, since the extreme left didn’t support anything), because many people blamed libertarians for “voting the same as the communists,” who said they would vote for the “Against” option. It is not clear why that wing acted in such a contradictory manner, since its members were more than happy with the “In Favor” option, because it would finally give them a Venezuela-like Constitution and other Marxist paradises.
The fact is that advocates of the “Against” option called for a vote without caring whether the communists agreed with them or not. Instead, they focused on making voters aware of the text that was being offered to the country, and presenting it as a socialist, progressive, globalist document. The patriots’ alleged loyalty to the communists turned out to be not only false, but a weak argument that served at best to narrow the difference of a comfortable victory.
In the end, without resources, using only the social media along with the awakening of people’s common sense, conservatives achieved a clear victory of 55.8% against the new constitution versus 44.2% in favor – a major defeat for the entire political establishment.
This success, however, did not stop Chile’s journey toward the cliff.
For example, along with its commitment to John Kerry’s “Global Methane Hub” (which includes Chile, the United States and 11 other countries), Chile also signed the “COP28 UAE Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Action”, which will soon become an attack on national and Western agriculture and livestock.
In parallel, climate policies in Congress continue to progress. One is the “Energy Transition Law”, which aims to incorporate electricity transmission as a sector enabled for carbon-neutrality. This is simply a disguise that actually seeks to save European renewable energy companies from bankruptcy.
This bill, dispatched by ‘president’ Boric as a matter of urgency, arose from a one-day visit to Chile last June by Ursula Von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, asking him to “solve the problem”. With this new climate action, electricity rates will continue to skyrocket, worsening the country’s social and economic crisis, but supposedly saving the planet – and definitely saving foreign companies – at taxpayers’ and consumers’ expense.
Chile thus faces a bitter return to reality after the triumph of freedom against tyranny, yet with some hope for a longer-term solution.
It must function under strict climate policies, even though the country doesn’t exist for the purposes of preventing the planet’s climate from changing. And it has a political right that’s on the verge of extinction, not quite because of global warming but because of its violent turn to the left.