They have to be able to show the benefits of freedom and democracy. Clinton's prescription for this is unabashed free trade. While the Clinton presidency may wish to be the hemisphere's godfather of modern democracy, viewing free trade as the indispensable linchpin of constitutionalism may be an unfortunate excess. In fact, Clinton's fast track may inadvertently result in a return to the despotism that ruled the region in the 1970s and 1980s. During its harsh rule, draconian economic neo-liberal changes were mandated, almost entirely falling on the backs of the poor, which could never have been legislated if democratic institutions existed.
Chile continues to suffer from several serious social and economic maladies.
It has been the recipient of relatively gargantuan sums of foreign investment which, however, have not always translated into the jobs needed to employ the crowded ranks of its urban poor. Even if workers are fortunate enough to obtain one of the relatively few manufacturing slots, it is virtually impossible for them to conduct any meaningful dialogue with their employer regarding sub-standard wages and working conditions, largely due to a trade union sector which has never been allowed to fully recuperate from its withering experience under Pinochet. Sadly, the Chilean case is far from being a regional anomaly, but shares a Latin American norm. Furthermore, Chile's low prevailing tariffs have encouraged local entrepreneurs to import consumer goods, and the capital to finance them, instead of making more cost-effective investments in domestic production. The pressures of globalization have meant that it is not rational for Latin America to pursue the inward-looking development style featured in the 1960s and 1970s.