(An answer to a question on quora.com)
Like Aldof Hitler before him, Salvador Allende was elected with a weak plurality (36% for Allende in 1970, 44% for Hitler in 1933), and, like Hitler before him, upon his election Allende set about dismantling the democratic system that had made his election possible. Both Allende and Pinochet were anything but democratic, and both had violent gangs of armed supporters who killed, kidnapped and terrorized their opponents. But Allende was stripping the people of their basic rights, militarizing the political process with Cuban arms & the MIR & his "Grupo de amigos personales," crippling the economy, impoverishing the people, and consolidating power under Marxist authority, provoking the Chamber of Deputies and Supreme Court to demand his removal, which he ignored. Pinochet, in contrast, after instituting free-market reforms, which were extremely successful, oversaw the adoption of a democratic constitution, reestablished democracy, and relinquished power voluntarily. I would not have wanted to live under either Allende or Pinochet, but, on balance, Allende was the worst of the two. Here are some supporting references: Brian W. Doss: http://www.webcitation.org/6Aygxo1c1 Nathaniel Davidson: http://www.webcitation.org/6AyghIMxE The late Val Dorta: http://www.webcitation.org/6AyiBlLKb And, for the sake of balance, a contrary opinion: David Frum: http://www.webcitation.org/6AyjRIYy5 (and a reply to it http://www.webcitation.org/6AykGy59n) And a balanced view: John O'Sullivan: http://www.webcitation.org/6AyleujFI And a very detailed 3-part history by Eugenio Velasco, Loyola Law Review: Part 1: http://www.webcitation.org/6AymdqN7a Part 2: http://www.webcitation.org/6AymW3PoP Part 3: http://www.webcitation.org/6Aymp0usj And here's a glimpse from Time Magazine of Allende's Chile: http://www.webcitation.org/6Ayx9tcgs (or http://www.webcitation.org/6AyvofomS)