No, I wasn't trolling. I was pointing out that the person of the week was on the Central Committee of the Communist Youth Party of Chile, a branch of the Chilean Communist Party. The Chilean communist party also commits atrocities, attacking Mormon churches 15 times (with deaths), attacking multiple radio stations and news outlets (with deaths), along wtih assassination attempts, bombings, kidnappings, executions, and other mayhem. They use RPG's, US LAW rockets, dynamite, C-4, and M-16's, while calling for all the workers to become armed revolutionaries. They were the violent revolutionaries Pinochet was in large part trying to suppress with an iron fist. Fortunately he intercepted some of the huge weapons shipments they were set to receive.
Chile had lower deaths, by far, than most other Latin American countries where the communist revolutions took off, possibly because Pinochet succeeded in keeping them from forming an effective armed opposition. Had he not, it probably would've devolved into something extremely bloody, similar to the Spanish civil war, where both sides should've lost - badly. Other cournties in the region weren't as successful, so Cuba had at least 85,000 killed. Peru had 77,000 dead. Columbia had 31,000. Add in Nicaragua, Guatemala, and El Salvador and you exceed 500,000 dead.
That total is still not as bad as Suharto and Sukarno in Indonesia, but then they don't compare to Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, and ever leader of North Korea, not to mention lesser communist killers like Ceausescu, Tito, Kruschev, Brezhnev, Haile Mariam (little known because he only killed a million), Mugabe, Castro, Milosovics, or Ho Chi Minh and his successor, coming to a total of 85 to 100 million dead. Historians who study genocide and democide, even leftist ones, conclude that in the 20th century, communism was far more lethal than any other system of government.
Camila Vallejo is probably not one of these violent revolutionaries, but why would someone who joins the communist central committee (whose party had an active, violent revolutionary wing) get a pass because their former government sucked, as opposed to someone who joins some neo-Nazi movement because their former government sucked? At best she's a useful idiot, unaware of the track record of most communist states and the billions of people who suffered under them, and the tens of millions eliminated in mass killings.
Sure, she's currently calling for more democracy, but communists always call for more democracy until they finally win an election. Then the fair voting seems to stop. Thankfully, Chile is now a thriving democracy (ranking very high on all international rankings, including the human rights index) with a booming economy, and the communists only won 3 seats out of 120. Maybe that's why she's angry. The place is too centrist.
I'm sure she'll look great on T-shirts, but the region's ground truth reality of communist opposition has been lots of men with AK-47's, land mines, and RPG's conducting decades long guerilla wars against men with M-16's and helicopters, with villagers always caught in the crossfire. It is not pretty, and it almost certainly isn't part of the Marxist fairy tales she was raised on. She's fighting a revolutionary battle that ended when Pinochet left, one of the few who apparently didn't get the memo.
One of the common elements of student protests is that they're the ones who have the least real-world experience and historical perspective of all adults (she didn't get the memo). Another element is that despite their claims of worldliness, they're usually protesting something that affects college students, like admissions, tuition, grading, university policies, or military service (she's protesting tuition and admissions). Another element is that they tend to be far, far left (she could be the poster child for communist "useful idiot"), and a final element is that they put hot co-eds center stage (thus all the press coverage of her).
Camila is a trifecta of stereotypes. Can't women aspire to be more than that?