Chile’s Do-or-Die Referendum – WSJ

Since April, surveys have consistently shown that more voters plan on voting against adoption than for it. That spread is now running at about 10 percentage points but the final tally could be much closer. In a poll released Aug. 19 by Pulso Ciudadano, 45.8% of those surveyed said they would vote against ratification of the document versus 32.9% who plan to approve it. But in the same survey, 15.7% said they were undecided. That’s the wild card.

Odds are that the final spread between the two sides will be narrow. If so, what was once billed, by both the right and the left, as a new national charter of rights to make Chile “a house for all,” instead made around half the electorate—or more—feel left out.

One lesson for any country seeking to build a free and just society is that terrorism can’t produce national unity. It is true that the Communist Party and the radical left, including its representatives in the indigenous community, gained control of the constituent assembly in the May 2021 elections. But the constitutional project was introduced only because militants, anarchists and criminals were burning, looting and vandalizing the country in a rampage, begun in October 2019, that the government was at a loss to contain.

As part of the rules Congress set for electing the assembly, independent, special-interest candidates, competing in local districts, were allowed to skip the onerous process of organizing political parties but still coalesce to get on the proportional-representation ballot. Even the Socialist Party admits this was “a big mistake.” Plus, 17 seats were reserved for indigenous activists. These antidemocratic provisions distorted the outcome in favor of fringe radicals who mistook their victory for broad popular support.

Chile’s center-right objects to the draft because it undermines property rights, free speech and the rule of law and expands the role of the state in the economy. But republican opposition isn’t enough to explain the unpopularity of the assembly’s work. Extreme-left President

Gabriel Boric’s

support doesn’t help. His tenure is best known for high rates of violent crime, economic malaise and inflation topping 13% annually. Yet it may be the objections of the country’s social democrats that best demonstrate why backing for the draft constitution has collapsed.

Former President

Eduardo Frei,

a Christian Democrat, favors a new constitution. But in July he announced he will vote to reject the draft. Among his stated concerns is an inadequate “balance and division of powers,” such that an elected majority in control of the executive and legislature could move the country “towards a dictatorial regime” similar to “those in the world that are becoming frequent.”

Translation: Let’s not go the way of Venezuela, Bolivia and Nicaragua.

Mr. Frei also worried that the proposal runs the risk that judges will become “politically controlled.” He again cited the experience of the neighbors: “The independence and non-politicization of [the judicial branch] is crucial because more and more dictatorships are started and then consolidated through the capture of the judiciary.” Other prominent left-of-center opponents include Chilean economists

René Cortázar,

Rodrigo Valdés

and

José De Gregorio.

Perhaps more than any other aspect of the draft, it is the establishment of a plurinational Chile—creating nations within the country and a variety of legal systems applying to different groups—that most rankles the electorate. From elites in Santiago to humble working-class Chileans in far-flung areas of the country, plurinationalism is seen as an assault on the very idea of Chile. Mr. Frei called it a potential “threat” to the “unitary state and equal rights for the country’s inhabitants.” As Mr. Cortázar explained, “instead of contributing to a more united nation, [the draft constitution] proposes to divide us into several nations.”

Chile’s indigenous don’t seem to be fans either. In a survey of Chileans who self-identify as Mapuche—conducted earlier this year by the Santiago-based Center for Public Studies—70% opposed independence for their community and only 12% favored a plurinational state.

Thanks to the survival of institutions like free speech and debate in the public square, there is a chance to defeat this proposal. Less certain is Mr. Boric’s commitment to modern liberal democracy and to stamping out the terrorism that spawned this disastrous constitutional experiment.

Write to O’Grady@wsj.com.