Original article: Elecciones presidenciales: ¿Cuáles son los proyectos que están en disputa en Chile?
“We know that elections do not resolve social class issues on their own; they merely highlight them«.
Miguel Enríquez, 1973
By Javier Pineda Olcay, Director of El Ciudadano
Chile is gearing up for its presidential elections in 2025, with the first round set for Sunday, November 16, and the runoff on December 14. A total of eight presidential candidates will compete: Jeannette Jara, José Antonio Kast, Evelyn Matthei, Johannes Kaiser, Franco Parisi, Harold Mayne-Nicholls, Marco Enríquez-Ominami, and Eduardo Artés.
Despite criticism regarding their methodologies, polls indicate certain trends: Jara leads in the first round, benefiting from support from Boric’s government and expanding her appeal among centrist (DC) and left-wing voters (from opposition parties like Izquierda Ecologista Popular), with percentages ranging from 28% to 38%. Kast follows in second place, experiencing a slight yet sustained drop in support, polling between 19% and 25%. Kaiser is gaining momentum, primarily capturing votes from Kast, yet remains behind with projections of 15% to 20%. Matthei, once leading the polls, has slipped to fourth place (only matched with Kast and Kaiser in the La Cosa Nostra survey). Parisi has seen a significant drop in votes, mainly shifting towards Kaiser, while Mayne-Nicholls slightly improved after the first presidential debate but remains below 5%. Marco Enríquez-Ominami has not gained traction, and Eduardo Artés is stabilized at around 1%.
F itsource: Summary of polls prior to the 15-day election silence.
Given the possible outcomes of the presidential elections and, particularly, the backing from legislative lists likely to secure seats in Congress, we will focus our analysis on four candidates: Jara, Kast, Matthei, and Kaiser. The candidacies of Mayne-Nicholls, Enríquez-Ominami, and Artés remain independent, lacking significant parliamentary support as they had to gather signatures for their nominations. While Parisi is the candidate for the People’s Party, his party has limited potential congressional seats (Olivares in D6, Jiles in D12, and Gubernatti in D15). The odds of Mayne-Nicholls, MEO, and Artés securing their own representatives are nearly nonexistent.
In this presidential election, candidates can be positioned along two key axes: the approach to state power and the proposed economic and social policies. Other dimensions or programmatic axes have become almost irrelevant in public discourse or have not been prioritized by candidates with a genuine chance of winning the presidency.
In this context, we observe that one project is authoritarian neoliberalism, represented in Chile by pinochetism, which Kast and Kaiser embody with certain nuances. Secondly, there is a “grand neoliberal coalition” led by Evelyn Matthei, aiming to replicate the Concertación and Sebastián Piñera’s governments, while simultaneously shifting towards the far-right to form a parliamentary majority. Lastly, a “popular social-democratic front” consisting of political forces ranging from the Christian Democracy to the Communist Party and leftist parties beyond the coalition, primarily focused on halting the far-right, possesses a contending economic-social project.
Neoliberal Authoritarianism
Pinochetism epitomizes an authoritarian political and neoliberal economic project in Chile. This neoliberal authoritarian model persists in the 21st century across various countries: Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, Daniel Noboa in Ecuador, Giorgia Meloni in Italy, Javier Milei in Argentina, and Nayib Bukele in El Salvador. In the United States, Donald Trump exhibits authoritarian tendencies alongside economic-social policies that benefit businesses, though not strictly adhering to neoliberal prescriptions.
Politically, these regimes implement authoritarian policies that restrict civil liberties, such as the right to protest and freedom of expression; deploying armed forces to maintain public order; diminishing the role of Congress while expanding executive legislative powers; criminalizing migration; and fostering discourse against drug trafficking and organized crime to justify prior policies. Johannes Kaiser has also proposed an amnesty for human rights violators during Augusto Pinochet’s military dictatorship (1973-1990) and during the 2019 Popular Uprising, including offenders sentenced to over a thousand years in prison.
Economically and socially, they endorse classic neoliberal policies: trimming public expenditure at the expense of public social investment; lowering taxes for corporations and wealthy individuals; dismantling labor rights under the pretext of fostering economic growth; environmental degradation for extractive projects; escalating state indebtedness despite the rhetoric of fiscal austerity; privatizing public enterprises; and attacking public sector employees among other measures.
To sustain support despite the unpopularity of these measures, they resort to financing misinformation campaigns via social media, employing paid troll accounts to generate and amplify messages. Mainstream media outlets are either purchased or coerced into suppressing dissent. Currently, only social media remains relatively unaffected by this media discipline, though millions have been spent on advertising on platforms like Meta, TikTok, and YouTube.
Kast and Kaiser’s campaigns reflect these policies with variances: both advocate for expelling all undocumented immigrants (without specifics on how or the costs involved); both propose militarizing borders and criminalizing irregular migration. Kaiser doubles down, suggesting the establishment of migrant detention camps near borders (with no calculations on costs or necessary legal changes to facilitate this aberration under international human rights law). Regarding tackling organized crime, Kast has even announced “states of emergency” during certain hours, reminiscent of the permanent curfews during the Military Dictatorship.
On economic grounds, their proposals align, centering on reducing fiscal deficits. Kast suggests cutting public spending by $6 billion, while Kaiser proposes doubling that to $12 billion. Neither candidate articulates a reasonable explanation for such a reduction, while Evelyn Matthei asserts that it is only feasible to decrease spending by $2 billion. Additionally, they emphasize cutting “unnecessary government,” but without serious figures or effective mechanisms for laying off the number of public workers they intend to dismiss.
As Kaiser noted when asked about his differences with Kast, he claims to be less conservative, despite both opposing abortion and euthanasia, indicating they share the same stance in specific public discussions.
Both candidates collectively garner approximately 30-40% of the electorate in the first round, demonstrating how pinochetism persists in our country, revitalized by the 2019 Popular Uprising. Furthermore, both campaigns share a common project represented in the parliamentary list combining the Republican and Christian Social parties supporting Kast and the Libertarian National Party backing Kaiser, potentially becoming the most voted list, similar to the results of the 2023 Constitutional Council elections.
Grand Neoliberal Coalition
Evelyn Matthei’s candidacy has altered its electoral strategy after failing to capture the hardcore right’s vote, seeking instead to rally historical supporters of the Concertación.
In her recent speeches, she has steered clear of pinochetism, calling on those nostalgic for the 90s and 2000s, when traditional right-wing parties and the Concertación governed together, inspired by Germany’s grand coalition model between the Christian Democratic Party and the Social Democratic Party. This distancing from pinochetism has been inconsistent; in interviews, she has claimed that the killings in 1973 and 1974 were inevitable and stated that the National Search Plan for detained and missing persons is “more about vengeance than justice.”
Nonetheless, she has managed to attract splinter groups from the Christian Democracy originating from the first constitutional process, such as Amarillos por Chile and the Democrats’ Party, but has not succeeded in garnering support from “Approve” voters for the constitutional draft proposed by the Constitutional Convention. By appealing to this electorate, which once identified as “center-left” – despite lacking true leftist principles – she has been unable to recover votes lost to José Antonio Kast. It appears her only remaining strategy to lure votes from Kast is promoting the media narrative of a “useful vote for governance,” suggesting that a Kast government would not ensure social peace and could even be “dangerous.”
Some sectors within her coalition, identifying as simply right-wing, are dissatisfied with this shift and have quietly or publicly rallied behind Kast’s campaign. Within Chile Vamos, factions wish to govern alongside Kast’s pinochetist right-wing, and should social-democratic parties like the Radical Party, Christian Democracy, Socialist Party, PPD, and Liberal Party not extend their hands, they may be forced to ally with the far-right to advance projects in Congress.
Authoritarian tendencies also characterize Matthei’s candidacy. Her hardline rhetoric against crime prioritizes state control, though her proposals are less radical than her discourse. For instance, regarding migration, she has supported the National Agricultural Society’s proposal to regularize migrants for agricultural work.
Economically and socially, they too advocate for reducing public spending but recognize the necessity of preserving much of the current structure of ministries and key social policies like PGU, free education, or health co-payments.
Ultimately, this approach fails to resonate with the electorate, as their promise of an efficient government maintaining stability lacks the capability to inspire hope or attract large majorities. Moreover, the rhetoric of a “grand neoliberal coalition” with historical Concertación sectors may shift focus toward seeking far-right support to secure parliamentary majorities and ensure strong voting in the second round, although they are unlikely to reach the runoff.
Popular Social-Democratic Front
Jeannette Jara’s candidacy has successfully established itself as the official candidate, securing over 60% of the votes, significantly outperforming the Broad Front (10% of votes) and Democratic Socialism (30% of votes). This candidacy, in the primary, featured a traditional program from the Communist Party and the left: expanding coverage of social rights (increasing free higher education access to 70% of students, establishing a public health system, enhancing PGU for women retiring at 60 years); nationalizing copper and lithium; ensuring free and safe access to abortion; a development model focused on raising internal demand (with a living wage of $750,000); among other measures.
However, following the primary victory, it had to broaden its candidature beyond official lines. Toward the “center,” it incorporated elements from the Christian Democracy, while to the left, it welcomed many from the Izquierda Ecologista Popular (Partido Igualdad, Popular, Solidaridad para Chile, and others).
This wide array of organizations is not without tensions, and the principal glue binding this coalition is the threat posed by the far-right, leading the bloc to adopt characteristics of a Popular Front where the program takes a back seat to specific measures aimed at alleviating the economic and social situations of families, focused on raising the minimum wage; mental and dental health initiatives; job creation, among others.
However, Jara’s candidacy is not confined to a “Popular Front” against the Chilean far-right but represents the potential for constructing a longer-term project initiating a third wave of progressive governments in Latin America, led for the first time by the Communist Party.
In this regard, Jara’s opposition to the agreement between SQM and Codelco, as well as her foreign policy positions advocating for alignment with BRICS+, signify a divergence from President Gabriel Boric’s stance on these matters.
Consequently, Jara’s candidacy encompasses at least three sectors: a traditional sector of the Concertación including DC, PPD, PR, and segments of the Socialist Party; a bridging sector with the Broad Front and some PS segments; and a left sector composed of the Communist Party, Humanist Action, and Christian Left (all part of Jara’s primary coalition) along with those in the Izquierda Ecologista Popular, which have joined post-primary victory. Should Jara triumph, this will trigger a struggle for hegemony within the coalition.
Conclusions
In the first round, Jeannette Jara is likely to be the winner, needing to contend with a right-wing candidate. According to polls, José Antonio Kast appears most likely to advance to the runoff, predicted to prevail by approximately 10 points, though similar projections had suggested a significant win for Gabriel Boric in his runoff against Kast in the previous election.
Alternatively, Johannes Kaiser’s growth may help him claims the second position from Kast, a scenario more favorable for Jara, as some polls place them in a technical tie, with various liberal right sectors unwilling to back Kaiser. A runoff involving Evelyn Matthei appears increasingly unlikely; should she advance, her anticipated victory over Jara would be facilitated by earlier polling trends.
The only certainty in times of interregnum is the struggle. In facing tumultuous global conditions, where neoliberal capitalism finds itself in crisis yet persists without a clear replacement, we see the emergence of creatures reminiscent of fascism.
The political landscape opened by the October 2019 Popular Uprising has yet to settle, making it likely that regardless of who wins the elections, Chile will remain in contention.
Analysis document of the presidential elections in Chile prepared with support from the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation.